[House Hearing, 113 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
[H.A.S.C. No. 113-2]
A REVIEW OF SEXUAL MISCONDUCT
BY BASIC TRAINING INSTRUCTORS
AT LACKLAND AIR FORCE BASE
__________
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
HEARING HELD
JANUARY 23, 2013
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
79-490 WASHINGTON : 2013
___________________________________________________________________________
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.
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
One Hundred Thirteenth Congress
HOWARD P. ``BUCK'' McKEON, California, Chairman
MAC THORNBERRY, Texas ADAM SMITH, Washington
WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina LORETTA SANCHEZ, California
J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina
JEFF MILLER, Florida ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania
JOE WILSON, South Carolina ROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey
FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey SUSAN A. DAVIS, California
ROB BISHOP, Utah JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio RICK LARSEN, Washington
JOHN KLINE, Minnesota JIM COOPER, Tennessee
MIKE ROGERS, Alabama MADELEINE Z. BORDALLO, Guam
TRENT FRANKS, Arizona JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa
K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas NIKI TSONGAS, Massachusetts
DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado JOHN GARAMENDI, California
ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
DUNCAN HUNTER, California Georgia
JOHN FLEMING, Louisiana COLLEEN W. HANABUSA, Hawaii
MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado JACKIE SPEIER, California
E. SCOTT RIGELL, Virginia RON BARBER, Arizona
CHRISTOPHER P. GIBSON, New York ANDRE CARSON, Indiana
VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri CAROL SHEA-PORTER, New Hampshire
JOSEPH J. HECK, Nevada DANIEL B. MAFFEI, New York
JON RUNYAN, New Jersey DEREK KILMER, Washington
AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
STEVEN M. PALAZZO, Mississippi TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
MARTHA ROBY, Alabama SCOTT H. PETERS, California
MO BROOKS, Alabama WILLIAM L. ENYART, Illinois
RICHARD B. NUGENT, Florida PETE P. GALLEGO, Texas
KRISTI L. NOEM, South Dakota MARC A. VEASEY, Texas
PAUL COOK, California
JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma
BRAD R. WENSTRUP, Ohio
JACKIE WALORSKI, Indiana
Robert L. Simmons II, Staff Director
Jeanette James, Professional Staff Member
Debra Wada, Professional Staff Member
James Weiss, Research Assistant
C O N T E N T S
----------
CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF HEARINGS
2013
Page
Hearing:
Wednesday, January 23, 2013, A Review of Sexual Misconduct by
Basic Training Instructors at Lackland Air Force Base.......... 1
Appendix:
Wednesday, January 23, 2013...................................... 53
----------
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 23, 2013
A REVIEW OF SEXUAL MISCONDUCT BY BASIC TRAINING INSTRUCTORS AT LACKLAND
AIR FORCE BASE
STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
McKeon, Hon. Howard P. ``Buck,'' a Representative from
California, Chairman, Committee on Armed Services.............. 1
Smith, Hon. Adam, a Representative from Washington, Ranking
Member, Committee on Armed Services............................ 2
WITNESSES
Lisak, Dr. David, Ph.D., Forensic Consultant..................... 36
McNally, CMSgt Cindy, USAF (Ret.), Service Women's Action Network 38
Norris, TSgt Jennifer, USAF (Ret.), Protect Our Defenders........ 40
Rice, Gen Edward A., Jr., USAF, Commander, Air Education and
Training Command, U.S. Air Force............................... 4
Welsh, Gen Mark A., III, USAF, Chief of Staff, U.S. Air Force.... 4
APPENDIX
Prepared Statements:
Lisak, Dr. David............................................. 74
McKeon, Hon. Howard P. ``Buck''.............................. 57
McNally, CMSgt Cindy......................................... 139
Norris, TSgt Jennifer........................................ 146
Smith, Hon. Adam............................................. 59
Welsh, Gen Mark A., III, joint with Gen Edward A. Rice, Jr... 61
Documents Submitted for the Record:
Letter from Hon. Jackie Speier to Gen Edward A. Rice, Jr.,
Dated
November 16, 2012.......................................... 188
Statement of Elaine Donnelly, President, Center for Military
Readiness.................................................. 181
Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:
Mrs. Davis................................................... 191
Mr. Enyart................................................... 191
Ms. Sanchez.................................................. 191
Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:
Mr. Smith.................................................... 195
Ms. Speier................................................... 201
Ms. Tsongas.................................................. 200
A REVIEW OF SEXUAL MISCONDUCT BY BASIC TRAINING INSTRUCTORS AT LACKLAND
AIR FORCE BASE
----------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, Wednesday, January 23, 2013.
The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in room
2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Howard P. ``Buck''
McKeon (chairman of the committee) presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. HOWARD P. ``BUCK'' MCKEON, A
REPRESENTATIVE FROM CALIFORNIA, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON ARMED
SERVICES
The Chairman. The committee will come to order. Good
morning. Thank you for joining us for our first hearing of the
113th Congress. I think it is appropriate that we begin our
oversight with a subject that this committee has been vigilant
in addressing for many years. At the same time, I find it
extremely disturbing that despite the collective work of
Congress, the Department of Defense, the military services, and
the dedicated groups who advocate on the part of victims of
this heinous crime, sexual assault and sexual misconduct,
remains a problem within our arms forces.
Today we meet to receive testimony on sexual misconduct by
basic training instructors at Lackland Air Force Base. The
events at Lackland are the most recent example of sexual
assaults that have plagued our military for far too long. This
tragic example where 32 instructors have either been found
guilty, have been charged with, or are still being investigated
for crimes against 59 trainees, begs the question: How could
this have happened? How could the system and in particular, the
leadership, have failed to protect the men and women who serve
our Nation from sexual predators who also wear the uniform?
While I applaud the Air Force for pursuing indepth
investigations to find answers to these questions, I am
particularly disturbed to learn that there was significant
delay reporting the allegations to the proper authorities when
they first came to light. Equally troubling is that no action
was taken by local leadership when the reporting delay was
uncovered. This to me, is unacceptable.
I look forward to hearing from General Welsh and General
Rice how the Air Force has addressed these issues to eliminate
the possibility that sexual misconduct goes undetected in the
future.
Make no mistake, Congress shares the responsibility for
preventing sexual assault within the military and assuring
victims that their cases will be prosecuted to the fullest
extent of the law.
Over the past 5 years, Republicans and Democrats have
joined forces to put real reforms in place. We have ensured
that victims of sexual assault are taken seriously, provided
medical care and support, and that cases are investigated and
prosecuted.
Last year Congress passed reforms on how the military
tracks sexual assaults in order to paint a reliable picture of
just how big the problem is. We also established a commission
to take a critical look at the Uniform Code of Military Justice
and make recommendations for reform to make certain that the
military justice system can successfully prosecute sexual
assault. However, legislation is not the only answer.
Commanders at every level and at every Service must make
eliminating sexual assault and all forms of sexual misconduct
from their commands the highest of priorities. Senior leaders
at all levels must hold commanders accountable for aggressively
pursuing allegations of sexual misconduct. We will accept
nothing less.
I understand that the Air Force has already made several
changes to improve the safety and effectiveness of basic
training. I would like to hear from our second panel if the
reforms and safeguards recently put in place are sufficient. I
have no doubt that there is more to be done. My visit to
Lackland in September renewed my belief that the young men and
women who volunteer to join our Armed Forces are the finest in
the Nation. These young men and women have earned the respect
of the Nation. They deserve the respect from their leaders and
fellow service members.
Before I ask Ranking Member Smith for his opening remarks I
would like to remind our members that at the same time as we
hold this hearing the Air Force continues to prosecute the
remaining cases at Lackland. When military perpetrators of
sexual assault are tried by courts-martial, public statements
by military and civilian leaders, especially senior leaders,
about the guilt or innocence of an alleged perpetrator can be
perceived as or there may even be undue command influence on
the outcome of the trial. That means public testimony about
Lackland could be used as grounds for a mistrial by defense
attorneys.
This isn't an outcome anyone wants. To that end, I will
give latitude to General Welsh and General Rice to answer
questions to the extent that it will not prejudice ongoing
criminal prosecutions. We are all committed to eradicating
sexual assault in our Armed Forces, but first, we have to
respect the victim's need for urgent and sure justice.
Mr. Smith.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McKeon can be found in the
Appendix on page 57.]
STATEMENT OF HON. ADAM SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM WASHINGTON,
RANKING MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
Mr. Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I concur in all of
your remarks and I thank you for that strong statement. I too
have a statement which I will submit for the record and just
summarize briefly here.
I thank General Welsh and General Rice for being here and
for the leadership that they have shown on this issue. This
obviously is a very serious problem. Being able to protect the
men and women who serve in our military is job one. If there is
not trust, if the people who are serving do not trust the
people who are supposed to be leading them, then the entire
system breaks down. And sexual assault and sexual violence is a
major problem throughout the military, and I think that is one
big point to keep in mind throughout this hearing. This is not
just Lackland. I mean, certainly, this is an extreme example
and one that I hope we can learn from, one that certainly
continues to need to be resolved. The cases need to be
prosecuted. We need to get to the bottom of exactly what
happened, but this is a problem that has plagued the military
for far too long, and that we on this committee, and throughout
the military, needs to be addressed in order to make sure our
military can continue to function at the ability that we all
expect it to.
So I thank the chairman for having this hearing. I do want
to thank both General Welsh, General Rice, and Secretary
Panetta and others, and we have had many meetings in the last
couple of years and it is apparent to me that the Department of
Defense takes this issue very seriously and is now trying to do
their best to figure out what went wrong and how to fix it. It
is completely unacceptable that we got to this point, that it
wasn't solved before this, but at least now we are seeing the
seriousness from the Department of Defense that I think is
warranted.
I also want to thank, there are too many members on this
committee to name who have taken a leadership role on this
issue and trying to make sure that we put the best possible
legislation in place to make the changes necessary to protect
our men and women from this type of assault and violence, so I
thank them for that leadership as well.
But going forward, the critical thing is to make sure that
we do much, much better than we have done now, to learn what
are the changes that are going to be done within the Department
of Defense, within legislation, to do a better job of
protecting our men and women.
At the end of the day, the culture needs to change. I have
heard a number of members talk about this. I forget who made
this point, but basically when it gets to the point where if
you are serving in the military, you know that your advancement
in the military is dependent upon protecting the men and women
and being out front to protect the victims and make it clear
throughout your command that this is completely unacceptable
behavior that will be punished.
When everybody serving in the military knows that that is
one of the primary things that they are going to be judged on
for advancement, when that cultural change is made, that is the
only point at which I believe we will begin to seriously
address this issue.
I hope we can learn more from this hearing today how we get
to that point. Again, I thank the chairman and I thank the
generals for being here this morning. I look forward to the
testimony and the members' questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Smith can be found in the
Appendix on page 59.]
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
At this time, without objection, I ask unanimous consent
that an additional statement from the Center for Military
Readiness would be included in the record of this hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
on page 181.]
The Chairman. I want to echo Mr. Smith's comments about
General Welsh and General Rice. They have been most helpful and
those who conducted the investigation, I couldn't commend them
more for the seriousness with which they have taken this and
for the leadership that they have brought to this issue.
At this time, now, I understand we may have votes at any
time, so what I would like to do in the interest of trying to
make sure that we have time to properly conduct this hearing,
if we just have one vote on the rule, we will not break. We
will ask the members to go vote and keep moving so that we can
expedite this.
We will hear from General Welsh, and he will divide the
time up between him and General Rice. General Welsh.
STATEMENT OF GEN MARK A. WELSH III, USAF, CHIEF OF STAFF, U.S.
AIR FORCE
General Welsh. Thank you, Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member
Smith, and distinguished members of the committee, for the
opportunity to speak with you today. This topic is obviously a
tough one, but we don't have to enjoy the subject to appreciate
the privilege of being before this committee. Thank you for the
opportunity, and General Rice and I are truly honored to be
here.
Mr. Chairman, with your permission I would like to start by
having General Rice give you an update on the incident and
allegations and activities conducted relative to the basic
military training investigations at Lackland, and then I will
follow that with a few Service-wide things that we are doing to
try and follow-up on activities to learn from it and to do
everything we can to ensure that it never happens again.
The Chairman. Certainly.
STATEMENT OF GEN EDWARD A. RICE, JR., USAF, COMMANDER, AIR
EDUCATION AND TRAINING COMMAND, U.S. AIR FORCE
General Rice. Thank you, Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member
Smith, and distinguished members of the House Armed Services
Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on
the Air Force's investigation into sexual misconduct by basic
military training instructors at our basic military training
complex at joint base San Antonio-Lackland in San Antonio,
Texas.
Over the past 9 months we have conducted a very deliberate
and comprehensive investigation. Over 550 investigators have
been involved. They have conducted over 7,700 interviews. We
have surveyed every basic military training graduate from the
last 10 years for whom we have contact information. Although we
have conducted a 10-year lookback, the vast majority of the
allegations are of alleged misconduct that occurred over the
past 3 years. During this 3-year period, 855 airmen have been
assigned to military training instructor duty. Of this group of
855 instructors, we have completed disciplinary action for
sexual misconduct against 8. We have preferred court martial
charges against another 9, and 15 other instructors are under
investigation. The allegations against these instructors range
from sexual assault to the inappropriate contact with students
after they graduated from basic military training and were no
longer under the authority of the instructor.
At this point 24 of the military training instructors are
presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt. We have identified 59 victims or alleged
victims of this criminal activity or misconduct. Regardless of
whether a victim or alleged victim was the victim of a sexual
assault, the recipient of an inappropriate email, or willingly
participated in an unprofessional relationship with an
instructor in violation of established policy, we have offered
each of them the full range of available victim support
services and no victim or alleged victim has been charged with
a policy violation or otherwise held accountable as part of
this investigative process.
The 32 instructors who have been disciplined, or who are
under investigation, represent less than 4 percent of the
instructors who have served in basic military training over the
past 3 years, and I believe it is important to underscore that
the vast majority of our instructors serve with distinction in
a very demanding duty assignment.
That said, it is completely unacceptable to us that so many
of our instructors have committed crimes or violated our
policies and we clearly failed in our responsibility to
maintain good order and discipline among too many of our
instructors in basic military training.
Among the most important and fundamental responsibilities
of command is the requirement to maintain good order and
discipline among the members of the military organization. This
responsibility cannot be delegated. All of the changes we are
making in basic military training are directed in one way or
another at helping our commanders discharge this fundamental
responsibility.
Although it is still very early, the evidence indicates
that our efforts are making a difference. We have not had a
reported incident of sexual misconduct in basic military
training for the past 7 months. This is not to say that we
believe we are nearing the end of our work; on the contrary, we
know this is not the beginning of the end but the end of the
beginning of a journey that can never end. The key to success
over the next weeks and months, and years is to sustain the
intense level of focus we have devoted to this issue over the
past 9 months.
To this end, I believe the most significant action we are
taking to address this critical issue is the establishment of
the Recruiting, Education, and Training Oversight Council. This
council will include the senior leadership of my command and
will, one, review the progress and effectiveness of the actions
we are now implementing; two, provide an expanded perspective
on future actions we will take to prevent problems from
recurring; and, three, advise me on strategic issues affecting
airmen safety and the maintenance of good order and discipline
in basic military training.
In short, this council will help us institutionalize the
intense level of focus we must sustain if we are to
successfully defeat the threat of sexual misconduct in the
basic military training environment.
I look forward to your questions after General Welsh's
remarks. Thank you.
General Welsh. Thank you, Ed. And I completely agree that
the BMT [basic military training] investigations don't mark the
end of anything. The Air Force has recommitted itself to
ensuring that every airman is treated with respect. It is not a
one-time fix. It has to be a way of life. This collection of
events at basic military training has been stunning to most of
us in the Air Force. There is simply no excuse for it. There is
no justifiable explanation, and there is no way we can allow
this to happen again.
The Air Force's goal for sexual assault is not simply to
lower the number. The goal is zero. It is the only acceptable
objective. The impact on every victim, their family, their
friends, the other people in their unit, is heart-wrenching,
and attacking this cancer is a full-time job, and we are giving
it our full attention.
Of General Maggie Woodward's 46 recommendations presented
to General Rice at the end of her investigation, 23 are already
fully implemented, 22 more will be implemented by November of
this year, and the final recommendation has actually been
separated from this particular activity. It has to do with
shortening the length of basic military training itself, and
General Rice is considering that under a separate curriculum
review that is already under way.
Some of these recommendations have applicability to the
entire Air Force and we are working now to build them into the
larger Air Force Sexual Assault Prevention and Response
Program, into our Air Force leadership training at every level,
and into our investigative and legal processes.
Since becoming the Chief of Staff I have worked pretty hard
to express my deep concern with the issue of sexual assault,
and I have shared my thoughts with airmen at every level of our
Air Force. I have also shared it with every commander in our
Air Force. They understand, especially our senior commanders
understand, as both Ed Rice and I do, that the American people
trust us with their greatest treasures, their sons and
daughters. They expect us to lead them with honor, to value
each of them, and to treat them as if they were our own. We do
not have a greater responsibility than that. Every Air Force
supervisor, every Air Force commander must be actively engaged
in this effort. If they don't get actively engaged, I consider
them part of the problem.
I met with our Air Force four-star generals in early
October to ensure they knew exactly how I felt about the
subject. Not surprisingly, they all feel the same. I directed
all 164 of our Air Force wing commanders to come to Washington,
D.C. in late November so that I could discuss this issue with
them face-to-face. There is simply no room for misunderstanding
as we move forward from here.
Secretary Donley approved an Air Force-wide health and
welfare inspection during the first 2 weeks of December. The
intent was to ensure that we provide every airman a work
environment that allows them to excel and to ensure each of
them feels valued and is treated with respect. The detailed
results of this inspection are available to your staff and have
been publicly released.
And finally, a couple of weeks ago in my monthly letter to
airmen, I reinforced the fact that obscene, vulgar, or
disrespectful images, songs, or so-called traditions are not
part of our heritage and will not be accepted as part of our
culture. And while these things may or may not directly relate
to sexual assault, they certainly do create an environment more
conducive to sexual harassment and unprofessional
relationships, and I personally believe that both of those are
leading indicators for sexual assault.
We have worked very hard to ensure we are aligned with
sexual assault policy and on issues from both the Secretary of
Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. We have
also worked with the Office of the Secretary of Defense to
create special victims teams comprised of investigators and
attorneys who have received specialized training in sexual
assault cases. That effort has been encouraged and supported by
members of this committee, and I thank you for that.
A cadre of 24 special investigators have now finished
training and 60 Air Force attorneys have been identified and
trained to serve as Special Victims Counsel providing
comprehensive and compassionate legal assistance to victims.
That program goes fully into effect on the 28th of January, but
in fact we have already assigned seven Special Victims Counsel
to victims around the Air Force.
We continue to employ over 3,100 volunteer victim
advocates, and in accordance with the fiscal year 2012 National
Defense Authorization Act, we are on track to hire and place a
full-time fully accredited victim advocate at every
installation by October 1st of this year.
Mr. Chairman, there are many other things we are attacking,
we are doing to deal with this problem that I would be happy to
discuss during the question-and-answer period. But in closing,
let me just say that I will never stop attacking this problem.
We will never slow down our efforts to ensure our victims
receive the best, most capable, and most thoughtful care and
advice possible until we can eliminate the problem. And I
promise every member of this committee that the United States
Air Force leadership team will never quit working to eliminate
this horrible crime from the ranks of our Air Force.
Thank you to the committee members for the help you have
already given us on this effort and for the time you are
spending here today. General Rice and I are looking forward to
your questions.
[The joint prepared statement of General Welsh and General
Rice can be found in the Appendix on page 61.]
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
I just was informed that we do have the vote and it will be
three votes, so we will have to recess and return as quickly as
we can after the votes.
General Welsh, during your confirmation hearing you
testified that everyone in the Air Force is trying to do the
right thing and figure out some way of stopping sexual assault.
You know, I don't think this is an incident only at Lackland. I
don't think it is an incident only in the Air Force. I don't
think it is only in the military. I think it is a societal
problem. We cannot fix a societal problem. We can address, as
you are, the Air Force problem, and I know in talking to
General Dempsey and the other chiefs, they are also looking at
all of the branches of the military.
However, you acknowledge that what was being done at that
time was not adequate to reverse the trend. What are your
thoughts on how the Air Force can reverse the trend? Do you
have some specific examples other than what you have mentioned
already that still need to be done?
General Welsh. Mr. Chairman, I think there are a lot of
things that need to be done and we need to be doing them from
now until the Air Force quits being an institution. The biggest
thing is committing to dealing with people on an individual
level every day by every supervisor and commander. I don't
think institutional directives will solve the problem. I think
caring more for every airman will help solve the problem. We
have been trying a number of programs, a number of training
activities, a number of educational initiatives. While some of
them may be successful, they may be helping the problem, we are
certainly not reversing the trend in a dramatic way. And so I
believe we need to keep looking for new and different ways to
approach the problem. As we find things that work, we should
expand on them, and continue to exploit them.
The Special Victims Counsel I believe is a good example. If
we can get the 30 percent or so of the victims who initially
report as unrestricted and allow us to begin an investigation,
who then step away because of concerns about a number of
things, I won't go into all the details that we are hearing,
you know all the reasons they decide not to participate in the
prosecution. But some of those, clearly, are related to the way
we conduct an investigation, the way we advise the victim, the
way we make them feel as they go through the follow-up victim
care and preparation for trial. We have to eliminate those
things and keep those victims engaged in the process of
finding, prosecuting, and removing the perpetrators, because if
we don't there will be additional victims.
I believe there are predators who commit this crime. I
don't think everyone who commits sexual assault is inherently a
predator, but there are predators. We have to find them,
hopefully screen them out early if there is a way to develop
tools that allow us to do that before they come into the
military. If not, we have to find them through indications from
the people around them who know them. And if they do commit a
crime, we have to stop them after the first one and not allow
them to continue.
We also have to work very hard to identify those activities
that lead to bad behavior, and there are a number of them. We
deal with them with our children all the time. Our younger
airmen are nodifferent. They are involved in the same social
circles; they do the same kind of activities; and there are the
same indicators. A young man who routinely binge drinks and
loses control of himself is going to conduct bad behavior. That
bad behavior could result in sexual assault. Let's stop the
binge drinking. Let's identify the behavior early. But that
takes a clear understanding of the issue at every level of our
Air Force, starting with our youngest airmen and our youngest
officers, and it requires supervisors and commanders who never
quit engaging.
I think that is the key, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. The command-directed investigation initiated
by you, General Rice, found that the MTI [military training
instructor] manning levels at Lackland did not support optimum
oversight during basic training. The report recommends
increasing MTI manning. Given that the Air Force has drawn down
military personnel and is facing continued reduced budgets and
the potential of sequestration, how will you fill these extra
MTI requirements?
General Rice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As I reported, my
response to the command-directed investigation to the Chief and
the Secretary of the Air Force and talked about some of the
resource requirements that would be necessary in order for us
to implement fully the recommendations. I am happy to say that
resources were not a constraint in terms of my ability to
address the issues.
I asked for more MTIs, military training instructors. They
have been authorized. We are in the process of hiring them and
training them. In the meantime, we have effectively achieved
the impact of having two military training instructors assigned
to each flight, which is the end state that we want to get to,
by both bringing in temporary instructors on temporary duty
status and rearranging some of the staff positions to put them
on the line, if you will, to perform military training
instructor duty because we thought that was important to do now
and not wait for the assignment and personnel process and the
training process, quite frankly, to catch up.
So we have been authorized the additional positions by the
Air Force. Quite frankly, the long pole in the tent is our
ability to effectively train enough instructors. We are in the
process of doing that right now, but that will take a little
bit of time for us to complete. In the meantime, I am satisfied
that we have been able to achieve the effect through other
mechanisms.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you. The investigation directed by
Major General Leonard Patrick into the training wing's response
to the MTI misconduct found that there was significant delay in
reporting by senior MTIs. The investigation also revealed that
when the commander learned of the delay no corrective action
was taken.
What actions have you taken to address these failures and
to raise awareness among the Air Force leaders of the
importance of aggressively pursuing reports of misconduct?
General Rice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In the specific
instance, I believe you are referring to in the command-
directed investigation, I directed a separate investigation
into the delayed reporting and did find that there was
culpability among members of the supervisory chain in terms of
informing the commander in a timely manner of an issue that the
commander should have been aware of, and I have held people
accountable for that delay in reporting. I did find in that
specific instance that when the commander knew of it that he
took appropriate action initially, but there were other
instances that were identified in the command-directed
investigation and other areas that we have discovered through
other means where I was not satisfied with the actions that
commanders and other leaders took in response to reports of
misconduct.
We have addressed that in a number of different ways, to
include putting in place mandatory reporting requirements such
that any incident of misconduct or maltreatment must
immediately be reported up the chain of command, not just to
the squadron commander but to the wing commander and up to the
two-star commander who has overall responsibility for non-
flying training within the Air Force. If it involves sexual
misconduct, this report must occur within 24 hours and the
alleged offender is removed immediately from the position of
either the staff position or the instructor position until we
have had enough time to sort through the details of what went
on and ensure that it is proper to either go to an
investigation fully or to place that instructor back into the
duty position.
So partly, we have handled it through this idea of having
mandatory reporting procedures that allow us to ensure that
these, that the proper information is transmitted to the proper
people at the right times in order to deal with this. I would
say a secondary, and a second order way that we have dealt with
this has to do with the level of seniority and experience that
we have placed now in the basic military training environment
such that we have more senior experience and seasoned leaders
and supervisors making decisions about what constitutes an
infraction and what doesn't, and what should be done about it.
This is not an environment where we want to test or
determine whether someone is a good leader, whether someone has
had supervisory experience. It is a place where we bring people
who have demonstrated strong leadership, strong ability to
supervise, a strong history of making good decisions. And so
part of what you have seen in the changes that we have made is
to ensure that we get more experienced, more seasoned leaders
into these positions so that when they get that information
they can make better decisions.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you. After Ranking Member Smith's
questions, we will recess.
Mr. Smith.
Mr. Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that. I
think you covered the subject fairly thoroughly. Just a couple
of quick questions. One of the difficulties is, how do you
measure success going forward? And it is difficult because, you
know, on the one hand you could say, well, we have fewer sexual
assaults, but you also don't want people to be not reporting.
As you are sort of looking at--you know, are you making
progress just within the Air Force to get at the broader issue?
What are you looking for to figure out whether or not you are
moving forward and making progress in reducing and, as General
Welsh said, getting to the point where you eliminate sexual
assault within the Air Force?
General Welsh. One of the things, sir, I think that we need
to do is establish and maintain a clear baseline of
information. In 2010, we conducted a Gallup survey that gave us
numbers on the incidence and the prevalence of sexual assault
and reporting within the Air Force. We are in the process now
of contracting for the follow-up survey to that, the 2013
survey, to try and follow up on the initial baseline and see
which direction we happen to be moving. Is our reporting
increasing and, if so, why? Are the types incidents changing?
Are the number of incidents changing? Is the demographic of the
victim changing? All of those things I think are critical to
baseline our effort and then figure out what is working and
what isn't working.
I think the other thing that is not something that we can
grab a hold of and show you is the feedback we get from people
within the Air Force. We have made a huge effort recently to
start getting to a discussion at the small unit level of
respect, treating each other with respect. The feedback we are
getting from that effort is interesting because it is clear
that we haven't done enough in this area; that people don't
feel valued; that we have a certain population of our Air Force
that has been going along to get along by ignoring things that
they are uncomfortable with in their workplace or in their work
environment or with the people who work around them, whether it
is mannerisms, poor language, pictures hanging on the wall,
whatever it might be. That feedback----
Mr. Smith. That is incredibly important. I am sorry to
interrupt, but it is just, you have to talk to people to feel
what is it that is making them feel intimidated? And it may
surprise, you know, higher-ups what that is exactly. So
understanding that I think is critical. So I appreciate you
making that point. Go ahead.
General Welsh. But I think that is where it starts. The
other thing we need to do is identify the numbers in a clear
way so that we can have an unemotional, logical discussion
about a very emotional topic when it comes to how are we doing
in prosecution, conviction, et cetera, and what are the tools
we can use to get better. We have major disconnects between the
numbers we use in the Department and in the Department of the
Air Force, our numbers versus if you look at a prosecutor's
numbers on the outside. I don't think the numbers are that far
apart, my personal opinion. Now, I base that on the fact that I
took the Air Force numbers and asked our staff judge advocate
to use the RAINN [rape, abuse, & incest national network]
methodology to compute our percentages for convictions,
prosecutions, et cetera. Internally when we did that it was
within about a percentage point of most of the mean data that
they have. And what we have done to follow-up with that is to
take that to RAINN, and I have asked our staff judge advocate
to sit with a representative from RAINN and together put these
numbers together so we can share with you what the numbers are
relative to something that is considered a standard or at least
a baseline in the nonmilitary world just so we can determine
where the problems really exist. We spent a lot of time focused
on numbers, and if the numbers are not consistent, if we are
not talking apples to apples, it is hard to figure out where
you put the most effort.
For us, the level of effort, the number of resources we
apply has got to be focused in a way that has the most effect.
Mr. Smith. I just have one more quick question and we do
have to run. I briefly prosecuted domestic violence cases and
you mentioned sometimes the victims won't come forward. Can you
tell me what--I think within the military, certainly, you know,
you have got the broad cultural challenges that we talked
about, but one of the advantages you have is you have options
in terms of punishment, discipline, and other things that a
normal criminal justice system wouldn't have.
How are you planning on using those options in situations
where you may not be able to prosecute because of, you know,
various evidence things, but you still know there is a problem
that needs to be addressed? Can you explain some of the
discretion that you use within the military chain of command to
again change the culture, punish perpetrators, and discourage
this behavior?
General Welsh. Yes, sir. Let me make a general comment and
then I will ask Ed to add some detail on the specific incidents
at Lackland.
Of the Lackland cases, of the 59 incidents that we are
investigating, 45 of those are cases that we couldn't prosecute
under a sexual assault prosecution. They are prosecuted for
unprofessional relationships, which is something the Uniform
Code of Military Justice gives us the opportunity to engage on
where you might have a very difficult time prosecuting outside
the military. For a little more detail, though, let me ask Ed
to expand on that.
Mr. Smith. Okay.
General Rice. I think commanders have and will continue to
use the entire suite of tools that they have to enforce
discipline. The court martial process using the Uniform Code of
Military Justice is only one of those tools, and as General
Welsh said, in the cases that we are looking at, at Lackland,
we have cases where, as a commander looked at all of the
evidence that was available to him or her and decided that a
court martial was not the appropriate venue to get to the right
answer in terms of justice in that case, and so they used some
of the other tools that are available to them uniquely in the
military justice system.
I think it is something that is not as well understood
oftentimes in terms of the decisions that commanders make in
terms of the venue that is used to achieve the right outcome in
a case, and the fact that we can use nonjudicial punishment and
other forms that in many cases would have the same sanction as
you would find in a court martial, but are done in a way that
does not require the same level of standards of proof that a
court martial would, is a very important tool that commanders
can use in order to enforce discipline and get to a better
outcome in more cases than if they did not have that tool.
Mr. Smith. And to set that cultural norm, and change it.
General Rice. Yes.
Mr. Smith. I appreciate that. I think we have all got to
run and vote, so I will yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you. The committee will stand in recess
for about 15 minutes or so. Thank you very much.
[Recess.]
The Chairman. The committee will come to order. Mr. Wilson.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Generals Welsh and
Rice. Thank you for being here today. It is really uplifting to
me, General Welsh, as you were quoting Air Force Secretary
Michael Donley, he indicated that the Air Force is a family.
And that is the way I believe, too. And for me it is firsthand.
My dad served in the Flying Tigers in the Army Air Corp. I am
very grateful. I have a nephew who is serving in the Air Force
today. I served 31 years in the Army Guard and Reserve. I have
got four sons serving in the Air Force and Navy today, and so
it is family. And we want the best for our family members. We
want them to achieve to their highest, a fulfilling achievement
of military service which to me is an opportunity, and so the
issues that you are dealing with must be addressed.
I am particularly grateful to General Rice that you were
ahead of the curve. Your leadership, and by selecting Major
General Margaret Woodward to conduct the command-directed
investigation, has been so positive, and I want to thank you.
And I would just be grateful if any of my family members could
serve with you. So thank you for what you have done.
And indeed, with General Woodward's report, in meeting with
her, I was so impressed by her determination, her confidence,
and she of course came through with 22 findings. And the
findings then directed 46 recommendations, and these 46
recommendations are real-world ways to address the problems for
the best of our military. And I know that you will be
implementing 45 of the 46 recommendations and from each of you
I would like to get a report on what is the status of
implementing these recommendations?
General Rice. Thank you, sir. We have to date implemented
23 of the 46 recommendations. As you know, there was one that I
decided was not appropriate for this forum, so we are going to
implement 45 of the 46. And we have completed our
implementation of 23 of them. Some of the most important near-
term actions we have been able to complete, especially as it
addresses leadership, and as I indicated in response to an
earlier question, the reporting requirements to ensure that
leadership is notified in a timely manner of issues. We are on
pace to implement the remaining recommendations, 22, by
November of this year. Some of them require a more deliberate
process for implementation, such as ensuring that we get the
right leaders in position through the assignment cycle instead
of just pulling people in who may not be appropriate for the
position. As I indicated earlier, we have got to go through the
right process for training. We have some experience of what
happens when we try to overload the training system. We did
that not too long ago and the results were not satisfactory. So
I have directed that we do this in a very aggressive but
deliberate manner so that we get quality training done.
And so I am comfortable that we have taken action on the
most important recommendations near-term. Those that we
couldn't implement in the way that we want to finally implement
them, we have taken initial temporary action to achieve the end
state and I am briefed weekly on our progress in implementing
the rest and we will get at those quickly.
Mr. Wilson. And indeed, I worked on such issues as a JAG
[Judge Advocate General] officer in the South Carolina Army
National Guard. A concern I have are trainees being reluctant
to report misconduct. There is always a concern about
retaliation or peer pressure. How is this being addressed?
General Rice. You have highlighted one of the most
challenging issues that we have, and that is, how do we get
quality feedback from everyone, both trainees, instructors, and
others who are part of this system? We have a system of getting
feedback now, but it is not effective enough. When I look at
the 59 victims, less than a handful came to us to provide us
feedback on what happened. Totally unsatisfactory. We have got
to find a better way of connecting with them. I think that as
part of the investigative process we have broken some important
ground in how to do that better as an institution. We know that
you can't just ask the question once and expect that the
original, the initial answer is always going to provide an
accurate assessment of what is going on, and so how we talk to
people and the persistence with which we engage them in the
right way is very key to this.
We also know that although victims oftentimes themselves
won't talk to us or report for any number of reasons, they do
talk to other people in many cases. They talk to their friends,
they talk to their family. They talk to co-workers, and by
engaging those people in the right way we have been able to get
a great deal of additional information on the cases that we
have today. I believe this area of feedback and accurate
feedback is one that we are going to continue to explore.
I have asked the RAND Corporation to specifically look at
this issue. It is easy for me to sit down and write down a
bunch of questions, you know, over a couple of hours and think
that I have an effective survey. The actual facts tell us that
that isn't very effective, and to do this right, requires, I
think, a sophisticated understanding of people and how they
feel about these issues. And so they have begun this process
and I think are going to help us understand how better to get
at this area of better feedback.
Thank you.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much.
The Chairman. Ms. Sanchez.
Ms. Sanchez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, the
witnesses, generals, for being before us. My question is, of
those military training instructors who have been convicted or
are currently under investigation in the Lackland case, did
their service record show any history of unprofessional
behavior or sexual harassment prior to this?
General Rice. I am not aware of any that showed any
behaviors of sexual harassment or sexual misconduct. We have a
screening process that before you can become a military
training instructor we look back at your history for 5 years
and you had to have essentially a clean history. That was
waiverable by the group commander, and so that is another area
where we have addressed that process to look at the background
screening program and to assure ourselves that we are doing
everything that we can to not bring, as I said earlier, not
bring people into this environment that don't have a very
strong and proven record of disciplinary history in addition to
job performance.
Ms. Sanchez. Okay. In the Air Force if an airman or an
airwoman is found to be involved in a sexual harassment case,
how does the Air Force proceed?
General Welsh. In a sexual harassment case, yes, ma'am, the
same way we deal with any other misconduct with an airman. UCMJ
[Uniform Code of Military Justice] is an option that is
available to commanders and their legal advisers. You go
through an investigative process and you make what you believe
is the appropriate and proper decision.
Ms. Sanchez. So if you are being screened, if you want to
be one of these instructors and you are being screened and you
have had some sexual harassment in the past on the job, would
it necessarily be on your record?
General Welsh. I can create a scenario where it would not
be, Congresswoman.
Ms. Sanchez. Various scenarios where they might not be.
General Welsh. Yes, ma'am, and others where it would be. I
think it depends on the case, but yes.
Ms. Sanchez. Because it is at the discretion of commanders
or certain people, right, as to how they are going to deal with
it. And a lot of times, a lot of times the sexual harassment in
this type of situation may not show up on somebody's record. Am
I correct?
General Welsh. I believe you and I might disagree on the
term ``a lot of times.'' I wouldn't tolerate it as a commander.
Ms. Sanchez. You wouldn't tolerate it, but there are
various instances, correct, where the commander can have the
choice of doing other things?
General Welsh. Certainly it has happened.
Ms. Sanchez. If this instructor or wannabe instructor is
being transferred to another unit, would that new commander
necessarily know that they had had a sexual harassment episode
in the past?
General Welsh. Let me answer generically, and then I will
ask Ed to address if there is a specific issue related to the
Lackland investigation that we are walking towards. If an
individual was transferred as a result of poor performance, bad
behavior related to sexual harassment, I would be astonished if
it was not somehow relayed to the gaining unit and in his
record. If they were being transferred as a matter of a routine
transfer and there had been a decision made that the sexual
harassment was not substantiated, for example, then it would
probably not be in the record.
Ms. Sanchez. Or if there might have been an incident but
the commander decided he would handle it in a different way and
it wouldn't be show up on the record, then this person could be
transferred somewhere and that would never pass along with
them?
General Welsh. I would just tell you that yes, that could
happen. If I, or any commander I know, including the one
sitting next to me, knew about one of the commanders acting
that way, we would remove them from command.
Ms. Sanchez. While I wish all of our commanders were held
to that standard. It is my understanding sometimes they don't
actually hold themselves to that standard.
I am asking these questions because I am trying to find
out, you know, we have seen through studies that sexual
harassment leads in many cases to sexual assault. And so we
really have to be cognizant of trying to, you know, handle
these things, these issues, and to really put it on people's
records so that we don't promote them, move them, et cetera,
and let them know that, well, they got away with it in this
case. Sometimes it is a progressive sort of situation.
So my next question is about the Air Force commander's
conduct of climate assessment. The GAO [Government
Accountability Office] report in September 2011, told us that
this wasn't consistently done. How is this done in the Air
Force? We have now put in the 2013--I am sorry, in the fiscal
year 2013 NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act] that
climate reports have to be done. There are two reasons why
people don't like to do them, we learned, was commanders are
resistant to conducting them, and the command lacked an equal
opportunity adviser to help conduct it. So what are you doing
about this, because we know that if we had climate assessments
some of this harassing kind of a situation might have been put
forward. What are you doing now?
The Chairman. The gentlelady's time has expired. If you
could answer that for the record.
Ms. Sanchez. I would like that written for the record,
please, Mr. Chairman.
General Welsh. We will be glad to, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
on page 191.]
The Chairman. Mr. Turner.
Mr. Turner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate you
holding this hearing and the other hearings that you have also
held and your attention on the legislative side to us trying to
address the sexual assault issue. You have been a leader on
this and I appreciated your support as my co-chair Niki Tsongas
does, who is the co-chair of the Sexual Assault Prevention
Caucus. You have been a great advocate as we have worked with
the Senate on these provisions.
Gentlemen, we know why this happens. It happens where--we
come to this time where we say how in the military could there
have been such a systematic breakdown of leadership and not
know? We know why, and it is absolutely an issue of culture. We
can try to pass laws, we can try to pass legislation, but until
we break the culture that allows the environment for this to
occur, we are never going to be able to make these changes from
the seats up here in Congress. It has to come from the seats
that you have, from the leadership that you have, and I want to
thank you because I believe that you have turned to this issue.
But I want to focus on the issue first of culture to really
identify how bad this is and why the military and DOD
[Department of Defense] needs to address this issue, first of
culture.
I had two tragedies occur in my district. Maria Lauterbach,
who was a Marine who came forward with an allegation of rape
and was subsequently murdered by the accused, and Kori Cioca,
who had been revictimized by the system, and my office provided
assistance to her. And we all know her story through the movie
The Invisible War. But in the Maria Lauterbach case, I want to
read to you a letter I got back from the Marines. After Maria
Lauterbach had been viciously murdered by her accused, we
contacted the Marines and asked them, how could you not know
that she was at risk for a violent crime or a violent action or
assault, and they actually wrote back this letter to me, which
I have here from Lieutenant General Kramlich, U.S. Marines,
Director, Marine Corps Staff. And I asked him this question:
``Doesn't a rape accusation inherently contain an element of
force or threat?'' And this is the written answer that I got
back as a sitting Member of Congress: Lauterbach, the victim,
Lauterbach never alleged any violence or threat of violence in
either sexual encounter.
So I have first for you, gentlemen, a question that is
relatively simple. Have you ever heard of a nonviolent rape?
General Rice.
General Rice. No.
Mr. Turner. General Welsh?
General Welsh. No, Congressman, I have not.
Mr. Turner. I appreciate that. Because that is the answer I
have gotten in every hearing that I have started with that
question because that is basically part of the problem of the
culture of understanding that this is a crime, that this is
violence.
And I want to tell you another story; I have a question for
you there. We were at the Marine Commandant's house, sitting
around his dining room table. My co-chair, Niki Tsongas, was
there, she can corroborate this story. We were having a
discussion on the issue of culture and the need to change the
culture within the Department of Defense. When we were all
done, we had all identified the issues that needed to be
addressed, and the Marine Commandant's wife said, ``Before
every one leaves, you need to hear this.'' And she turned to a
senior female officer who was sitting around the table and said
to her, ``Could you tell them what you told me earlier? If you
were subject to a sexual assault, would you report it?''
And she said ``No.''
Here is a Marine senior female officer sitting at the
Commandant's table and she said ``No.''
I would like to address that issue with both of you because
clearly that is the culture. The concern is the fear of coming
forward of the fact that they would be subject to
revictimization, that their career would be subject to a
disadvantage. And as we hear all the stories of the victims,
the basic issue that we have is their concern of fear of coming
forward.
Now, I want to ask both of you, you had to see in this and
you have to see in the culture of the military that part of
what happened here in this case and these number of cases that
you have is this fear of people who are victims from coming
forward.
So I want to ask you to discuss that, of the fear of the
victims and how you change that culture.
The second thing is, and, General Welsh, you made a comment
that I kind of cringed at. Because I hear this through the
military and it is a term that goes I think partly to the--to
some of the disconnect in the view of this. You said, ``We have
to stop bad behavior.'' It is not bad behavior, it is a crime.
And I think the people around it, the non-victims, they don't
feel comfortable either because they have a similar fear.
We only have 30 seconds to go. Gentlemen, if you could
begin to comment on that.
General Welsh. The bad behavior I was referring to,
Congressman, is behavior before a crime is committed by people
who will eventually commit a crime if we don't stop the at-risk
behavior----
Mr. Turner. Appreciate that distinction.
General Welsh [continuing]. Of the potential perpetrator.
The key to solving this problem, every time I talk to an
Air Force audience the first question I ask them about this
issue is, why on what was undoubtedly the worst day of a
victim's life did they not turn to us for help?
We stand beside them in combat areas, we go to war with
them, we protect each other's lives. We talk about this
constantly. We are missing something fundamental in the human-
to-human interaction that will allow them to feel safe enough
to come to us and report and let us put our arms around them
and help them through this horrible event in their life. You
are right, Congressman, that is at the heart of the problem.
Mr. Turner. Gentlemen, if you make that your priority, we
are going to go a long way in being able to address this. Thank
you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Ms. Tsongas.
Ms. Tsongas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As Congressman Turner
has alluded to and by the mere fact of this hearing, I think
you know that there are many of us on this committee who take
this issue very seriously and many who have worked so hard to
address it, to address it and move you all ahead. So I thank
you both for the efforts you have put forth to address sexual
misconduct in the Air Force. It is a crime that continues to
shock us with its regularity. And, in particular, General
Welsh, I appreciate the efforts you have made since you became
Air Force Chief of Staff, most recently in bringing all of the
164 wing commanders to Washington to discuss this most serious
issue.
But I think we all know, as Mr. Turner just alluded to, as
others have, that in order for changes to really take hold the
culture of the military has to change. And it is a multifaceted
effort.
Mr. Turner told what you brought him to this issue. What
brought me to it was meeting with a nurse soon after I had been
elected to Congress about 5 years ago. She had been deployed
several times. She herself had never been sexually assaulted.
But I asked her if it was as prevalent as I was beginning to
learn. And she said, ``Ma'am, I'm more afraid of my own
soldiers than I am of the enemy.''
So that tells you that this is a really a very challenging
situation that you confront. And the cultural change has to
happen not just among our officers, but among our enlisted
service members as well who make up about 80 percent of the
force.
So as you talk about what you are doing and you are
starting at the top, how do you change culture across the 80
percent? What are you doing at that level? How do you encourage
everyone to embrace the efforts that you are currently engaged
in?
Because I fear if you don't and aren't successful there we
will be coming back again and again and again. You will tell us
your good stories, but we will continue to hear very shocking
situations that you have said will not occur again.
General Welsh. Thank you, Congresswoman, for giving me the
opportunity to comment on this.
I have never said it will not occur again. I said we can't
accept this. It is horrible. We all know that.
Human behavior, as you well know, because you are actively
involved in this every single day, is very difficult to change.
I don't believe the entire Air Force has a culture of sexual
assault. I don't believe that. I believe there are units, there
are places over time, as people change and personalities take
over that we create pockets where culture is a major problem.
Ed will tell you that that is what happened at Lackland, this
BMT investigation.
I don't believe that everybody in the United States Air
Force accepts a culture of sexual assault. We have officers, we
have NCOs [noncommissioned officers], we have civilians in our
Air Force who have daughters who are working side by side with
airmen around the world. They are not going to tolerate a
culture of sexual assault.
Ms. Tsongas. But, General, what do you do? What do you do
to change the culture across that 80 percent, not at the wing
commander level. What are the specific steps that you can take
to begin to address that?
General Welsh. You start with simple things. The number one
thing we have tried to do is increase the battle rhythm in
addressing this issue. As an example, this is a sheet that just
shows activities that involve every level of supervision and
command in the Air Force for January to March of 2013. And
there are things like videos for me and the Chief Master
Sergeant of the Air Force, to the force, it is commanders'
conferences, it is four-star sessions, it is command chief
sessions at every MAJCOM [Major Command] level. It is an
iteration that goes down at the unit level; every chief and
every squadron is getting together with the wing command chief
to discuss this issue. It is commanders' calls down to the
squadron level. It is roll call at the flight level. And it is
in every accessions training, it is in every PME [professional
military education] course. It is a matter of getting this
discussion going and keeping it going, not just for a short
period of time, so it becomes part of who we are, part of the
way we operate.
Ms. Tsongas. How do you institutionalize that that goes
forward once you are no longer the Air Force Chief of Staff?
How do you make sure that that continues?
General Welsh. I meet every week now with our Sexual
Assault Prevention and Response Team on the air staff. Because
I think you have to drive this from multiple levels. We meet
weekly. If I am out of town, my vice-chief meets with Brigadier
General Eden Murrie, who runs this for us, with our A1
Lieutenant General Darrell Jones, and our experts in this area.
We create activities that what I have asked them to do is
every week bring in something new, something we haven't tried,
some idea they found somewhere else, from a Member of Congress,
from an advocacy group, from a university or another Service
that tried something that seemed to work, at a certain base or
certain demographic group. And then let's talk about the logic
of implementing this thing. And we create a battle rhythm where
we are talking about this, we are implementing new ideas, we
are assessing how well they work. We stop doing the ones that
don't seem to have a major impact and continue the ones that
seem to be making a difference.
It has got to become part of the fabric of how we operate.
It is no different than the way we operate aircraft every day.
We talk about it, we communicate regularly on it. We meet, we
come up with new approaches to save money, to increase
effectiveness. We have to do the same thing on the command side
of the house.
That is where we are starting, Congresswoman.
The Chairman. Gentlelady's time has expired.
Mr. Coffman.
Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
General Rice, General Welsh, thank you both for coming here
today to testify on the problems of sexual assault in Air Force
basic training at Lackland Air Force Base.
One question I have, General Rice, I think you mentioned
that one of the conclusions out of this was to reduce the
training time, the number of weeks, I guess, at Lackland Air
Force Base. Is that correct?
General Rice. It was a recommendation that was in the
commander-directed investigation. It was the 46th
recommendations that I said I would deal with in a different
forum. So we are looking, as we always do, at the length of
basic military training, that the length of the training will
be determined by the training that we need to accomplish and
not based specifically on addressing this issue.
Mr. Coffman. Thank you. Let me just tell you, obviously,
your training is inadequate. Because you have a culture in the
United States Air Force that allowed these really pervasive
sexual assaults to occur by your senior enlisted personnel
during basic training. And, you know, the purpose of basic
training or any entry-level period of training at any of the
branches of service--and I have been through two of them, Army
and Marine Corps--is to really indoctrinate that soldier,
airman, marine, or sailor into customs and courtesies of that
respective branch of service and to the rules associated with
the Uniform Code of Military Justice that spans all of our
Services equally.
And so, obviously, something is missing in that training.
So I would ask you, you need to reinforce that training, I
think not reduce the training. And they need to come out of
there, the airmen, the men and women in uniform that serve in
the United States Air Force, with a solid understanding of what
the values of the United States Air Force are. Because,
obviously, those senior enlisted that perpetrated these crimes
were not sufficiently indoctrinated as to the values of the
United States Air Force.
Would you like to respond?
General Rice. Yes, sir. I appreciate the question. I
completely agree that what makes this so egregious in basic
military training is exactly for the reason that you stated,
which is this is the place where we have to inculcate the basic
values of our Service on our newest airmen. And when we violate
the trust that we have to do that, and that responsibility, it
is difficult to describe the damage that happens to those
individuals and to us as an institution.
I agree a hundred percent.
I would say, you know, you are right, there is an element
of training to this. But at the end of the day, we have people
who knew well what the rules of the policies were, who knew
well the difference between right and wrong and decided to make
a wrong choice. And so part of that I can address with
training. Part of this has to do with people's values of what
they perceive as wrong and what is right. And how I get at that
is partially training. But I think I have got to think more
broadly about how I affect someone's calculus about actions
that they are going to take. It is why we look at this not just
from a dissuade perspective, having people make the right
decision because it is the right decision, but a recognition
that some people are not going to be dissuaded regardless of
the training that I have. And I have got to deter them. I have
got to have them make a calculation in their mind that the
consequences of their actions are going to be negative enough
that they aren't going to take it.
So as much as I am concentrating on the training piece of
this, I am also focusing on the detect, deter, and hold
accountable piece because I know that there are people that I
have to do that with.
Mr. Coffman. General Welsh, I would agree with you on a
very critical point. And that is this, that I think that it is
important that those entering the Service have a moral
foundation. Because I think you are right, that people that
don't have a moral foundation, you can put them through the
toughest training in the world and at the end of the day
everything will be a calculus as you describe as to what is the
risk and reward for my conduct, versus what is morally the
right thing to do. But I do want to stress that that discipline
comes from that entry-level training. And, of course, I think
that no doubt it has to be reinforced at all times.
But thank you for your testimony today. I yield back.
The Chairman. Gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Castro.
Mr. Castro. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you, Generals, for your testimony. I proudly
represent San Antonio, Texas, the home of Lackland Air Force
Base. Thank you for coming to testify today.
I think when there are scandals like this there are
essentially two things that must happen. First, we need to make
sure that justice is swiftly served. The second is that we have
got to learn from our mistakes and implement policies to change
our practices.
In regard to that, do we know, for example--have we
investigated whether any of this occurred at any of the other
basic training units in other military branches?
What is hard for me to believe is that in the last 3 years
at Lackland that there is something specific to that
environment that didn't happen somewhere else at another time.
So can you all speak to the scope of the investigation and
whether there has been an indication of problems anywhere else.
General Rice. I do know and I won't speak for the other
Services, but I do know that each one of them at the direction
of the Secretary of Defense has reviewed their Basic Military
Training Equivalent Program, has reviewed the report that we
have written on it, and has looked at the issues that we have
found as they apply to their system. So, yes, I know that there
has been a review done by the other Services. I cannot speak to
what they found as a result of their review. I am sorry, but
they have looked at it.
General Welsh. Congressman, also, the Secretary of Defense
very early in this investigative process asked General Rice to
come forward and give him an update on what he was finding. And
so Ed did that back in September. As a result of that initial
update, the Secretary ordered an assessment of military
training accessions programs for all the Services. That is
ongoing. It will be delivered here shortly. I don't remember
the exact delivery date, but it is in the next couple of
months. And the intent is to make sure that anything that is
learned from this is lessons are shared with the other
Services.
Part of the effort that Ed has initiated with the council
he mentioned before is that that council will also be able to
communicate with the other Services' accessions training
programs and make those connections for routine interaction,
not just after something ugly occurs. So we hope to share all
of this with the other Services. They have been fully briefed
on the results of this investigation, the findings and the
recommendations on the way forward. All of that has been
orchestrated through the Secretary of Defense's Sexual Assault
Prevention Response Office.
Mr. Castro. And then, finally, have you seen an effect on
recruiting? And also what has been the effect on the morale of
the soldiers at Lackland?
General Rice. No impact that I can tell, and we have looked
on recruiting. Fortunately, we are still able to attract the
best and brightest young men and women that our Nation has to
offer and we will continue to work on that.
In terms of morale, this has been a significant emotional
event for the people who are responsible for the training
program at Lackland. I would say, in general, the reaction of
other instructors and supervisors and leaders when this first
started to break was one that sort of--their belief was this
was a few bad apples. This does not represent, you know, any
significant number of MTIs.
I think today they understand that although it is 4 percent
of the population, 4 percent is 32 MTIs, much larger number
than anyone would have suspected existed.
And so they have had to both recognize that this is, in
fact, a real problem, they have had to recognize that they have
a significant part to play in addressing the problem. I think
they have embraced the changes, many of them which have run
against the tradition of the way that we have done things in
the past.
But part of what we are doing--and we aren't there yet. You
know, this is an ongoing process--is to work with our MTIs to
have them understand that they have to take control of this
issue. If we are going to be fully successful, they have to be
part of the solution set. And this is an ongoing process, I
think, of transformation that we are well on our way toward.
But I am not in any way ready to declare victory.
Mr. Castro. Thank you, General.
I yield back.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Runyan.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you, Chairman.
Kind of getting to talking about culture, environment,
compared the Air Force to other Services and you talk about the
environment, how much of it has--have either of you ran the
numbers or seen any numbers, how much of this, people that are
comfortable in their situation and have those relationships and
created a bad environment instead of having changeover and
holding people accountable more often than not? General Rice?
Is there--do you see where I am going with that?
General Rice. Let me answer the question. If I don't answer
it fully, please re-ask it.
I agree that having people, especially in an environment
that can be as challenging as basic military training for too
long a period of time exposes them to, I think, issues and
challenges that can be corrosive over time. And so we have to
pay attention to how long we allow someone to serve in these
positions. That is part of the solution set as we move forward.
We are going to restrict the amount of time that you can serve
as an instructor, for example, to 3 years. It used to be 4
years. We are going to move that back to 3 years. And we are
going to divide the duty day in half, such that you are not
having contact during that entire duty day with trainees.
It is a way of getting at this issue of exposure over time
that we believe can be very corrosive, both in terms of an
individual and the development of a culture.
And culture sometimes is used in a negative way. Every
group of people, whether it is 2 or 200 or 2,000, develops a
culture. It is the way human beings react to each other and
act. Most aspects of developing a culture are very positive; it
is how we relate to each other, it is how we reinforce each
other. And there are lots of elements of culture that I want to
have as part of basic military training, both among trainees
and trainers, so they can reinforce the positive elements of
what they have to have as part of this environment.
You have to be careful with a culture because it can over
time become insular and develop negative elements that you have
to be careful about. So part of the changes we have made are to
ensure that, in addition to the people who are part of basic
military training, who have come back for a second or a third
assignment, which is important for us to have the right
experience levels throughout the chain of command, we also have
more people who are not part of the culture, if you will, in
terms of having had previous experience.
So it is why at the most senior enlisted levels we are
bringing in chief master sergeants who have not been former
military training instructors because it gives a fresh outside
perspective that is important to, I think, inject into this
group of people.
Mr. Runyan. I think it kind of--and you did answer the
question. Thank you very much.
It plays to kind of how we are as a society. We are always
saying ``if you see something, say something.''
And when you are in a situation in a group, and you have
personal relationships with your buddy, you will tend not to
raise that question.
And as far as what do you do, is there anything you can do
on a disciplinary aspect of it to codify more stringent
penalties to discourage behaviors as we are discussing?
General Rice. Yes. So we have essentially a standard of
behavior that we demand of our instructors. There, you know,
has been disciplinary action taken because people knew of
things that they didn't report in the right way. So I have a
set of policies that require reporting of any maltreatment or
maltraining. And if anyone sees something that is not reported,
then they have to answer for that nonreporting as part of the
process of accountability that we have for the standards that
we have put in place. So there is a sanction. But I would say
when this works properly, I mean, that is sort of a secondary
way to address the problem.
When we have it working in the way that we need it to work
to be most effective, you know, the instructors and people
within the system will be--it will be self-correcting in a way
that I don't have to use the hammer in order to achieve the
result.
Again, this is a work in progress. I think we have to
recognize that regardless of the screens that I use to bring
people in, I am still going to have some people that I have to
use a variety of tools on in order to achieve the result.
Mr. Runyan. Yield back, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Mrs. Davis.
Mrs. Davis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you, Generals, for being here. As you know, a few
of us had an opportunity to go to Lackland. And I certainly
want to commend them for opening up the opportunity for us to
ask the questions that we needed to ask and to have access to a
number of the MTIs, particularly who spoke with us.
And their discussion with us was very compelling. And I
wonder if you have or how you have engaged them particularly,
because they had good background from which to speak about
this, certainly on feeling ostracized, on this whole issue that
we are talking about of culture, and what do we do in terms of
bystanders who have information that is not shared. How was the
information that they have used as you move forward? And did
you actually talk to them? Because one of the things that we
heard from them, which was really surprising, was that nobody
had actually asked them.
General Rice. Thank you, Congresswoman Davis. I appreciate
the question.
When Major General Woodward conducted her investigation,
she actually had an extensive piece of her research work that
involved talking to instructors. And several of her
recommendations are based directly on that feedback that she
got from instructors.
Subsequent to that, the wing commander who is in place now
and the group commander who is in place now, who is directly
responsible for basic military training, has conducted a series
of engagements with our instructors. The first, absolute first
thing that the new wing commander did was sit down with all of
the military training instructors and had a session with them
to both let them know what his expectations were, importantly
to convey to them clearly what the outside world was thinking
about this, and to get feedback from them and to let them know
that he was completely open to their assessment of what we need
to do to move forward because he understands better than anyone
that he cannot do this alone, that they have to do this with
us.
Mrs. Davis. I know you have spoken to the increased
communication, and I think that is very important. One of the
things we did here, and I am assuming this was relayed as well,
is that having some informal--this sounds like a contrary--but
informal mandatory meetings for everybody to have a chance to
sit down and to talk about what they see. Because trying to get
these issues of environment and climate and culture in
questionnaires I think most people don't believe that you
actually get there.
And so having the opportunity to sit down, and if it is
mandatory then everybody is doing it, and it doesn't mean that
someone is going and telling on their peers, which is a really
big problem that you have all discovered, I know.
Is that--I didn't quite see that in the recommendations.
And I am just wondering, where does that issue fall when it
comes to the broader areas of recruiting and oversight and
review that clearly have not all been instituted yet?
General Rice. Ma'am, you are right that that was not a
specific recommendation. But I wanted to underscore again the
45 recommendations were just the starting point. So we have
done a lot more since then and will continue to do more in the
past. And I am open and welcoming any suggestions and
recommendations on what else we can do. You and I have talked
about this issue. I think it is an important one that we need
to find the right way to do, the right way to address. And I
want to do it in the right way. It gets back to this idea of
feedback.
Mrs. Davis. Yes. I guess my question would be, why not? Why
something like that? Is it cost? Is it personnel? Why we
wouldn't do that. And I guess just a follow-up question, in
terms of the number of female MTIs and how has that increased
and what are you doing about that?
Sir, did you want to?
General Welsh. Yes, I will answer your initial question if
I could, Congresswoman, then I will turn back to Ed so he can
tell you exactly where we stand in bringing in the female MTIs,
increased numbers.
First of all, on speaking to the MTIs at Lackland, actually
a lot of people have spoken to them. The Secretary of the Air
Force has visited with them back last fall. I have done the
same thing. Ed, of course, and the leadership that he mentioned
as a team there have all talked to them.
The individuals you talked to might not have been there,
but a lot of people have gone and talked to the MTIs to get
their feedback.
The number one thing I took away from the meetings with
them was that those people, and the passions they have now for
this problem, they feel exactly the way I do. And that is that
our Air Force, our military, ought to be leading this effort
for the country.
We have a structure. We have the ability to command and
control and educate and train and oversee, and we have the
ability to punish. We have all the tools in place to be the
role models for this. We owe you that. We owe the American
people that.
The Chairman. Gentlelady's time has expired. Could you
please finish that answer for the record?
[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
on page 191.]
The Chairman. Mr. Nugent.
Mr. Nugent. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And as a graduate from Lackland Air Force Base, many years
ago, really disturbing as we move across. But my big concern,
having been a sheriff and prosecuted and investigated sexual
assault cases, is the victimization, how we deal with those
victims, and particularly as an organization how does the
reporting process go? Sexual assault or sexual harassment don't
always go hand in hand, but they are different in certain
aspects. But the reporting process. And if I hear this
correctly, the commander makes the decision whether or not it
goes to a judicial process or it goes to a nonjudicial process.
How do they make that decision?
General Welsh. Sir, sexual harassment will sometimes be
handled through other venues rather than the UCMJ. Very often
it will be raised by a report to the Equal Opportunity Office
on base or to the Inspector General on base. And it is passed
to the Equal Opportunity Office for an investigation conducted
by that office. There is a formal process it goes through. That
process reports back to the commander. And then there is a
decision made on what to do. Is it something you handle
administratively? Is there something that actually escalates
this to a level where you would deal with it under the UCMJ?
You make the decision after the process is completed.
A report of a sexual assault takes this to a different
level. There is law enforcement. The OSI, the Office of Special
Investigations is involved. And it immediately jumps into a
process that is bound and judged through the UCMJ.
Mr. Nugent. Do they have to follow a chain of command to
report that?
General Welsh. No, sir, they do not in either case. You can
report directly to an Equal Opportunity Office, you can report
directly to the Inspector General, you can go to your chain of
command. You can report any number of ways.
Clearly, reporting is part of the problem, though. Despite
all of the options we attempt to offer, people do not come
forward and report routinely on either sexual assault or sexual
harassment. That is one of the major issues we have to get to.
Mr. Nugent. And that is the climate issue in regards to how
do you get folks to come forward, and particularly----
General Welsh. Yes, sir.
Mr. Nugent [continuing]. In a military application because
they all want to cooperate and graduate. They want to be able
to move up through the ranks, and they are fearful that an
allegation will be used against them versus a fair and
judicious application as it relates to the offender.
And I guess so what are you doing specifically for the
victims to encourage them to come forward without the worry of,
you know, retaliation?
General Rice. We start this when they are recruits. So
their recruiter provides them with a one-on-one briefing about
what is and what isn't allowed in terms of behavior when they
get to basic military training. That briefing is repeated once
they get to basic military training within the first days that
they arrive. And then we repeat it again in technical training
in terms of expectations. It is not a silver bullet, but it is
one of the means that we try to over time set the expectation
of what very brand new people to our organization should expect
and what is normal behavior and what is abnormal behavior and
then try over time through those engagements in the right way--
they have to be done in the right way--to develop a level of
trust, and the person that is conveying that information and in
the system and how it will react.
I think a second important way we are addressing this in
basic training is to provide other avenues and more of those
other avenues for trainees to report. So we have added more
sexual assault response coordinators who will be out and about
in the community and will have more opportunity to have
engagements with trainees. We have added more chaplains, again,
someone who we hope that they will feel may be more comfortable
talking to in one-on-one sessions. And more leadership in
general will be part of the equation.
Again, none of these are, you know, one-point solutions,
but part of a total package that we think heads us in the right
direction.
Mr. Nugent. One last question. Your victim advocates that
you have and your investigators, do they work hand in hand in
regards to trying to help the victim move forward in regards to
dealing with the actual allegation?
General Welsh. The special victims counsel's job is to
advise the victim to make the process as simple, as
understandable, and as painless as possible for the victim and
to streamline the activity associated with the UCMJ process to
include up through a court martial activity, so they are
removed from the friction and the frustration and the lack of
understanding and the poor communication that often makes their
situation even worse.
Mr. Nugent. Is there mental health counseling----
The Chairman. Gentleman's time has expired.
Ms. Speier.
Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you, Generals, for your participation.
I have a letter dated November 16th to General Rice from me
that I would like to submit for the record, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Without objection, so ordered. What year was
that?
Ms. Speier. Last year.
The Chairman. Without objection, so ordered.
[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
on page 188.]
Ms. Speier. General Welsh, we all had a meeting about this
document. We talked about 17,000 hours, we talked about 32
staff. General Rice referenced 7,700 interviews. And not one of
the victims, not one of the 50-plus victims at Lackland was
interviewed.
Forty-six recommendations came out. But how can any of
those recommendations be complete without first having talked
to at least some of the victims?
Now, the letter I sent to General Rice dated in November
sought to have those victims interviewed. I have yet to get a
response from General Rice.
General Welsh. I don't think the effort can be complete
until we have the chance to talk to the victims.
Ms. Speier. All right. Let me go on.
The trainees that we met with, we had lunch with them. They
were 17, 18, 19 years of age. They were young, they were naive,
they were earnest. And as I sat there having lunch with them at
Lackland, I thought to myself, oh, my God, these are the age of
my daughter. All of these trainees are the ages of my daughter.
And my daughter would no more have the ability to say ``No'' to
a military training instructor, who you are taught is the law,
you do everything that training instructor tells you.
Now, there has been a lot of talk here today about all the
things that are happening. But what happened was that military
training instructors directed these trainees to go to supply
closets and to the laundry room, where they were then sexually
assaulted and raped. We have two instructors that admitted to
having had sex with ten of their trainees, each. And these
instructors were married.
Now, in the end, do you agree or not agree that consent
should not be part of this quotient? General Rice said that
some of these were willingly engaged in sex with their MTI. As
I understand it, the MTI is never supposed to be alone with a
trainee in a room. Never alone. So can a trainee willingly have
sex with her instructor? Your answer.
General Welsh. I would never be able to look you in the eye
and tell you that no trainee of any age--we have trainees who
are 30, 32, 34 years old who go through this program--would
ever be able to offer their personal consent in a situation
like that. I don't know that, I can't judge that. And I think
that is a little problematic under law.
Let me tell you what I do agree with, and I think you
probably agree with this. An individual who is serving as a
military training instructor who has a relationship like this
with a trainee has no place in our Air Force. And there should
be a presumptive sanction under some mechanism to discharge
him.
Ms. Speier. So I am introducing a bill today that will
basically say no longer can a consensual relationship between a
training instructor and a trainee be used as a defense for the
acts of the training instructor. Would you support that
legislation?
General Welsh. Ma'am, I would have to ask my legal experts
to advise me on the technicalities of that legislation. I will
support you in an effort to make sure someone who has that kind
of a relationship in an Air Force training program, that BMT,
it is just unacceptable----
Ms. Speier. And they are kicked out of the military.
General Welsh. And that they are out of the military.
Ms. Speier. Thank you.
A military expert, Professor Heigl from Yale, recently said
that the UCMJ is something that would be recognized by George
VIII, that they are very similar to what is going on in the
U.K.
Now, the United Kingdom had a scandal like this in 2006.
And they created a separate unit, a separate unit that was
staffed with experts in investigations and prosecutions within
the military to handle these cases, so that the decision was
not being made by the unit commander.
That was in 2006. In 2007, they found that good order and
discipline stayed intact, that in fact the unit commanders were
relieved of not having to handle these cases anymore.
I would like to encourage you to speak with your
counterparts in the U.K. to see how their system works and see
if we wouldn't be better served moving into a system like that.
I yield back.
The Chairman. Dr. Wenstrup.
Dr. Wenstrup. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I am encouraged to hear you say that there is a training
session for the new recruits before they actually go to BMT. I
think that that is very helpful. I guess my question is how do
we get the recruits to fully understand or believe that
reporting bad behavior will be supported by the leadership and
will not harm them, that they can develop that trust and know
that that is the right thing to do and be more confident in
their reporting. What might your suggestions be on that?
General Rice. Very challenging. I have been through basic
military training as well, not as an enlisted person. But at
the Air Force Academy we do the same thing. So I have been in
that position and understand fully what these trainees think
about this environment and how challenging it would be, you
know, looking back on my time and my experience to talk about
things like this. Sometimes it is very challenging.
So as much as we want people to do certain things, I think
we have to deal with the reality of the environment that they
are in and try to think about it from their perspective. Part
of this has to do with getting more feedback from trainees and
looking at those barriers.
I think the most important element for the decision we can
make in this regard, though, has to do with trust. At the end
of the day if people don't trust, either a person or the
institution, there isn't anything that we are going to do in
terms of training that is going to have them make that decision
to take what they perceive as personal risk.
So as we train our instructors in how to relate to the
trainees, how we train other people within this environment to
relate to trainees, who we try to ensure that they have that
level of trust and confidence in within the system is a part of
the work that we are undertaking.
I don't have the answer today. But I know that is a place
that I have got to get better at if I am going to be more
successful in the future. And I think we can do a lot better.
But I am not ready to tell you today that I have figured that
out.
The Chairman. Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
A person who is training under a trainer and has a
consensual, some might say sexual relationship, sexual
intercourse, in other words, sexual intercourse with the boss,
the boss might think is consensual, but what is going through
the mind of the trainee is that I need to do this in order to
get through training successfully. So it is a duress, it is a
mental type of situation. It may not be forcible physically,
but forcible mentally. And that is why if there is not one now
there should be a crime that makes it a per se violation to
have sexual intercourse, be it forced--be it consensual or not
between an instructor and a trainee.
And I think that that is probably something that Ms.
Tsongas has dealt with in her bill, which I fully support.
Now, a different situation between, say, a former trainer
or a trainer who formerly trained someone who has made it
through training and now that person is out of the dominion and
control of the trainer, then there could be a consensual sexual
relationship that does not equate to rape. So it might be maybe
unprofessional or something like that. So I am not saying it is
at all times noncriminal. But let's just say that a former
trainer and a former trainee, a former trainer and a person
that he trained, he or she trained at a time previously, they
are in a sexual relationship but then the woman or the man, the
victim might say, ``No, I don't want to do this today.'' And
then it is forced on them. Okay. So that is a classic rape
allegation. Classic allegation of rape or someone just took
authority and just imposed themselves on a weaker individual
physically. Rape.
I have looked at the guidelines that--the list of
commander-directed investigation recommendations, and I see
nothing about training of military police in the gathering of
physical evidence that would support the accused--excuse me,
that would support the accuser in making the allegation of a
forcible rape. Because you only have one's word against the
other, no other witnesses. So you got to prove the case, prove
it by some physical evidence. A rape kit is what it is
generally called.
Why is it that we don't make provisions for these types of
cases, which I think are pretty typical, in addition to the
other sexual assault cases, harassment, nonphysical activities?
Why is it that we are not dealing with this issue of rape and
forcible sodomy and things like that in terms of police
investigation and prosecutorial ability to prosecute
effectively?
General Welsh. Congressman, we are. We have trained 24 Air
Force officers, special investigations, special victims
investigators to this point. We have just started a new class
model on the Army's CID [Criminal Investigation Command] class
that was advised by outside experts to put together a
curriculum to focus on that type of investigation. That first
class just completed this week. We had some outside experts in
to give us some feedback that was objective. We will run
classes through that course routinely. We sent 50 Air Force
judge advocate generals and OSI agents through the Army CID
course before starting this one. We will continue to further
train our investigators in the skills required to better
investigate these actions.
My opinion is that part of the reason we have trouble with
people sticking with an investigation and a prosecution, victim
sticking with it, because the way they are handling the
investigative cycle is so critical to them being willing to
stay with their commitment to actually identifying and
prosecuting an assailant.
The Chairman. Gentleman's time expired.
Ms. Walorski.
Ms. Walorski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate you being here. I am new, and I am shocked,
and I apologize for not being here this morning.
But I just want to go back to the point from General Welsh.
I just want to make sure I have, talking about sexual assault
in the Air Force on page 4. And it says, ``A 2010 Gallup survey
revealed that since joining the Air Force, 19 percent of women
and 2 percent of men experienced some degree of sexual assault.
For 3.4 percent of women and 0.5 percent of men, those assaults
had occurred in the 12 months preceding the survey.
Of those, only about 17 percent of those women and 6
percent of the men reported the incident.''
And my question is, and I apologize, I am brand new. And
this is my first hearing. I don't have the benefit of all of
our veterans in the room on the committee. If I am a woman in
the military and I am sexually assaulted, how do I report that?
Do I pick up a phone? Is there a 911 in the military? How do I
report that? Do I call from my cell phone? What generates the
report?
General Welsh. Any number of things. There are hotlines at
every base in the military. You can tell someone in your chain
of command. Everyone knows that you can go to the Inspector
General, you can go to the security forces, you can go to the
base hospital or clinic and ask for help there.
Anywhere in that network is connected to the reporting
mechanisms that then starts the activity moving forward. The
problem we have is not that nobody--most people don't know who
to talk to or where they could talk to, it is that they don't
feel comfortable reporting. The Congressman mentioned sometimes
they are concerned about them getting in trouble or somebody
holding them accountable for some reason for reporting. Some of
them are concerned about their family finding out, their
friends finding out, their spouse finding out.
Some of them are embarrassed. Some of them feel guilty
about the incident. All of these things come together to create
a problem where people don't feel comfortable stepping forward.
It is something that we have to just work constantly. I
don't have an easy answer for this one, Congresswoman. And you
know, new on the job or old, you are going to be shocked every
time you hear this, just like I am.
Ms. Walorski. Well, do we have in the military--is there
something specifically for this, because this is crime?
General Welsh. Yes, ma'am. We have----
Ms. Walorski. Do we have whistleblower protection in the
military? Am I protected and know that I will know that I know,
say, as a female that if I am the victim of a crime in this
military that I know I am protected and is there some--and I am
not familiar with the hierarchy in the military to understand,
but am I protected if I go and say, ``I am a victim of a
crime,'' do we have whistleblower protection?
General Welsh. Maybe. There is no hard, firm law that says
you are protected if you come forward and report something and
everybody is going to make sure that you never suffer a
consequence for any action you took.
I think in the past there have been many more incidents
where people were held accountable for activity that was
involved in or around an event where they became a victim. That
is unacceptable. You heard General Rice mention in this
particular case none of the victims have been held accountable,
made to feel like they were guilty of anything. That is the way
it has to be going forward.
We have a sexual assault response coordinator at every
organization. They are trained and certified to know how to
handle these situations. As soon as we find out through any
part of this reporting chain that we have a victim, the victim
is contacted by the sexual assault response coordinator and all
these things that we can help provide are available to them.
Not just law enforcement or investigative stuff. That is the
last thing we want to worry about at that first contact. It is
the personal care, the counseling, the healthcare, the forensic
exam if required.
Ms. Walorski. I appreciate it. So if when I call and report
that incident, am I matched with--is it gender-to-gender
reports? Am I reporting--if I am raped, am I reporting to a
women?
General Welsh. In every case you would not be. Anecdotally,
the majority of our SARCs are women. But, anecdotally, no, that
is not the case everywhere.
Ms. Walorski. And what is the ratio--I think somebody asked
earlier but I am not sure, I just simply don't know--what is
the ratio of basic military instructors--and I don't know all
your acronyms, I apologize--but if you are a basic military
instructor, what is the chance--how many women versus men,
percentage-wise, do we have in the Air Force?
General Rice. It is about 11 percent women. We are moving
to 25 percent.
General Welsh. Air Force-wide, about 19 percent women.
Ms. Walorski. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Mr. Enyart.
Mr. Enyart. Thank you, Mr. Chairman,
General Rice, would you agree with me that the command
chiefs with the commander set the command climate of a unit?
General Rice. I think command chiefs are an integral part
of that. But I believe it is fundamentally the commander's
responsibility to maintain the command climate within a unit.
Mr. Enyart. And the command chief relays, is the interface
between enlisted folks, the NCOs, and the commander. Is that
person not?
General Rice. Certainly, yes. A critical link between the
commander and the airmen within the unit.
Mr. Enyart. General Rice, I would like to know how many
female command chiefs do you have at Lackland Air Force Base
and how many do you have in the recruiting command?
General Rice. I can't give you an exact number. I would
like to take that for the record, please.
Mr. Enyart. I would like to have that information back.
Thank you.
[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
on page 191.]
Mr. Enyart. General Rice, can you tell me what is the
accessibility that a female basic military trainee has to
reaching out to a female command chief?
General Rice. No, I can't give you an exact answer to that
question. I would answer it this way: We have a number of
females who are in the instructor or staff or supervisory or
command positions. We are moving to a place where we have more
females in those positions. I don't select commanders based on
their gender, I don't select command chiefs based on their
gender. I do believe at the military training instructor level
that the team that is responsible for a flight of 50 trainees
should include one female. But beyond that we have not made
another determination to make assignments of leadership
positions based on gender.
Mr. Enyart. Have you in any way, General Rice, empowered
your command chiefs to deal with this problem that seems to be
happening--or seems to have been happening; I am sure that it
is not happening now--but have you empowered your command
chiefs to act with this? And, if so, how?
General Rice. No. So at my level I have not taken any
direct action to specifically empower command chiefs other than
making it mandatory that the rank of the command chief is no
longer a Senior Master Sergeant, but a Chief Master Sergeant,
which is not a trivial matter. I believe you understand, based
on your background, the significance of that.
But, fundamentally, I have to depend on a commander to use
the resources that I have provided to him or her to maintain a
proper command environment. And it is up to that commander to
use those resources, whether it is a first sergeant, whether it
is a command chief, whether it is an operations officer,
whether it is a supervisor or anybody else, to use that
combination of resources in a unique way, because every
commander is different, to maintain good order and discipline
and the proper command environment. And I think it is
problematic if I start to dictate how they put that team of
people together.
Mr. Enyart. I would agree with you that it may well be
problematic for you to do that. But I think you have a problem,
don't you, that needs to be dealt with. I would suggest that
having dealt with those kind of problems in my previous career,
that by setting the proper command climates you can resolve
those problems. And an inherent way of doing that is empowering
and relying our command chiefs, and by that I am talking about
the E9s, the chief master sergeants, to aid the commander in
ensuring that the NCOs, and every one of those TIs [training
instructor] is an NCO, those NCOs fully understand the
commander's intent.
I will yield the balance of my time.
The Chairman. Dr. Heck.
Dr. Heck. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you both for being here and for your service. We have
heard a lot of discussion about the climate and what is being
done to encourage individual victims to report without fear of
retribution. And, General Rice, you talked about much of the
training that goes on to try to impart the knowledge of how to
report and what to report.
I can tell you that as a military commander I know well
those training programs, both basic and recurring.
And the problem is, whether it is EO [equal opportunity],
or consideration of others, or prevention of sexual harassment,
they seem to become stagnant PowerPoints where people are
sitting in a classroom with eyes glazed over. Now, these
programs have been going on for years. Yet these incidents have
occurred even while training programs have been put forward.
How do you judge the effectiveness of those training
programs that are supposed to be providing those initial entry
service members or those that are on the front lines going
through their annual recurrent trainings on these topics to
make sure that they understand? Because it seems that the
training that we did--it is not the Air Force, I am an Army
guy--the training we do across the Services isn't resonating. I
mean, these incidents continue despite this ongoing initial
entry and recurrent training. So how are we going to assess the
training programs we have out there to try to stem the tide of
these sexual assaults and associated sexual incidents?
General Welsh. Fantastic question, sir, thank you, exactly
the question we are trying to answer right now.
I mentioned before the volumes of training and education
programs that we have had in place for years and we continue to
keep in place, and we have added more. Every time we have an
incident, we add more. All the Services do this. The question
is which ones are having an impact. Expand those, emphasize
those; get rid of the rest of them and quit wasting resources
on them, wasting people's time that could be better spent in a
different way attacking this problem.
We have talked to experts who are advising us on this
topic. The one thing they told me got my attention, because I
am more interested in seeing if it works quickly and then
dumping it if we can't tell that it does and trying something
else, the experts said, you have got to be a little bit careful
about that. Because some of these things you won't know the
impact until you give them time to work. Some of them are
institutional education changes and it takes a while. So the
trickiest part for us right now is figuring out which ones do
we stick with, and the ones we stick with we have to refresh,
we have to modernize, we have to make them applicable to our
young workforce, we have to put scenarios on YouTube, we have
to do things, you know, TED [Technology, Entertainment and
Design] Talks. We have to do the kinds of things that will
attract them. Generally, that is scenario-based training and
education. It is not PowerPoint, go home and look at it on the
computer. That is not going to help.
And so that is the type of effort we are focused on right
now. How do we energize this training and bring it down to a
personal level, not sitting in the back of the room with 500 of
your closest friends sleeping through the latest sexual assault
awareness training.
Dr. Heck. I am encouraged by that approach. And I hope it
works and I hope that you share it with our sister Services. I
can tell you far too often we have become more about training
to time than to standard and it is about sitting a classroom
and watching the slides go by for 30 minutes regardless of the
information that is being absorbed by the person sitting in the
chair.
So I applaud your efforts in trying to do some
comprehensive assessment of what does work and making sure we
push that out across the Services.
Thank you. I yield back, Mr. Chair.
The Chairman. Gentleman yields back.
Mrs. Noem.
Mrs. Noem. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it.
General Welsh, I have a question I believe should be
directed towards you.
How are the victims that were involved in this
investigation at Lackland Air Force Base currently being cared
for by the United States Air Force?
General Welsh. Thank you, ma'am. This is maybe the most
important question of the day.
They are being cared for as well as they possibly can.
Fifty-nine victims all were offered whatever level of support
we could provide them. Fifty-seven of them accepted some level
of assistance, whether it was healthcare, counseling, legal
assistance, whatever it might be.
General Rice can give you more of the details, the types of
things they accepted. I am not fully aware of that.
We have tried to do everything we can with them. We offered
them the new special victims counsel. Although it is not in
place yet, we did offer some of them that in advance of the
initial capability date because we knew there were trials
coming up and wanted to them through that. Some of them took
advantage of that.
Anything that we can think to do to help them, sadly, after
the fact we are trying to do.
Mrs. Noem. Thank you. General Rice, could you shed some
light on why some of these victims chose not to exercise every
opportunity to get care and counseling from the United States
Air Force?
General Rice. I think there are a variety of reasons, as I
have gotten feedback, it goes from some of them do not consider
themselves victims. And so they have not wanted to have
support. Others have considered the level of victimization, if
you will, such that they don't require support. And others have
made more full use of the support mechanisms that we have. So
each one of these is at a very individual case, an individual
decision. I am confident that we have made a good-faith effort
to offer the support and to conduct the investigations in a way
that we have tried not to revictimize the victims. We have
tried to honor their requests, if they have said, you know,
please, I just want to sort of move on here.
I do think, and it is something that I have talked to my
team about, just as we have found out that oftentimes the
initial answer to, did something happen to you is no, that if
we reapproach people in a different way over time, that we can
get them to develop a sufficient level of trust that they will
be more accurate with us; that because a victim said no, I
don't need any help, that we should go back at some appropriate
time interval and reask and reoffer that assistance, because
time does change people's perceptions of this. So we need to
find the right way and time to do that, but I have that on my
list of things to do here.
Mrs. Noem. We have had a lot of discussion here today about
lack of reporting, unwillingness to report incidents as they
happen, and I think that right now every single airman is
watching this situation, and watching our victims to see how
they are being treated, and making decisions on whether to
future report, to report on incidents that could be going on
right now, or could go on in the future, that you are building
a reputation right now on how you respond to these victims, and
it will determine your success on getting more accountability,
on getting more reporting of airmen being willing to come
forward and talk about what may or may not be happening.
So just know that as we work our way through this painful
process and try to bring a resolution and improvement to it,
that there are a lot of eyes on you, and there are a lot of
eyes on how we are caring for the current victims that we have,
and that we have an opportunity here to really do the best that
we can to take care of them. I have looked at some of these
recommendations that have come forward and I just have a
specific question about one or two of them, depending on how
much time I have.
One of the recommendations was A19 which says: Shorten the
MTI tour lengths to a maximum of 3 years, and do not allow
follow-on special duty assignments. Were the MTIs that were
perpetuating these crimes or assaults against the victims there
for longer periods of time? Did they have a longer service rate
in their position that they held? Is that why this
recommendation has been accepted?
General Rice. We did have some that were there for longer
than 3 or 4 years. Typically, you won't serve as a military
training instructor for that long. You will move on to a
supervisory position, so that recommendation is less about
serving as a military training instructor, than it is
consistent participation in the whole process. So the idea is
you serve one and then you move on to something else.
Mrs. Noem. My concern was that I read this, and I assumed
that some of the perpetuators potentially were in these
positions too long, and that maybe the climate within that
position as they were there for a long period of time,
developed an attitude or an environment where they felt as
though it was more acceptable the longer they were there. I
guess that is the answer that I am looking for is there is no
consistency on length of time in that position from the
perpetuators?
General Rice. No.
Mrs. Noem. Okay. Thank you for that. I appreciate that. I
will yield back, chairman.
The Chairman. Gentlemen, that concludes the questions we
have for the first panel. Thank you very much for the work you
are doing. And we will excuse you and move to the second panel.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Can we please clear the witness table? We
need to get the next panel up, thank you.
We have now--what timing. This is the call for our last
series of votes for the day. But let's try to get as far as we
can before we leave. We have on our second panel, David Lisak.
Mr. Lisak. Lisak.
The Chairman. Lisak, forensic consultant; Chief Master
Sergeant Cindy McNally, United States Air Force, retired, with
the Service Women's Action Network; and Technical Sergeant
Jennifer Norris, U.S. Air Force, retired, from Protect Our
Defenders. Mr. Lisak.
STATEMENT OF DR. DAVID LISAK, PH.D., FORENSIC CONSULTANT
Dr. Lisak. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Smith,
and thank you to the committee for giving me this opportunity
to speak to you this morning. I am a clinical psychologist, a
researcher, and a forensic consultant. For the past 25 years, I
have studied rapists and I have treated and evaluated men and
women who suffered sexual violence.
For the past 10 years, I have worked extensively with the
four Services of the U.S. military and simultaneously in the
civilian sector, I have worked with dozens of universities
across the United States, and numerous law enforcement agencies
and with State and local prosecutors. My extensive contact with
both military and civilian institutions across the country,
provides me with a perspective on the problem of sexual
violence that I would like to articulate to this committee.
Sexual violence afflicts all nations and all societies.
Societies are not distinguished by whether or not they have a
problem of sexual violence, but rather by whether or not they
actively and forthrightly confront the problem. The same is
true for institutions within those societies. It is perhaps a
little ironic, given the testimony that you have been hearing
today, but in almost every respect, the U.S. military is doing
more to confront sexual violence than any other institution in
the United States.
Nevertheless, despite their efforts, there are serious
problems within the Services that have either yet to be
addressed or yet to be fully resolved. It will require many,
many years of sustained effort and commitment to resolve these
problems, and therefore, many, many years of sustained scrutiny
by this committee, by Congress more generally, and by advocacy
groups, some of which are represented here today.
However, the scrutiny and criticism of the military very
often implies that its problems and shortcomings are somehow
unique. In my opinion, this is not only grossly inaccurate, it
also is a serious disservice to our country because it lets
other institutions in this country off the hook. And in so
doing, it puts the men and women in those institutions and
communities at far greater risk of sexual violence.
Specifically, our universities have not confronted their
problems of sexual violence with anything like the commitment
shown in the Services. There are a few exceptions, however, in
no university have I ever seen the type of commitment from
leadership, the comprehensive prevention efforts, the sustained
efforts at tackling the very challenging problems that I have
witnessed in the Services.
Perhaps the most scathing criticism that the military has
received has been focused on the shortcomings in prosecuting
cases of sexual violence. Again, I believe that this criticism
is necessary. However, our country would be well served if the
criticism of the military's prosecution record was placed in
the context of the civilian prosecution of sexual violence.
With rare exceptions, again, there are enormous problems with
the prosecution of nonstranger sexual assaults in civilian
jurisdictions.
Nonstranger cases represent the vast majority of all sexual
assaults. They are challenging cases to investigate and
prosecute, and very few civilian jurisdictions have made the
necessary efforts to train their staffs to competently and
effectively take on these cases. As a result, many nonstranger
cases are inadequately investigated and never even taken to a
courtroom. Many local prosecutors fail to prosecute the types
of nonstranger cases that military prosecutors are now
increasingly taking to court. The Services are making efforts,
and you heard reference to some of these this morning, to
increase the effectiveness of their criminal justice response
to sexual violence.
As just one example, and I think this was mentioned
already, the Army has developed a 2-week course to train
investigators in state-of-the-art techniques for investigating
nonstranger sexual assault cases and 440 investigators are now
being trained each year. This is an example of one of the much-
needed improvements that needs to take case place in the
military's criminal justice response to sexual assault, but it
will take time for these improvements to take hold and be felt.
And there is much, much more work to be done. Improved
training for investigators and military prosecutors must
continue to evolve and it must be sustained. The Services must
confront the problem of junior litigators handling complex
sexual assault cases far too early in their professional
development. Unhelpful biases and attitudes are still present
among some investigators, prosecutors, and commanders, and
these must be addressed through a process of culture change
that I think has been already stated will be a permanent
process.
I hope that my testimony will not be taken here either as
an apology for the military's handling of sexual assault, or as
yet another criticism of its efforts. Based on my experience,
working with the Services, both very good and very bad things
are still happening. This is the reality in an institution that
is undergoing significant and meaningful change, and I suspect
it will be a reality for some years to come.
It is impossible to average these good and bad things. They
are simply both true. If the Services sustain their efforts, if
Congress continues to provide clear-eyed scrutiny, and
crucially, if Congress provides the resources that the Services
need to sustain their efforts, I believe that the United States
military will lead the rest of the country in demonstrating
what it means to confront sexual violence honestly and with
sustained commitment. Thank you very much.
The Chairman. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Lisak can be found in the
Appendix on page 74.]
The Chairman. Thank you. Sergeant McNally.
STATEMENT OF CMSGT CINDY MCNALLY, USAF (RET.), SERVICE WOMEN'S
ACTION NETWORK
Sergeant McNally. Good afternoon, chairman, and thank you
members of the committee. I sit before you today having
experienced sexual assault in the Air Force from multiple
perspectives; first, as a survivor of sexual assault when I was
a young airman; second, as an enlisted troop who has spent her
entire career as an aircraft maintainer; and third, as a
retired Chief Master Sergeant who has supervised 1,500 enlisted
troops as a maintenance group superintendent.
I have had direct dealings with all of the personnel issues
that come with supervising people in today's Air Force, and I
will be sharing that perspective with you today.
I enlisted in the Air Force in 1975 and was assigned to a
WAF squadron, a Women in the Air Force squadron at Lackland Air
Force Base. At that time, women trainees were segregated from
men both physically and in our course curriculum. Following
basic training, I attended technical training at Chanute Air
Force Base where I began my integration into the Air Force. It
was there that I was sexually assaulted by two of my
instructors. I reported the incident, believing that my leaders
would handle it, and that didn't happen. I knew then that I
would never, ever report another sexual assault.
In fact, a year later at my first assignment, I was
sexually assaulted again. I did not report it, nor did I ever
discuss either of these two incidences until after I retired 28
years later and was being treated for PTSD [post-traumatic
stress disorder].
While many things have changed in the Air Force since I
enlisted, the trauma of sexual assault has not changed. It
feels like someone has reached into you, and sucked the soul
right out of you. It is traumatic, and it is ugly. And for
those of us who have survived it, we do so because of our
strength and our will to overcome what could otherwise be a
crippling episode in our lives.
I remain in the Air Force, proud of my service, however.
The reason I served far outweighed any single incident in my
life. This was my choice. I also served alongside the Nation's
finest in an Air Force where honor, integrity, and service
before self are a way of life. Our job as enlisted leaders is
to find the standard and make everyone absolutely understand
that we have no problem removing anybody in a blink of an eye
if they cross that standard. And maybe that is where General
Rice and I somewhat disagree. I believe the enlisted leaders
are one of the most important people in the military to stop
this epidemic.
To me, the sexual assault cases at Lackland demonstrate
what happens when leadership fails. Basic training is where our
sons and daughters are at their very vulnerable. The power that
military training instructors, or TIs, have over airmen is
perceived as absolute. Turning young men and women from all
over our country into airmen is a transformational process
where the TI represents the sole success of that
transformation. Turning to female leaders when assaults have
occurred is not always an answer. The true yardstick for an
effective leader has nothing to do with their gender. I have
worked with many men who have set a stringent work environment
where all airmen are free from harassment and a threatening
workplace. The NCOs in the chain of command have an overarching
duty to take care of their troops. Doing what is right is
genderless.
I have followed closely the recommended actions in the
midst of Lackland's disgrace, and I discussed some of these
with SWAN [Service Women's Action Network], and I have had the
privilege of talking to General Woodward. And I applaud her for
her efforts in looking into these issues. I believe the
following steps that are being taken will have a positive
effect on the training environment at Lackland. I agree we
should increase the number of female MTIs to at least the
percentage that they are in the Air Force. All basic training
students should be exposed to both male and female NCOs. This
is, after all, who will be leading them.
Increasing instructor-to-student ratio is an absolute must.
I was shocked to find out that the TI-to-student ratio was
roughly the same as when I went through basic training 35 years
ago. A reasonable student-to-instructor ratio is education 101.
I also agree with the requirement to raise the rank of
MTIs. Technical Sergeants and Master Sergeants are seasoned
leaders and have a good deal of experience in deterring,
identifying, and taking action. However, a nonvoluntary TI
assignment didn't work before, and it won't work now. I have
had troops who viewed TI duty as the death knell for their
career. That needs to change to attract the type of people
suited to train our next generation of leaders. Incentives to
attract the best of the best is the answer, not nonvoluntary
duty assignments.
Additionally, I do not believe women should be segregated.
We train as we fight, one team. Segregation in training did
more harm than good in attempts to integrate us into the Air
Force. We want to be viewed as airmen first and you cannot do
that coming from a segregated unit. Our own history with racial
integration should tell us that. For larger solutions, we need
to look at integrating women completely into the Armed Forces.
Remove the combat exclusion policy. Then we will be a fully
integrated force. Being able to do the job should be the
standard, not whether you are male or female.
I believe that as leaders we took our eye off the ball. We
enabled a climate where our troops became vulnerable, and we
can train and train, but in the end, it is about leadership. We
draw the line on what is acceptable behavior, define it, and
enforce it. I don't believe we can legislate leadership, but we
can certainly have you hold our leaders responsible and legally
liable for the welfare of their troops. That is an absolute
must.
In the maintenance career field where all our leaders are
passionate about doing what is right to protect our pilots
while they fly, our leaders need to feel as passionate about
protecting our troops as they do the flying mission. You cannot
minimize risks to zero, but leaders can and better make sure
they are there to make the right decision and do the right
thing. Our troops demand nothing less. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Sergeant McNally can be found in
the Appendix on page 139.]
The Chairman. The vote is just about at an end, and I have
to recess the committee at this time to give everybody an
opportunity to vote. We will vote, and return. It will be, it
looks like, at least a half-hour. Thank you.
[Recess.]
Dr. Heck. [Presiding.] We will call the meeting of the
House Armed Services Committee back to order. Thank you for
your understanding as we ran across to cast our votes. I am
sure other Members will be coming back shortly.
At this time we would like to recognize Technical Sergeant
Norris for her testimony.
STATEMENT OF TSGT JENNIFER NORRIS, USAF (RET.), PROTECT OUR
DEFENDERS
Sergeant Norris. Thank you for having me.
I am Jennifer Norris. I am an Air Force veteran, wife to my
dear husband Lee, national advocate for the Military Rape
Crisis Center, and Protect Our Defenders Advocacy board member.
Protect Our Defenders is a place for survivors to build
community, amplify our voices, support one another, and take
collective action. It is with heavy heart that I appear here. I
speak not only for myself, but for the thousands of survivors
whose lives were forever altered by this epidemic, a culture
that punishes the victim in a broken justice system. I want to
recognize the service members who have not survived due to
murder or suicide, and their families who are still waiting for
answers.
Last August I stood outside these doors with fellow
veterans and survivors. We delivered a petition asking you to
open an investigation into the Lackland scandal and its causes.
There were 30 victims. Now, there are at least 59. Since
August, the DOD estimates roughly 10,000 more men and women in
uniform have been assaulted. We hope this hearing is the start
of fundamental reform to remove bias, conflict of interest, and
opportunity for abusive authority that precludes justice.
We ask that this be the first in a series of hearings to
fully explore the reasons Lackland and similar abuses are
occurring and what must be done to prevent them.
As the San Antonio Express-News put it, congressional
hearings look at the systemic failings that trials cannot and
reinforce the concept of civilian oversight. Both are needed.
Core issues must be addressed. The committee should hear from
current Lackland victims and from independent experts on issues
of victim treatment in the military justice system. The cycle
of repeated scandals, self-investigations, and ineffective
reforms must be broken.
Because no victims from the current scandal have been
invited to testify, I will share one of their stories from the
local press. ``A young Air Force recruit who said her basic
training instructor sexually assaulted her testified. After 2
months of obeying his orders, she was frightened to protest his
advances in a dark supply room. The defense asked the woman if
she resisted Estacio's advances. `I was too scared to,' she
replied. `Sometimes when somebody is too scared to talk, does
that mean that they want to do something?' '' A military judge
found Estacio not guilty of sexually assaulting the trainee,
allowing the instructor to face a maximum 1-year prison
sentence. Her story is very similar to mine. When I joined, I
was a 24-year old, a small-town girl, with idyllic childhood.
Soon, I was raped and assaulted by superiors.
Sergeant Norris. Two of the predators pled guilty to sexual
assault. They were honorably discharged with full benefits.
By not dealing with a culture that provides easy targets
for predators, we are hurting our military and our society. The
predators often appear to be great troops, achieve high rank,
are very charismatic and manipulative. But that is only part of
the problem. The military justice system elevates an
individual's discretion over the rule of law. Too often, the
commanders' go-to solution is to sweep the problem under the
rug and kick the victim out.
Often, legislative reforms are inconsistently applied,
unnecessarily encumbered, or just not implemented.
In my work as an advocate, it breaks my heart to see the
same problems today that existed when I joined 16 years ago--
sorry--39 percent of female victims report their perpetrator
was of higher rank, and 23 percent report it was someone in
their chain of command.
The Air Force's Lackland report and previous reports
indicate a failure of leadership. How many more times must
Congress hear this before enacting fundamental reform?
Why didn't the Air Force interview the victims to determine
if they tried to report or feared reporting, and why?
According to the DOD's own data, 47 percent of service
members are afraid to report because of the reprisals that
occur. This isn't just an Air Force problem, it is Service-
wide.
Many Secretaries of Defense have declared a zero-tolerance
policy. Yet recent actions challenge that notion.
In September, Secretary Panetta proposed the President sign
an executive order which would have eviscerated the military's
Rape Shield Rule. In 2011, the military argued in court that
rape is incident to service. Had I known this, that the
military dismisses rape as an occupational hazard, I would
never have joined. According to The L.A. [Los Angeles] Times in
1992, in response to the Tailhook Scandal, ``Several lawmakers
proposed stripping the armed services of their role in probing
sexual molestation cases.''
The deference and patience that Congress has shown the DOD
has come at great cost to our service members, our security,
and ultimately, our society.
Retired Brigadier General Loree Sutton recently said, ``The
only credible solution is an independent special victims unit
completely outside the unit chain of command under professional
civilian oversight.''
And I agree.
I ask you, as our elected representatives, please, please
don't let this wait. God bless our brave men and women in
uniform.
[The prepared statement of Sergeant Norris can be found in
the Appendix on page 146.]
Dr. Heck. I want to thank all of you for your testimony.
And thank you, Tech Sergeant, for your courage to be here today
and to tell us your story. Certainly, acts of sexual assault
under any conditions are especially heinous. But when committed
by those in position of power and under color of authority,
they are especially reprehensible. And we certainly appreciate
you taking the time to be here today.
This question is to Ms. McNally, Ms. Norris. The DOD and
the military services have taken a number of steps, albeit
maybe not enough, to develop, assess, and refine their
respective sexual assault prevention and response programs. As
individuals who are regularly involved with providing or
coordinating care and other services for victims of these
violent crimes, such as sexual assault, what do you consider to
be the trademarks of a good response program?
I will go to the Chief first.
Sergeant McNally. Thank you. One of the first things that I
think that has been a big problem is understating why we go
unreported. And I know--I could see that the generals were
putting their arms around this very same thing trying to
explain that. And I can tell you speaking for myself and for
some of the victims that I have supervised over the years that
they don't report it because, number one, it is so traumatic,
it is so ugly, and they know that it will be public knowledge.
And so the number one fear, and no matter how compassionate you
are, that this will go out. And how could I have let this
happen to me? You know, the men have the same response when
they are sexually assaulted. So the number one thing is
something very personal, very ugly, very traumatic is going to
be public knowledge. That is one of the biggest fears.
The second thing is that it is a ``he said, she said.''
And unless you see evidence that commanders have removed,
removed from the Service, with consequences, anybody who
enables an environment that allows harassment to even start,
then you have no trust in your system. You have to see
evidence. You know, not whack-a-mole responses to whatever
crisis comes up in the sexual assault thing.
And, finally, is the--you know, we have the ``he said, she
said,'' and then we have what everyone likes to use the word
``accountability,'' and I think that is thrown around a lot.
That just means we moved them to another assignment. He needs
to be responsible, they need to be held liable.
So these are basically the three reasons why people don't
report sexual assault. Until they understand that, they cannot
present a viable sexual response, you know, sexual assault
response program in any place, whether it be in the Air Force
or in college. I mean, that is a fundamental thing you have got
to get your arms around and understand. They should not come to
you. You should be out there talking to them, you know talking
to your troops. And commanders can't do that. The senior
enlisted can do that, the commanders can't do that.
Dr. Heck. Tech Sergeant, anything to add?
Sergeant Norris. I provided you with my personal testimony
to give you a little bit of background so that we didn't have
to go into detail. But, unfortunately, the rape and the three
different other predators who assaulted me, it all occurred
within the first 2 years of my career. And for those who have
served in the military, you recognize quickly that rank does
come with privileges. Meaning, when you are lower in enlisted,
you are that guy, or girl. And you are new to the institution.
So you haven't been able to establish the credibility necessary
to make a claim against someone that has been there for 18
years and appears to be the best friend or the right-hand man
of the commander. You are stuck. If you want a career, you
don't want to say anything. Because you get retaliated against.
You get thrown out, you get beat up.
And that is what we need to stop. We need to remove the
chain of command from the reporting process. It is absolutely
detrimental to us being able to report safely. And if you think
about it, it is actually good for the perpetrator too. Not that
I stand up for them, by any means. But a fair process would be
a fair process for both. So think about it. Commander, 18-year
veteran, Active Duty guy, just raped me. And I know he is your
buddy and best friend and he has had your back this whole time.
I know, I just entered and I am just a little old E1. But. Just
wanted to let you know.
It doesn't work that way.
You are too scared to tell the commander because, first of
all, it is alleged, in every case. Very much of a trigger for
me.
Second of all, others start to think that, ``Oh, no, you
better be careful around that girl because she might just say
that you sexually assaulted her.'' And so you almost become a
leper.
And because of the small community within a squadron, the
rumor mill starts flying. The victim doesn't want to talk about
what happened. I didn't want to tell anybody what happened to
me aside from the commander because he was the only person I
had to go to. I wanted it kept confidential. I was ashamed. I
was embarrassed. I couldn't believe that it happened. And
continued to happen and pushed me to the point where I was
forced to report, to prevent another rape.
So this small-squadron business where they are putting the
commanders in charge, I am not saying every commander's a bad
man or a bad woman. You know. What I am saying is that to put
that decisionmaking authority in one person's hands, that is a
lot to ask not only of the commander, but also for the rest of
us. You know, he decides one thing, I don't agree with it. What
recourse do I have?
None.
So if they decide they don't want to believe you, have fun
with that.
Dr. Heck. Thank you. Dr. Lisak, based on your experience in
both the military and civilian sectors, is it your view that
the U.S. military is doing worse than civilian institutions
when it comes to the investigation and prosecution of sexual
assault cases? And in your view, what are the areas in the
military's response to sexual violence that need the most
attention and improvement?
Dr. Lisak. Well, this is one of those things that is really
impossible to average. There are several civilian jurisdictions
that are doing quite good work in both investigating and
prosecuting non-stranger sexual assaults, but they are really
exceptions. By and large, it is a pretty bad picture.
Likewise, in the Services, there are some good things that
have started to happen in terms of better training, both for
investigators and for JAG officers. It may be too soon to see
much of the impact of that. I hear a little bit from--I just
did a training of Army JAG officers and have begun to hear them
say that they are seeing better CID reports. That is
encouraging. It is very anecdotal, but if you started hearing
that more and more, that would certainly be encouraging.
About 3 months ago, I consulted on a court-martial. And it
was probably an anomaly in that things went really well.
Everything went well. Everybody did their jobs really well.
What I value that experience for is it told me that it is
possible, that if you have both JAG officers and OSI agents and
the judge, the military judge, who are well-trained, who
understand the issues, that this is a process that can be
respectful to victims, can be respectful to the rights of the
accused, and can handle even the complexities of the
nonstranger sexual assault well. And there was a good outcome,
from my perspective. There was a conviction and a good
sentence.
So it is possible. It is still, obviously, happening
rarely.
And I would hope that if the training that has begun is
sustained, that we will see more of that. I also hope that if
you see more of that, that some of what has just been described
here is that we will begin to see incremental change in the
level of trust in the system. Which would lead, hopefully, to
more victims being willing to report.
Dr. Heck. Thank you. Thank you.
Ms. Davis.
Ms. Davis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you all for
being here. I am sorry I missed the first part of your
testimony. But, Tech Sergeant Norris, I really appreciate what
you said. Because in many ways, you capture this incredible
dilemma that we are facing.
And if I may, Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to follow up
briefly. Because I had asked about what we were able to
capture, really, from the MTIs that were spoken to at Lackland.
We had an opportunity to speak to several of the
whistleblowers. And they were very clear about what they felt
should be some key recommendations.
And I am just disappointed and I wanted to include this in
the record that the response came back about MTIs generally.
And I believe that the generals--I think that they knew and I,
you know, have great respect, but I think we were talking about
whistleblower MTIs. And to our knowledge, they actually still
have not been spoken to. And I think the people who were
willing to come forward, because this very issue of sort of
seeing through the good guys and being able to say, hey, you
know, it is not all that it appears. Which is what many of the
victims grapple with.
I think we are doing a better job training prosecutors. And
we have had an opportunity to hear some of that evolution of
the way that we do that. But it is still a big problem.
And I wanted to ask, because I must say, I have been
reluctant to take this out of the chain of command. Because
everything else is in the chain of command. And for us to pull
this out in some way says that we don't believe that our
officers are capable of dealing with this issue.
So I wanted to just come back and ask, of the--you know,
testimony that we had, and I often think that it is better to
go with this kind of testimony and then follow up, frankly,
what is it that you heard that was helpful that you think is
moving forward well and what really was problematic?
Because what we are interested here is what is the most
effective, what will change the culture and change the ability
of people to have any trust in it.
So if you could respond to that, that would be helpful, and
if you want to start.
Sergeant Norris. Yes, ma'am. Are you talking about when I
was listening to General Welsh and General Rice?
Ms. Davis. Yes, if you would like to respond to that.
Sergeant Norris. I had a very difficult time listening to
General Welsh and General Rice today. Not only because of my
own experience, but also because of what is happening to this
day.
This morning, I got a call from a client that is in the Air
Force that we are having issues with. So it is--despite what
General Rice and General Welsh are saying, which could very
likely be very genuine, and they really do care, they are
basically putting their trust in each individual commander to
do the right thing. And in my eyes, that means, okay,
commander, you are judge, jury, and executioner. You make the
decisions.
And what is happening is, is our commanders, depending on
who they are, and even whether they are even, you know,
schooled in this, I mean, it was hard for me to understand the
whole thing and I was a victim of it.
What we are finding is that the commanders aren't always
giving people the right information in addition to even dealing
with it.
So they are not saying, okay, okay, maybe we need to go
contact OSI and do something about this.
They have the ability to stop it right there. Just by
saying a couple things. All it would take is for a commander to
say, Well, this is alleged. Or, Well, it is a ``he said, she
said,'' for a victim to pretty much fall apart and decide I
don't trust you, and I don't trust anybody and I am not doing
anything with this.
Me personally, I am a spitball. I am a spitball of fire.
And I fought back on every single thing. Because I knew that in
America, there is basic constitutional rights that include
males and females. We are equal.
So why is it that commanders in the military are given this
special position that in society, we have civilian courts, we
have supreme courts, we have the ability to appeal, we have all
these different options available to us, but in the military,
we have one person that may or may not help you.
Ms. Davis. If I may go to Dr. Lisak, from your experience
as well, looking at this in a beyond the military, what is your
sense of this, again, in terms of pulling that out from the
military accountability?
Dr. Lisak. Well, I guess I have to preface what I say with
a major caveat, which is, I am not an attorney and I don't view
myself as anything close to an expert on military justice
system, so this is purely from my own experience and just
anecdotally.
I recognize that what has been very articulately posed here
is a significant problem. And I think a solution has to be
found to that.
The Services are clearly trying to solve it with training.
I don't have a crystal ball. I don't know whether in 25 years,
if we can wait that long, whether that will work or whether in
25 years we will have another hearing like this, you know, and
be looking for another solution.
I wish I could.
Because it is clear, you know, even not being an expert, I
can tell that this is a major decision to make. And it can have
all kinds of repercussions, many of which we can't anticipate
and some of which could be pretty harmful.
So it is a serious decision to be made.
I guess my only contribution could be that, yes, this is a
very serious problem. And what was, you know, described so
perfectly that when you have--you know, we all want victims to
come forward. If they don't come forward, not only can we not
provide them with the Services we want, but we cannot go after
those predators. You know, the justice system can't work,
nothing works.
And yet we haven't earned their trust. And how do you earn
their trust when the command structure is--it is a very
incestuous place. And you are asking victims to come forward to
somebody who has a tremendous amount of power over them.
So how we resolve that, I don't know. And I don't want to
pretend that I do. Other than you are hearing that this is a
serious problem that we have to find some solution for.
Ms. Davis. I know we have to move on.
Did you have a comment would you like to--did you want to
respond to this issue?
Ms. McNally. I think the first thing we need to look at is
a change in culture. We set out--one of the things that we did
was we had the command directive look at inappropriate material
in the workplaces. That was directed by the Secretary of the
Air Force.
What we didn't say was, you had notice and commanders
ignored you. We found this much material, then, generals, why
did the commanders ignore you? I mean, if you have a good grasp
for the culture, then why are they blowing you off? You know.
When you start at the beginning. I mean, you know, I would have
been down at the base removing the commander. After a month's
notice, he knew we were coming. And they had videos of
inappropriate behavior. We are not taking action on existing
issues that we have right now.
Ms. Davis. Thank you.
Dr. Heck. Ms. Speier.
Ms. Speier. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Let me say to all of you, I really apologize for the fact
that so many of the members had to leave, many of them having
to catch planes and the like.
I would agree with Congresswoman Davis that it would have
been appropriate to have you speak first so that it would have
allowed for the generals to recognize what we are talking about
here, more specifically.
To you, Retired Sergeant McNally, you are absolutely right.
There was an actual notice that went out at the Air Force: We
are going to come through, we are going to see whether or not
you have got sexual-harassing documentation in your cubicle, on
your computer. Not your--by the way, not your laptops, but just
the main servers. And after a month's notice they collected
32,000--32,000 inappropriate documents.
So your point is well taken.
Mr. Chairman, I want to introduce one other victim who was
not one of the--or survivors, I should say--was not one of
those who testified. Jessica Hinves is here.
Jessica, would you stand up for a moment?
Jessica was an airman. She was raped. She reported the rape
in 2009. So this is not an old case, this is a recent case. She
was told that it was going to be investigated, it was going to
go to court-martial. Two days before it was going to go to the
court-martial, a new commander came into town, and that
commander has the authority to dismiss the prosecution and
ordered the court-martial to be abandoned.
That is what is wrong with the system. Certain individuals
have power that far exceed what it should be. And if you can
basically stop a court-martial after all of that has taken
place, you don't have the kind of independence to look at these
cases. And that is what is so frustrating to so many of us.
Thank you, Jessica.
Dr. Lisak, you spoke earlier and talked about your work
with the military, and it has been over 10 years. And I got the
impression that you were basically saying that, you know,
things are looking pretty good. And while, you know, there is
probably more work that should be done, it is better than it is
in the civilian arena, and so I would like for you to just
comment on that a little more specifically.
Dr. Lisak. Sure, thank you.
Well, I am sorry I gave the impression that I think things
are looking pretty good. Anything but.
I was comparing the military's performance to the
performance in the civilian sector in both the local district
attorneys and our universities sort of similar populations. And
compared to that, the military looks pretty good.
But that really is as much if not more a comment about how
bad things are in the civilian world.
I don't disagree with anything that has been said here in
terms of the really profound problems that the Services have.
I do see the Services making efforts that I don't see in
the civilian world.
And I see little bits and pieces of evidence that some of
those efforts are bearing fruit. And that gives me some hope.
Ms. Speier. Let me ask you another question. You have done
a lot of research, and you have profiled sexual predators, if I
am not mistaken. Is that correct?
Dr. Lisak. I studiously do not use the word ``profile.''
Ms. Speier. Okay. You have studied them.
Dr. Lisak. Yes.
Ms. Speier. And you have studied them in the military. And
my understanding is that it is not unusual to have these
individuals, who I will call sexual predators, be exemplary
soldiers. And beyond being exemplary soldiers, being soldiers
that also are very good at identifying targets that are ripe
for the preying. Is that correct?
Dr. Lisak. That is correct.
Ms. Speier. Alright. So one of the things that happens in
the military is you can have as a mitigating factor the fact
that you have good military character. That is a mitigating
factor. So we can reduce--even though this is a felony, even
though this is a crime, if you have been an exemplary soldier,
then we are going to reduce the sentence. Because we don't have
sentence guidelines in the military either.
So I would actually disagree with you on a lot of counts,
as compared to the civilian society where we do have sentencing
guidelines, where there is a Rape Shield Law and where there is
an appeal process and where there is independence, none of
which exists in the military.
But knowing that, don't we have a greater obligation in the
military to make sure that these individuals that prey on
victims, trainees in this case, over and over again, get taken
out?
Dr. Lisak. You mean----
Ms. Speier. I mean taken out of the military. I don't mean
taken out.
Dr. Lisak. Well, I certainly agree with you that the only
solution--if you have identified a predator and you have a--
some kind of judicial process that--the research is very clear
that there is very little that can be done to rehabilitate
predators. And that for the protection of the community,
whether it is the military or the university or the civilian
community, these individuals have to be isolated from the
community, basically.
Ms. Speier. Thank you. My time has expired.
Dr. Heck. Thank you.
Ms. Duckworth.
Ms. Duckworth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
So Dr. Lisak, the question I have for you is dealing in
these situations, having been part of an aircrew and a tight-
knit military unit myself, I find that the unit members know
the tendencies of individuals. So that when this person is
being accused, it is not surprising, they may be of great,
upstanding moral character and great--as we used to say in the
Army, they are your high and tight soldiers, they are hard
chargers--but you know because the same situation that gets you
into a situation where you are protective of one another and
close knit also puts you in a role where you understand, okay,
I have got to watch out for this guy.
Is there anything that has been changed by the rise of
women in--into higher ranks?
I was often, for example, the highest ranking female in my
unit. And I found that it became my role to step in in other
units as well. And I was often the only EEO [equal employment
opportunity] officer.
So are you seeing some of those dynamics? I am not saying
that there are not great male officers who act the way they
should. But does that change the dynamic at all, to have more
female officers who have trained?
Dr. Lisak. This is a very anecdotal response to that.
Ms. Duckworth. Okay.
Dr. Lisak. Because it is my limited experience with, the
various Services.
I think it helps. But I don't think it is something that
could be relied on as the fix. Because the same sort of
cultural dynamics that we have been talking about all morning
into the afternoon apply to women as well. And the forces, the
pressures to conform, the pressures not to report, the
pressures to be careful about who you say what to can apply to
women as well and can silence women, even when they are in
authority. When you are in authority, in the Services, there is
always somebody who's got more authority. More power.
So I think it is an improvement. And it helps, but it is
not a sort of a fundamental fix.
Ms. Duckworth. Thank you.
Sergeant Norris, you would like to add?
Sergeant Norris. Yeah, I would like to start by saying that
oftentimes this issue gets turned into a male on female issue.
And it is very important to note that 56 percent of our victims
are males. It is yet to be looked at and given the attention
that it needs to. And I want that on the record today. That
this is not just a female issue, this is a predator issue.
And just to let you know, things are getting worse. In 2010
and 2011, commander actions on the ground dealing with sexual
assault complaints have gone down 23 percent. Down 23 percent.
Court-martials, 2010, 2011, down 22 percent. Court-martial
convictions, same year, down 8 percent.
The DOD surveys find that 39 percent of perpetrators are of
higher rank, 23 percent are in their chain of command.
So we are asking our people, our troops to turn to
potential predators to report another predator, according to
these statistics.
Ms. Duckworth. Thank you for that. I did not know the--you
said 56 percent?
Sergeant Norris. Yes.
Ms. Duckworth. That is good to know. So my question to you,
then, Officer Norris, you obviously are, as you said, a
spitfire and are willing to stand up.
Do you find many of your clients staying--choosing to stay
in once they are given the tools? Is there any way, once they
have gone through this process, and if there is a resolution
that can be reached, is there any way to keep these amazing men
and women that we have invested so much money into, so much
effort into, who could then take this knowledge and help others
as they go on in their career? Are they so hurt that they just
don't want nothing to do with the military?
Sergeant Norris. That is a great question.
On paper, all the sexual assault policies in the military,
they are so pretty. They are beautiful. If they actually were
implemented, that would be great. But they are not.
And we see it to this day, since the passage of the Defense
Strong Act in 2011, we have been dealing with implementation
issues the entire time because of people just straight up
ignoring it, not wanting to deal with it, or just we don't have
time for this, the mission's more important. Beat it.
That is what we are seeing. The culture is getting more
vicious. I don't know if it is because it has become so popular
with Congress now, and that it is out in the media. But the
stakes have been risen.
So in addition to getting raped, you are getting beat, you
are getting threatened. And then we are having to fight with
commanders on how to get this person off that base so they
won't get prolonged PTSD.
So no, right now, we are not going to be able to save them.
Not with the system we have in place right now.
Ms. Duckworth. Mr. Chairman, I am out of time. I just
wanted to thank both Sergeant McNally and Sergeant Norris for
your courage and leadership. We certainly need a lot more like
you. Thank you.
Sergeant Norris. Thank you.
Dr. Heck. Likewise, again, we want to thank you for taking
time to be here this afternoon. Certainly, for you, Tech
Sergeant, for sharing your very compelling story, and for our
other witnesses for providing your expertise to the panel.
Seeing no other questions, the meeting is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 2:14 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
January 23, 2013
=======================================================================
PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
January 23, 2013
=======================================================================
Statement of Hon. Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon
Chairman, House Committee on Armed Services
Hearing on
A Review of Sexual Misconduct by Basic Training
Instructors at Lackland Air Force Base
January 23, 2013
Thank you for joining us for our first hearing of the 113th
Congress. I think it's appropriate that we begin our oversight
with a subject that this committee has been vigilant in
addressing for many years. At the same time, I find it
extremely disturbing that despite the collective work of
Congress, the Department of Defense, the military services, and
the dedicated groups who advocate on the part of victims of
this heinous crime, sexual assault and sexual misconduct
remains a problem within our Armed Forces.
Today we meet to receive testimony on sexual misconduct by
basic training instructors at Lackland Air Force Base. The
events at Lackland are the most recent example of sexual
assaults that have plagued our military for far too long. This
tragic example--where thirty-two instructors have either been
found guilty, have been charged with, or are still being
investigated for crimes against fifty-nine trainees begs the
question--how could this have happened? How could the system
and in particular the leadership have failed to protect the men
and women who serve our Nation from sexual predators who also
wear the uniform?
While I applaud the Air Force for pursuing in-depth
investigations to find answers to these questions, I am
particularly disturbed to learn that there was significant
delay reporting the allegations to the proper authorities when
they first came to light. Equally troubling is that no action
was taken by local leadership when the reporting delay was
uncovered. This to me is unacceptable. I look forward to
hearing from General Welch and General Rice how the Air Force
has addressed these issues to eliminate the possibility that
sexual misconduct goes undetected in the future.
Make no mistake, Congress shares the responsibility for
preventing sexual assault within the military and assuring
victims that their cases will be prosecuted to the fullest
extent of the law. Over the past 5 years, Republicans and
Democrats have joined forces to put real reforms in place. We
have ensured that victims of sexual assault are taken
seriously, provided medical care and support, and that cases
are investigated and prosecuted.
Last year, Congress passed reforms in how the military
tracks sexual assaults in order to paint a reliable picture of
just how big the problem is. We have also mandated that only
senior officers can handle sexual assault cases, ensuring that
no matter what the rank of the victim, justice is meted out at
the highest levels. We established a commission to take a
critical look at the Uniformed Code of Military Justice and
make recommendations for reform to make certain that the
military justice system can successfully prosecute sexual
assault.
However, legislation is not the only answer. Commanders at
every level and in every Service must make eliminating sexual
assault and all forms of sexual misconduct from their commands
the highest of priorities. Senior leaders at all levels must
hold commanders accountable for aggressively pursuing
allegations of sexual misconduct. We will accept nothing less.
I understand that the Air Force has already made several
changes to improve the safety and effectiveness of basic
training. I would like to hear from our second panel if the
reforms and safeguards recently put in place are sufficient.
I have no doubt that there is more to be done. My visit to
Lackland in September renewed my belief that the young men and
women who volunteer to join our Armed Forces are the finest in
the Nation. These young men and women have earned the respect
of the Nation; they deserve the respect from their leaders and
fellow service members.
I would like to remind our members that at the same time we
hold this hearing, the Air Force continues to prosecute the
remaining cases at Lackland. When military perpetrators of
sexual assault are tried by courts-martial, public statements
by military and civilian leaders, especially senior leaders,
about the guilt or innocence of an alleged perpetrator can be
perceived as, or even may be undue command influence on the
outcome of the trial. That means public testimony about
Lackland could be used as grounds for a mistrial by defense
attorneys. That isn't an outcome anyone wants. To that end I
will give latitude to General Welch and General Rice to answer
questions to the extent that it will not prejudice ongoing
criminal prosecutions. We are all committed to eradicating
sexual assault in our Armed Forces, but first we have to
respect the victim's need for urgent and sure justice.
Statement of Hon. Adam Smith
Ranking Member, House Committee on Armed Services
Hearing on
A Review of Sexual Misconduct by Basic Training
Instructors at Lackland Air Force Base
January 23, 2013
I want to welcome General Welsh and General Rice. Thank you
for coming, I know that both of you have been personally
engaged in addressing the sexual misconduct that occurred in
basic training at Lackland, and within the United States Air
Force. I also want to thank the witnesses on our second panel,
Dr. David Lisak, Chief Master Sergeant Cindy McNally, USAF,
retired, and Ms. Jennifer Norris. I look forward to hearing
your testimony.
Each year Lackland is home to more than 30,000 trainees who
receive their basic military training (BMT) to enlist in the
United States Air Force. Approximately 25 percent of these
individuals are women. Basic military training is the backbone
in developing our young airmen and women. It is the cornerstone
to ensuring that the Air Force molds the behavior that is
expected from those serving in uniform. So it is disturbing to
learn that individuals who were entrusted to mold these young
men and women took advantage of their positions and sexual
harassed and assaulted the very individuals they had the
responsibility to develop and train.
We are here today because at least 32 basic military
instructors have been investigated or are under investigation
for inappropriate relationships with or sexual harassment and
assault of close to 60 individuals who were victims. And, the
investigations continue, so there may be additional instructors
implicated and even more victims acknowledged. Given that the
investigations and prosecutions are still ongoing, I just want
to remind my colleagues that today's focus should be on the
policies and process of what happened and what is being done to
repair this broken system, because we do not want to adversely
impact any ongoing prosecutions and investigations.
General Welsh and General Rice, we are here to understand
how these assaults and inappropriate relationships could have
occurred, how the system failed to detect these individuals,
and as a result of your reviews, what actions is the Air Force
taking to prevent such activities from occurring in the future,
where you are in the implementation of these recommendations,
and how we can ensure that these changes are upheld in the
future.
General Welsh, while I understand the hearing is focused on
Lackland and what is being done to correct the situation, I am
also concerned with the larger Air Force population which is
also seeing a number of sexual assaults and harassment. Is the
culture within the Air Force unintentionally contributing to
this problem? What is the Air Force doing to address this issue
within its ranks? Can the lessons learned and the
recommendations from the review at Lackland be used to address
this issue for the rest of the force? If not, what actions is
the Air Force taking to address this problem?
Dr. Lisak, Chief McNally, and Ms. Norris, we look forward
to hearing from you on recommendations you may have to address
this issue. Sexual harassment and assault are not unique to the
military; inappropriate comments, date rape, and other sexual
crimes happen every day within our society. Similar
institutions, such as colleges and universities, face similar
challenges. Are there lessons learned that the military can
build upon from the civilian sector? Unlike universities and
colleges, the military has much more control over an
individual's life, so are there areas in which the military
could do better than civilian society? I am interested in
learning what is working and what is not, and how we can
leverage research, policies, and programs that are effective
that can be implemented within the military.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
=======================================================================
DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
January 23, 2013
=======================================================================
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
=======================================================================
WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING
THE HEARING
January 23, 2013
=======================================================================
RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MS. SANCHEZ
General Welsh. The Unit Climate Assessment (UCA) system tracks the
last UCA and the upcoming UCA date, and Equal Opportunity Specialists
are reminded and prompted to conduct the assessment.
To ensure commanders meet the National Defense Authorization Act's
(NDAA) intent to conduct annual climate assessments, the Air Force is
revising Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2706, Military and Civilian
Equal Opportunity, to change the current two year requirement for unit
climate assessments to an annual climate assessment. As stipulated in
the NDAA, Air Force will now be required to conduct a climate
assessment within 120 days of commanders assuming command. Annually
thereafter, the Air Force will utilize a variety of assessment tools
such as Out and Abouts, Focus Groups, and Interviews to assess the
climate for commanders. The Equal Opportunity Office will conduct the
climate assessments and report findings and recommendations to
commanders.
Currently, the Air Force utilizes the UCA as the means of assessing
the climate. The UCA is an excellent assessment tool for commanders to
determine the engagement of their personnel. The UCA measures the
following areas:
A) Cohesion and Pride,
B) Motivation and Morale,
C) Supervisory Support,
D) Perceived Discrimination,
E) Overt Discriminatory Behaviors,
F) Command EO/EEO Policy, and
G) Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR).
Plus, the commander is allowed to select up to ten locally
developed questions.
All areas of the UCA are measured via Likert Scale, however, the
SAPR questions are measured based on the selection made by the
participant. Since the UCA incorporates the SAPR questions, Air Force
equal opportunity personnel partner with the Sexual Assault Response
Coordinators for the inbrief and outbriefs to the commanders. One of
the sections that commanders appreciate is the comments section
provided in each measurement area as these comments provide the
verbatim responses from the survey participants.
Once the survey is complete, equal opportunity professionals
analyze the data, schedule an outbrief with the commander, and provide
recommendations to address the issues/themes presented by the
workforce. If necessary, focus groups are hosted to solicit additional
information or confirm perceptions. [See page 16.]
______
RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MRS. DAVIS
General Welsh. There are 54 certified female Military Training
Instructors (MTI); nine additional female MTIs are in training,
assigned to Air Force Enlisted Basic Military Training (BMT)--these 63
personnel represent 13 percent of the MTI cadre. Historically, female
MTIs have represented 10 percent of the MTI cadre.
Recent non-voluntary manpower initiatives seek to significantly
increase the representation of females in the MTI corps with the goal
of one female per team of four certified MTIs (per two flights of
trainees). To achieve this, the Air Force has established a requirement
to increase inbound female MTI staffing to seven per month to achieve
and sustain an overall number of 129 certified female MTIs. Once this
level of female manning is achieved, BMT's ratio of female MTIs would
then match our trainee population of approximately 25 percent. [See
page 25.]
______
RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. ENYART
General Rice. During the period the misconduct occurred, 2009-2012,
one of the two Chief Master Sergeants (CMSgt, E-9) assigned to Basic
Military Training (BMT) was female. We currently have one male and one
female CMSgt working in BMT. We have recently hired four CMSgts for BMT
squadron superintendent positions; one of the four CMSgts is female.
For the Air Force Recruiting Service, six of twenty-seven CMSgts
and two of five CMSgt-selects are currently female. [See page 32.]
?
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING
January 23, 2013
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. SMITH
Mr. Smith. 1) Given that the findings and recommendations in the
Air Force November 2012 report parallel the results of other reviews
that have been conducted over the course of nearly a decade, is this
review indicative of a larger deficiency in the Air Force's culture
that remains unaddressed?
General Welsh. The Air Force has changed tremendously over the last
several years but it has not changed enough. Our professionalism and
culture must be consistent with our core values of integrity, service
and excellence. As the Secretary of Defense states, there is no place
in the military for sexual assault and our goal is ``zero.'' In
November, I convened an ``All-Call'' with all 140 wing commanders to
give them my expectations of them as leaders. This was followed up with
a Health and Welfare Inspection of common work areas. The results of
this inspection revealed we have more work to do. We will continue to
improve until work centers are reflective of the pride and
professionalism of our Airmen.
To institute sustained and enduring change, we have also taken
efforts to operationalize Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR)
program initiatives. This includes a special interest item on
inspection checklists to ensure viable programs and policies are
implemented. We also recently convened a SAPR scenario exercise
throughout United States Air Forces in Europe and will continue to
exercise these scenarios throughout the Air Force.
Additionally, we are in the midst of enhancing accessions, pre-
command, senior enlisted leader, professional military education and
annual training programs. Enhanced SAPR training over the course of a
career will provide continued attention and emphasis to support long
lasting change. This training also targets our senior leaders, to
include quarterly video teleconferences with wing commanders and annual
SAPR leader summits in which national experts provide education on a
variety of topics, including victimology, victim care, investigatory
techniques and accountability.
Finally, we are working the required additional manpower
requirements under the current fiscal constraints to support a
sustained SAPR program. This includes victim advocates, sexual assault
response coordinators, and legal assistance, as well as specially
trained investigators and prosecutors to ensure we hold offenders
accountable.
Mr. Smith. 2) To what extent did the commander-directed
investigation or the Air Force analyze the background of each of the
alleged offenders at Lackland to identify what, if any, trends exist
among the alleged perpetrators (such as criminal history, disciplinary
actions incurred while in the military, service waivers and the like)?
General Welsh. The commander directed investigation (CDI) conducted
by Major General Margaret Woodward and internal reviews by Air
Education and Training Command examined the backgrounds of alleged
offenders. None of the reviews revealed information among the alleged
perpetrators that would have indicated a propensity to engage in sexual
misconduct prior to their arrival at Basic Military Training. Although
these reviews did not reveal common demographics among alleged
offenders, they did help to identify trends in how the alleged offenses
were committed. These trends highlighted shortcomings in existing
policies, procedures, resources, and leadership, and served as the
focus for our corrective efforts. For example, in the past it was not
difficult or uncommon for a military training instructor (MTI) to meet
alone with a trainee, whether or not for legitimate purposes. Under the
new wingman procedures, the ability of an MTI to isolate a trainee has
effectively been negated.
Mr. Smith. 3) GAO found that some first responders were not always
aware of the health care services available to sexual assault victims
because not all of them were completing the required training. What
steps has the Air Force taken to improve first responders' compliance
with completing annual refresher training on sexual assault prevention
and response?
General Welsh. First responder training for medical personnel has
been implemented since Calendar Year (CY) 2010. In 2011, the Air Force
Medical Service (AFMS) upgraded First Responder Training for healthcare
personnel on MedLearn. This computer-based training is required
annually for all healthcare personnel as defined by Air Force
Instruction 44-102, Medical Care Management. Compliance is tracked by
each military treatment facility's Education and Training office. The
training module incorporates services available to assault victims. The
curriculum is standardized, clear and concise and is updated at least
annually. The AFMS has seen a dramatic increase in the number of
healthcare personnel who have completed this training, as evidenced by
the following data:
CY12--24,680 medics completed First Responder Training for
Healthcare Personnel
CY11--24,296 medics completed First Responder Training for
Healthcare Personnel
CY10--6,000 medics completed First Responder Training for
Healthcare Personnel
The Air Force Surgeon General continuously monitors training
completion and compliance of annual refresher training for sexual
assault prevention.
Additionally, our Military Criminal Investigation organization and
Security Force personnel currently receive first responder training
based on their specialty. We will also convene a multi-disciplinary Air
Force integrated product team in the summer of 2013 to further review
and assess first responder sexual assault services, including the
timing and delivery of support provided to victims, as well as the
methodology used to evaluate training effectiveness. This effort will
be in partnership with the Office of Secretary of Defense Sexual
Assault Prevention office who has also established a Special Victims
Capability to improve capabilities of all first responders.
Mr. Smith. 4) The Department of Defense June 2006 Instruction on
sexual assault prevention and response recommended that the Services
provide informational briefings and scenario-based training through the
professional military education system, to include initial-entry
training. Why did it take the assaults at Lackland and an investigative
report on sexual misconduct during basic military training for the Air
Force to finally undertake the development of such training?
General Rice. Beginning in 2005 and phased in by 2007, the Air
Force developed career-long Sexual Assault Prevention and Response
(SAPR) education and training with Air Education and Training Command
and private sector subject matter experts. SAPR curriculum includes
both policy overview and discussion-based scenarios/exercises to comply
with Department of Defense requirements. Airmen receive SAPR education
and training in Basic Military Training, technical training, the First
Term Airmen's course, officer training school, officer and enlisted
professional military education, and during annual and pre-deployment
training.
In 2007, a workshop with 25 subject matter experts on sexual
assault identified bystander intervention as the most effective
prevention effort within the military culture and environment. To that
end, Air Force prevention initiatives for the last two years focused on
bystander intervention training (BIT), 90-minute small-group
facilitated modules for leaders that incorporated discussion, exercises
and scenario-supported learning. Mandatory Air Force-wide BIT began in
January 2010 and was completed in September 2012. Over 448,000 Airmen
(active duty, Air Force Reserve Command, and Air National Guard) and
civilian supervisors of military were trained.
The Air Force will continue to search for innovative ideas to reach
the next level in our prevention and response efforts. In January 2013,
we stood up our second of several integrated product team meetings,
incorporating university experts and other subject matter experts, to
assess our pre-command, senior enlisted, and entry-level SAPR education
and training curricula with the goal to make it more relevant and
impactful. Future meetings will include the review and assessment of
other SAPR-related training, to include annual, pre-deployment, post-
deployment, military recruiter, first responder training, as well as
all levels of professional military education.
Mr. Smith. 5) The commander-directive investigation report
regularly referenced ``unique challenges'' that exist in a training
environment. What steps, if any, are being taken to identify and modify
other Air Force programs and areas that pose ``unique challenges'' and
require a more tailored approach in the prevention and response to
sexual assault?
General Rice. The ``uniqueness'' of the training environment
addressed in the Lackland Basic Military Training commander-directed
investigation referenced the training instructor's level of authority
over trainees, often with little or no supervision.
While each installation and command poses distinctive challenges,
this type of supervisor-subordinate relationship is not typical in Air
Force organizations. In most instances, there is supervisory overhead
to include branch and flight chiefs and superintendents. We acknowledge
that this does not always preclude misconduct or inappropriate behavior
and is why we have and will continue to emphasize every Airman's
responsibility to do the right thing and the significance of being a
good Wingman.
In regards to a tailored approach in the prevention and response to
sexual assault, we recently solicited from major commands shared best
practices. The consolidated list is posted on the Air Force SAPR
website for commanders to evaluate for local level implementation.
Mr. Smith. 6) The Air Force recently implemented a mandatory
misconduct reporting requirement based on the recommendation from the
commander-directive investigation that ``a clear policy be developed
requiring that wing commanders be informed immediately of all
allegations of sexual assault, sexual harassment, unprofessional
relationships, maltreatment, and maltraining.'' However, this new
policy does not provide an exemption to victims that would allow the
option to make a restricted report. To what extent does the Air
Education and Training Command's mandatory misconduct reporting
requirement adhere to or is consistent with DOD's policy on restricted
reporting of sexual assault incidents? How does Training Command plan
to bridge the disconnect between the new reporting requirement and the
current procedures that service members and first responders are taught
to follow when making a restricted report on sexual assault?
General Rice. On August 20, 2012, the commander of 2nd Air Force,
Major General Leonard Patrick, created a mandatory misconduct reporting
requirement for, ``all military training leaders, military training
instructors, and other training squadron personnel (except victims of
the alleged offense or trainees) with knowledge of a reportable
offense.'' Because this policy does not apply to victims of misconduct,
it is completely consistent with restricted reporting options provided
through the Air Force.
Mr. Smith. 7) The investigation team indicated that it spoke with
``immunized perpetrators'' as part of its review. To what extent did
the investigation team use these individuals? How many individuals
contributed to the review that would be classified as ``immunized
perpetrators'', for what types of offenses did they receive immunity,
and who determined who received immunity, and are these individuals
still serving in the military?
General Rice. The only ``immunized perpetrator'' interviewed by the
commander directed investigation (CDI) led by Major General Margaret
Woodward was Airman Peter Vega-Maldonado, as he was the only
perpetrator immunized at the time of the CDI. Airman Vega-Maldonado's
testimony before General Woodward's team was instrumental in
understanding military training instructor (MTI) culture as well as
identifying policy, resource, and leadership shortcomings that may have
enabled his misconduct.
Airman Vega-Maldonado was convicted by a special court-martial on
April 6, 2012 of an unprofessional relationship with a technical
training student. After his court-martial, Brigadier General Theresa
Carter, the 502d Air Base Wing commander, granted Airman Vega-Maldonado
testimonial immunity and ordered him to cooperate with investigators.
General Carter, as a general court-martial convening authority, was
authorized to grant immunity in this case pursuant to Rule for Courts-
Martial 704, under the Manual for Courts-Martial.
Pursuant to his immunity, Airman Vega-Maldonado admitted engaging
in consensual unprofessional relationships with four additional
students in technical training. He also provided investigators with
information regarding seven other potential MTI misconduct cases.
Airman Vega-Maldonado did not receive immunity for any particular
offenses. Rather, under a grant of testimonial immunity, Airman Vega-
Maldonado may not be prosecuted based on any information derived from
his immunized testimony. For example, his admission that he engaged in
four additional unprofessional relationships may not be used against
him in a court-martial.
Three additional MTIs have since received testimonial immunity
subsequent to their own courts-martial. Immunity was deemed necessary
in those cases because prosecutors believed these individuals had
information about other MTI misconduct that could not be obtained by
any other means. All of the MTIs who have received testimonial immunity
are still serving with the Air Force for a variety of reasons, to
include completion of their court-martial sentences and participation
in ongoing investigations and prosecutions.
To date, 18 alleged victims of MTI misconduct have also received
testimonial immunity and been ordered to cooperate with investigators.
In each case, the alleged victim was believed to have willingly engaged
in an unprofessional relationship with an MTI in violation of Air
Education and Training Center policy. Testimonial immunity was deemed
necessary in these cases because the victims either refused, or were
reluctant, to cooperate with investigators due to their legitimate
concerns about self-incrimination.
Mr. Smith. 8) To what extent did the commander-directed
investigation or the Air Force analyze the background of each of the
alleged offenders at Lackland to identify what, if any, trends exist
among the alleged perpetrators (such as criminal history, disciplinary
actions incurred while in the military, service waivers and the like)?
General Rice. The commander directed investigation conducted by
Major General Margaret Woodward and internal reviews by the Air
Education and Training Center examined the backgrounds of alleged
offenders. None of the reviews revealed information among the alleged
perpetrators that would have indicated a propensity to engage in sexual
misconduct prior to their arrival at Basic Military Training. Although
these reviews did not reveal common demographics among alleged
offenders, they did help to identify trends in how the alleged offenses
were committed. These trends highlighted shortcomings in existing
policies, procedures, resources, and leadership, and served as the
focus our corrective efforts. For example, in the past it was not
difficult or uncommon for a military training instructor (MTI) to meet
alone with a trainee, whether or not for legitimate purposes. Under the
new wingman procedures, the ability of an MTI to isolate a trainee has
effectively been negated.
Mr. Smith. 9) Sexual assault prevention and response training moved
from week 7 of basic military training to week 5, and a potential move
to week 4 was being considered. What, if any, criteria are being used
to determine when sexual assault prevention and response training
should be provided in basic military training? To what extent have the
data from the recent report of alleged sexual misconduct during basic
military and technical training been analyzed to identify what trends
may have existed at the time the misconduct took place? For example,
did data indicate the misconduct predominantly took place at the
beginning of basic military training when trainees may be more
vulnerable, or at the end of training when trainees are provided more
freedom?
General Rice. Decisions on where to place Sexual Assault Prevention
and Response (SAPR) training in the Basic Military Training (BMT)
program are based on several factors: 1) encouraging reporting from the
onset of training, 2) reducing fear of reporting and 3) reinforcing
SAPR messaging through related learning objectives for increased
retention. For these reasons, there are several points of training.
Within 72 hours of arrival the group commander briefs all trainees to
immediately report any sexual or other misconduct and how to do that,
as well to give a personal assurance that those who report will not be
punished. The squadron commander follows up in the first week of
training, defining sexual crimes, describing the multiple venues for
reporting (e.g. via Sexual Assault Response Coordinators (SARC),
chaplains, medical providers, etc.), methods of reporting (restricted
and unrestricted) and the implications for each, and leadership's total
commitment to place victim support as the first priority. Also in the
first week, military training instructors brief/show trainees the SARC
visual aid located in every dormitory and in every trainee's study
guide which contains the SARC hotline reporting number.
A new lesson has been crafted to alert trainees and MTIs of early
signs of developing unprofessional relationships (e.g. early signals of
sexual predator grooming) in the training environment. Plans are to add
this training into the second week of training to reinforce Human
Relations I and II training messaging, in the second and third weeks of
training respectively, each designed to promote a culture of respect
among Airmen. SAPR Accessions I training was moved from the seventh to
the fourth week of training to place it prior to the week of field
training deployment to reinforce the connection between SAPR and
mission accomplishment, and to allow reinforcement again during an
Airmanship and Core Values lesson and in the Squadron Commander's
Departure Briefing, both just prior to graduation. It also provides any
victims more time with a trauma counselor, if they request counseling.
The Squadron Commander's Departure Briefing also specifically addresses
prohibitions in contacting Airmen using electronic communications
(phone, text and social media) after BMT, especially stressing periods
of liberty and technical training. While the majority of sexual
misconduct incidents occur at the end of training or after graduation,
all of the above training improvements are intended to identify and/or
prevent sexual predator grooming which investigative cases have shown
occur early in training.
Mr. Smith. 10) To what extent did the DOD Inspector General's
office contribute to the commander-directed investigation team's review
of sexual assault?
General Rice. The Department of Defense Inspector General's (IG)
office did not contribute to the commander directed investigation
because commander-directed investigations are independent of the IG
system. Commanders have an inherent authority to conduct commander-
directed investigations to examine systemic or procedural problems or
to look into matters regarding individual conduct or responsibility, as
was the case here.
Mr. Smith. 11) To what extent did the Air Force solicit input from
responders such as medical and mental health personnel on their ability
to provide or coordinate care for alleged victims during basic military
or technical training?
Where there any identified changes that are needed to improve
medical and mental health care to service members who are assaulted
during basic military or technical training?
And, did the Air Force solicit input from individuals or groups
outside of the military culture with experience in prevention and
response to sexual assault?
General Rice. The Joint Base San Antonio (JBSA) Lackland Sexual
Assault Response Coordinator (SARC) coordinated with both medical and
mental health personnel on providing consolidated care for victims of
sexual assault. Trainees are notified of base resources, to include
SARC services, at the beginning of training and during their fourth
week of basic military training. If a sexual assault victim presents to
Behavioral Analysis Service (BAS) for assessment, BAS contacts the JBSA
Lackland SARC for supportive care. The JBSA Lackland SARC office staff,
which includes a sexual assault trauma counselor, provides continued
supportive victim-centered care to current basic military and technical
school trainee sexual assault victims including those who experienced
sexual assault prior to military service. Upon the trainee's departure
from JBSA Lackland, these cases are either closed or forwarded to the
victim's technical school or their first duty station assignment,
depending on the victims request for further SARC Support.
Additionally, the JBSA Lackland SARC works closely with the local area
Rape Crisis Center in providing resources to victims who elect to
utilize non-Department of Defense support and provides brochures and
flyers from recognized organizations (1 in 6, Military One Source,
etc.) to victims of sexual assault.
The JBSA Lackland SARC and the 559th Medical Group (MDG) BAS
continue to work closely together to improve coordination and support
for victims of sexual assault. The JBSA Lackland SARC makes referrals
to sexual assault victims as requested/needed (e.g., Local Rape Crisis
Center, Mental Health, etc.) for further assessment and/or treatment.
In addition, the 559th MDG process continues to assess for past/current
history of sexual assault during intake evaluations and works closely
with the JBSA Lackland SARC to refer trainees as needed. The 37th
Training Wing recently added a widely publicized SARC hotline for
trainees and increased SARC access to training operations.
In 2011, the Air Force Medical Service (AFMS) upgraded First
Responder Training for healthcare personnel on MedLearn. This computer
based training is required annually for all healthcare personnel as
defined by Air Force Instruction 44-102, Medical Care Management. The
training module incorporates services available to assault victims. The
curriculum is standardized, clear and concise and is updated at least
annually. The AFMS has seen a dramatic increase in the number of
healthcare personnel who have completed this training, as evidenced by
the following data:
CY12--24,680 medics completed First Responder Training for
Healthcare Personnel
CY11--24,296 medics completed First Responder Training for
Healthcare Personnel
CY10--6,000 medics completed First Responder Training for
Healthcare Personnel
The Air Force Medical Service (AFMS) has strengthened their sexual
assault process by partnering with external resources and subject
matter experts. The 2012 AFMS Sexual Assault policy was developed using
civilian subject matter experts' valuable input and guidance. Dr. Linda
Ledray, a leading national and international sexual assault nurse
examiner, lent her expertise in the development and standardization of
the Sexual Assault policy. Additionally, Air Force policy requires
military treatment facilities to partner with external resources/
facilities to conduct sexual assault exams (SAE), if they do not have
an internally trained team to conduct such exams. This ensures quality,
standardized exams with certified and experienced examiners.
The judge advocate community recently initiated a program, called
the Special Victims' Counsel, to provide sexual assault victims a
specially trained judge advocate for representation. The Special
Victims' Counsel's primary purpose is to provide victims with
independent, attorney-client privileged representation throughout the
investigation and prosecution processes. In implementing and developing
the Special Victims' Counsel Program, the Air Force Judge Advocate
General's Corps continues to partner with several external sources to
develop this program--receiving valuable and continuing input from The
National Crime Victim Law Institute, Lewis & Clark Law School,
Portland, Oregon, and the Department of Justice's Office for Victims of
Crime, Washington, DC.
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. TSONGAS
Ms. Tsongas. 12) General Welsh, I would like to thank you for your
recent efforts in the short notice service-wide health and welfare
inspections. Clearing all Air Force work centers (including public
areas) of any unprofessional material is a great step in changing the
culture. With that, I will say I was surprised to see that the Air
Education and Training Command had a large number of sexually explicit
materials. The results of the inspection should serve as a wakeup call
that the culture must change. How will you ensure that the progress
made by this inspection is kept up?
General Welsh. The intent of the Health and Welfare Inspection was
to reset the Air Force workplace environment to coincide with my
direction and expectations that Air Force workplaces must be
comfortable for all Airmen to work in. This is a culture change, and in
order to shift our culture, we must reach every level of leadership
throughout the Air Force. To ensure compliance, the commanders'
inspection program now includes requirement for regular health and
wellness inspections by commanders. Major commands review wing
inspection results and provide oversight on installation programs.
Furthermore, the staff here is responsible for oversight of major
command programs to evaluate Air Force-wide compliance.
Ms. Tsongas. 13) I was very pleased to be briefed by General
Harding, Air Force JAG, regarding the implementation of a Special
Victims Counsel Program. With the initiation of the Special Victims
Counsel, do you believe there will be an increase in the number of
victims coming forward to report their assaults/rapes? Is the Air Force
prepared for an influx of reports?
General Welsh. Sixty Air Force attorneys have been identified and
trained to serve as Special Victims' Counsel providing comprehensive
and compassionate legal assistance to victims. Their job is to advise
the victim and to assist the victim throughout the investigatory and
prosecutorial phases of their case. Our goal is to provide a level of
support to victims so that they do not feel like they have been
victimized a second time by the process. If victims feel like they are
treated better by the entire system, then it is our hope that more
victims will feel comfortable coming forward and reporting a sexual
assault.
The Special Victims' Counsels are currently prepared to assist all
eligible sexual assault victims of on-going investigations and courts-
martial, and future cases as they arise. Even if additional victims
come forward, not all of the eligible victims will require the same
level of workload, based on whether the case is restricted or
unrestricted, the stage of the proceeding (early investigation, mid-
investigation, post-preferral or post-referral), and the needs of a
particular individual. The Air Force is committed to devoting the
resources necessary to provide legal counsel to sexual assault victims.
Ms. Tsongas. 14) In Dr. Lisak's written testimony, he touched on
the fact that ``we'' shy away from the victim due to the nature of the
problem. I have often wondered how victims are treated in their work
centers after they report a sexual violence crime. From what I hear
from victims my office communicates with, they are often isolated.
Aftercare or ``postvention'' must be present to ensure the victim feels
supported. What is the Air Force doing to ensure every military member
understands how important it is to treat the victim ``normally'' after
they have reported such a crime?
General Welsh. Our first focus is on victim care and support, and
our goal is to maintain this priority through improved aftercare or
``postvention'' for each victim. The Air Force provides a number of
support services to victims of sexual assault, including a victim
advocate, legal assistance, medical care, mental health services, and
chaplain support. Enhanced and continued Sexual Assault Prevention and
Response Program (SAPR) training to include at accession, annually, by-
stander intervention and during professional military education courses
will educate all Airmen and better prepare them as ``Wingmen.'' We
discuss with commanders the importance of victim care and emphasize the
assault was not the victim's fault, victims should be treated normally
in the unit and they were not disloyal for reporting the assault.
In addition to SAPR training, leadership communication and emphasis
is critical. To this point, we will conduct quarterly video
teleconferences with all wing commanders and we have a strategic
communication plan to ensure consistent and continuous messaging.
Installation case management group meetings are convened monthly to
discuss a victim's progress and any on-going issues. For unrestricted
cases, these meetings are attended by the victim's chain of command,
victim advocate, mental health, and legal counsel, who discuss issues
to improve victim care and support. Additionally, specific training on
how to provide appropriate support and aftercare to victims who report
a sexual assault is now incorporated in standardized curricula for
commanders and first sergeants. Finally, victims who submit
unrestricted reports have the opportunity to request an expedited
transfer.
Ms. Tsongas. 15) Recently, it was announced that the first male
victims came forward at Lackland. Given the information in Dr. Lisak's
testimony, it seems that there may be more. What are you doing to make
sure that there aren't male victims we're missing?
General Welsh. All victims of sexual assault, regardless of gender,
are encouraged to report and obtain the care and support they need. A
2010 Gallup Survey on the prevalence/incidence of sexual assault in the
Air Force estimated 0.5 percent of males (1,355) in the Air Force had
been sexually assaulted within the preceding 12 months, though only a
fraction reported. While the reasons for not reporting differ by type
of assault that occurred, the Gallup survey indicated there are several
reasons women do not report while the majority of men (63 percent) do
not report because they do not consider the incident serious enough.
This perception is a challenge for us to overcome. However, we continue
to work the issue through training which includes discussion on gender
issues.
Additionally, we have implemented the ``Rights and Duties of Airman
Trainees.'' This document accompanies the Airman from the recruiting
station through completion of technical training and outlines how to
report sexual assault and misconduct. The Lackland training
instructor's acts of misconduct were briefed to all trainees, to
include recent graduates, and victims were encouraged to report.
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. SPEIER
Ms. Speier. 16) On behalf of Mr. Cummings, Ranking Member of the
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee: I am deeply concerned
about the failure to have appropriate procedural and investigatory
protections of alleged victims of sexual assault. The civilian criminal
justice system limits the defendant's ability to cross-examine victims
about their past sexual behavior, this is commonly known as the rape
shield law. Military adjudicatory process also has a rape shield law,
but invariably it permits the defense to discuss the victim's sexual
proclivities. Additionally, an individual who is accused of committing
sexual assault has the ability to provide character-bolstering evidence
during a court martial. By comparison, in the civilian adjudicatory
process character-bolstering is not permitted. Has the USAF considered
or begun the process of evaluating changes to the military adjudicatory
process as to better protect alleged victims? If so, what
recommendations, if any are under consideration or have been issued to
date?
General Welsh. Military Rules of Evidence (MRE) 412 generally
prohibits the introduction of evidence offered to prove that an alleged
victim engaged in other sexual behavior or to prove an alleged victim's
sexual predisposition. MRE 412 is substantially similar in substantive
scope to the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) 412. MRE 412 is intended
to shield victims of sexual assault from the often embarrassing and
degrading cross-examination that is common to prosecutions of such
offenses. MRE 412 applies to any alleged sexual offense case and is not
limited to rape or assault with intent to commit rape.
The exact same exceptions that exist in FRE 412 apply to MRE 412.
Evidence may be admitted only if excluding it would violate the
accused's constitutional rights. This is the same standard that is also
commonly used in most state courts as well. The procedures to determine
admissibility are similar to the Federal Rule but modified to conform
to military practice. For example, the time period to provide notice of
intent to introduce evidence under Rule 412 is shortened and a closed
hearing is substituted for an ``in camera'' hearing by a federal judge.
Thus, Rape Shield protections apply equally in the military as they do
in other Federal courts.
MRE 404 generally prohibits the introduction of character evidence,
which is mirrored in Federal Rules of Evidence 404. MRE 404 permits an
accused to offer evidence of a pertinent character trait, just as FRE
404 allows. Evidence of good military character is admissible when that
specific trait is pertinent. Military appellate courts have taken an
expansive view of when that trait is pertinent. However, those same
courts also apply an equally liberal standard to the scope of
government rebuttal that allows the government to rebut evidence of
good military character that would otherwise not be admissible. Unlike
civilian courts, courts-martial are part of a disciplinary scheme
relied upon to maintain good order and discipline, to preserve
obedience and conformity necessary to successful military action, and
to eliminate from the military individuals who pose a risk to other
service members or national security. Often, acts not punishable as
crimes in civilian society are deemed criminal under military law. A
long-standing tradition based on the separate nature of military
society is one basis for admissibility of the evidence; whatever weight
the evidence carries at trial may be little or none.
The Air Force implemented the Special Victims' Counsel Program on
January 28, 2013 as a pilot program as one means of providing better
support to sexual assault victims. The lessons learned from this
program will be collected and evaluated to make recommendations for
potential changes to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the Rules
for Courts-Martial, or the Military Rules of Evidence.
Ms. Speier. 17) On behalf of Mr. Cummings, Ranking Member of the
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee: This month the Air
Force Academy reported that sexual abuse and assault reports have
increased significantly to 65 during the last academic year compared to
41 the year prior. Why is there an increase in assaults? What specific
actions has the USAF taken to investigate and properly curtail the rise
in these incidents? What best practices from other military academies
or other entities is USAF considering implementing to better address
this growing issue?
General Welsh. The numbers 65 and 41 are actually the total number
of reports from all three Military Service Academies for academic years
(AY) 2010-2011 and 2009-2010, respectively. The number of sexual
assault reports at the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) has gone
up steadily since AY 2008-2009 (listed below) and may be attributable
to the efforts to increase reporting. Additionally, 12 of the 52
reports for AY 2011-2012 were cases of sexual assault that occurred
prior to entry.
Academic Year Number of Sexual Assault Reports
AY 2005-2006 17
AY 2006-2007 19
AY 2007-2008 24
AY 2008-2009 8
AY 2009-2010 20
AY 2010-2011 33
AY 2011-2012 52
USAFA maintains a robust Sexual Assault and Prevention and Response
(SAPR) program as described in the Annual Report. Each cadet receives
over 12 hours of SAPR related development education during the course
of their four-year career which is closely aligned to USAFA's officer
development model (USAFA's development model aligns development
education along a four year progression from follower to organizational
leader). USAFA uses a wide range of techniques to deliver SAPR related
training, to include the use of subject matter experts. This fall,
USAFA will implement by-stander intervention training modeled after the
active duty program.
USAFA thoroughly investigates all unrestricted reports of sexual
assault and prefers charges to court-martial when appropriate.
Additionally, USAFA reviews the reports of the other Military
Service Academies along with the Department of Defense annual reports
looking for best practices and new and effective ideas. USAFA is also a
member of the Colorado Coalition Against Sexual Assault which includes
universities throughout the state and provides a forum for the exchange
of ideas.
Ms. Speier. 18) On behalf of Mr. Cummings, Ranking Member of the
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee: USAF vision is to
``excel as stewards of all Air Force resources in service to the
American people, while providing precise and reliable Global Vigilance,
Reach and Power for the nation.'' How can the USAF live up to its
vision when the outward appearance of the Service is that it has
recruited individuals that think it is acceptable to engage in behavior
that runs counter of that vision?
General Welsh. Since the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response
program was implemented by Department of Defense Directive 6495.01 on
October 6, 2005, the Department has maintained policy, stated in
paragraph 4.l of the current Directive dated January 23, 2012, that:
Enlistment or commissioning of personnel in the Military Services shall
be prohibited and no waivers are allowed when the person has a
qualifying conviction for a crime of sexual assault.
A ``qualifying conviction'' is defined in the Directive Glossary
as: A State or Federal conviction, or a finding of guilty in a juvenile
adjudication, for a felony crime of sexual assault and any general or
special court-martial conviction for a Uniform Code of Military Justice
(UCMJ) offense, which otherwise meets the elements of a crime of sexual
assault, even though not classified as a felony or misdemeanor within
the UCMJ. In addition, any offense that requires registration as a sex
offender is a qualifying conviction.
For those recruited into the Service who choose not to live by the
Air Force core values, deterring their misconduct begins with
convincing them that the risks associated with unprofessional behavior
are too great. When institutional safeguards work properly, most will
be dissuaded from misconduct, the few not dissuaded will be deterred
from unprofessional behavior, and those not deterred must be detected
and held accountable in a way that further strengthens dissuasion and
deterrence for others. The Air Force is committed to sustaining high
levels of professional conduct through persistent attention to and
reinforcement of our core values from all levels of leadership.
Ms. Speier. 19) On behalf of Mr. Cummings, Ranking Member of the
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee: What specific actions
has USAF taken to better prevent sexual assaults among women serving in
or attached to units in combat zones given DOD's recommendations to
enhance the position of women and in part make critical changes to its
combat exclusion policy?
General Welsh. Prior to the elimination of the 1994 Direct Ground
Combat Definition and Assignment Rule, Air Force women were eligible to
fill 99 percent of the authorized positions.
The Air Force has six Sexual Assault Response Coordinators (SARC)
assigned in the combat area of responsibility. In addition to these six
SARCs, Air Force Central Command has instituted a ``Blue Line'' program
to reach out to Airmen deployed to forward operating bases. Air Force
SAPR Operations at Headquarters Air Force Personnel Center in San
Antonio provides 24/7 reach back support to deployed SARCs on training,
reporting and other issues. Additionally, the deployed SARCs
participate in monthly teleconferences to benchmark and share concerns
and best practices.
Ms. Speier. 20) On behalf of Mr. Cummings, Ranking Member of the
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee: What are the key
challenges USAF has identified in implementing DOD's recommendations?
What specific recommendations does USAF anticipate being fully
implemented in the next 6 months, 1 year and 2 years from now?
General Welsh. Though we anticipate fully implementing Department
of Defense (DOD) recommendations, we do recognize challenges for the
Air Force Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) program due to
current budget and resource constraints. The hiring freeze will impact
the ability to fill critical vacant Sexual Assault Response Coordinator
(SARC) and full-time Victim Advocate (VA) positions to comply with
Fiscal Year 2012 National Defense Authorization Act requirements by 1
October 2013.
Furloughing runs an unprecedented risk to sustaining the 24/7/365
SAPR capability and restricts access to institutional knowledge which
may adversely impact victim care. Approximately 74 percent of
installation-level SARCs and 84 percent of projected full-time VAs are
civilian positions. The Air Force would need to rely heavily on
military SARCs/Alternate SARCs (only assigned in some locations) and
volunteer military VAs to sustain.
Fiscal constraints and reduced budgets may impact SARC and VAs'
opportunity to complete continued education units required to maintain
certification. Additionally, installation level programs currently
funded through Operation & Maintenance budgets may impact quality of
program events.
The following recommendations will be implemented within the next
6, 12, and 24 months.
Within 6 months:
-- Additional leaders at Basic Military Training (BMT)
-- Adjustment of the timing (conduct earlier) and frequency of
SAPR training at BMT
-- BMT student access to SAPR services
-- Pre-Command SAPR training for Commanders and Senior Leaders (30
Mar 2013)
-- Revised SAPR Commander's Guide
Within 12 months:
-- New Unit Climate Assessment Requirements: conducted within 120
days of command and then annually
-- Air Force-wide enhancement to SAPR Training and Education
Within 24 months:
-- Selection of BMT instructors (more of them, more experience,
better quality) to include selection of more female instructors (Dec
2014)
Ms. Speier. 21) On behalf of Mr. Cummings, Ranking Member of the
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee: In June 2012, you were
directed by Gen. Rice to conduct ``an independent 60-day Command
Directed Investigation into faculty and staff misconduct with Basic
Military Training [BMT] trainees and technical training [TT] students .
. . [which] would deeply and deliberately evaluate the BMT and TT
environments and obtain recommendations to enable Air Education
Training Command to . . . ensure a command environment that effectively
supports victims.'' Within the Command Directed Report, which consists
of approximately 180 pages, there is no mention of victims being
interviewed. Gen. Rice, at any time did you directly interview victims
during the course of your work? Did your staff interview victims? If
so, how many of the total identified victims to date did you or your
staff meet with? Could you explain why victim interviews were not
included in this report?
General Rice. This question was answered in a letter to
Congresswoman Speier. The letter was dated 12 Feb 13 and a copy was
given to Congresswoman Speier's MLA by SAF/LL (Lt Col Peltzer) on that
date.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
