House Hearing, 111TH Congress - Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations For 2010

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, VETERANS AFFAIRS,
AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS

FOR 2010
HEARINGS
BEFORE A
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, VETERANS AFFAIRS,
CHET EDWARDS, Texas, Chairman
SAM FARR, California
JOHN T. SALAZAR, Colorado
NORMAN D. DICKS, Washington
PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island
SANFORD D. BISHOP, JR., Georgia
MARION BERRY, Arkansas
STEVE ISRAEL, New York
ZACH WAMP, Tennessee

ANDER CRENSHAW, Florida
C. W. BILL YOUNG, Florida
JOHN CARTER, Texas
NOTE: Under Committee Rules, Mr. Obey, as Chairman of the Full Committee, and Mr. Lewis, as Ranking
Minority Member of the Full Committee, are authorized to sit as Members of all Subcommittees.
CAROL MURPHY, TIM PETERSON, WALTER HEARNE, DONNA SHAHBAZ, and MARY C. ARNOLD,
Subcommittee Staff
PART 7
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with HEARING
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
VerDate Nov 24 2008
22:45 Jul 07, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 7513
Sfmt 7513
E:\HR\OC\50526P1.XXX
50526P1
Part 7MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, VETERANS AFFAIRS, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2010
VerDate Nov 24 2008
22:45 Jul 07, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6019
Sfmt 6019
50526P1
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, VETERANS AFFAIRS,

FOR 2010
HEARINGS
BEFORE A
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, VETERANS AFFAIRS,
CHET EDWARDS, Texas, Chairman

JOHN CARTER, Texas
NOTE: Under Committee Rules, Mr. Obey, as Chairman of the Full Committee, and Mr. Lewis, as Ranking
Minority Member of the Full Committee, are authorized to sit as Members of all Subcommittees.
CAROL MURPHY, TIM PETERSON, WALTER HEARNE, DONNA SHAHBAZ, and MARY C. ARNOLD,
Subcommittee Staff
PART 7
(
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
50526
VerDate Nov 24 2008
22:45 Jul 07, 2009
Jkt 050526
WASHINGTON : 2009
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 7513
Sfmt 7513
50526P1
DAVID R. OBEY, Wisconsin, Chairman
JOHN P. MURTHA, Pennsylvania
ALAN B. MOLLOHAN, West Virginia
MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio
PETER J. VISCLOSKY, Indiana
NITA M. LOWEY, New York
E. SERRANO, New York
JOSE
ROSA L. DELAURO, Connecticut
JAMES P. MORAN, Virginia
JOHN W. OLVER, Massachusetts
ED PASTOR, Arizona
DAVID E. PRICE, North Carolina
CHET EDWARDS, Texas
MAURICE D. HINCHEY, New York
LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD, California
JESSE L. JACKSON, JR., Illinois
CAROLYN C. KILPATRICK, Michigan
ALLEN BOYD, Florida
CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania
STEVEN R. ROTHMAN, New Jersey
BARBARA LEE, California
ADAM SCHIFF, California
MICHAEL HONDA, California
BETTY MCCOLLUM, Minnesota
TIM RYAN, Ohio
C.A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland
BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky
DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida
CIRO RODRIGUEZ, Texas
LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee
JERRY LEWIS, California

HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky
FRANK R. WOLF, Virginia
JACK KINGSTON, Georgia
RODNEY P. FRELINGHUYSEN, New
Jersey
TODD TIAHRT, Kansas
TOM LATHAM, Iowa
ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama
JO ANN EMERSON, Missouri
KAY GRANGER, Texas
MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho
JOHN ABNEY CULBERSON, Texas
MARK STEVEN KIRK, Illinois
DENNIS R. REHBERG, Montana
JOHN R. CARTER, Texas
RODNEY ALEXANDER, Louisiana
KEN CALVERT, California
JO BONNER, Alabama
STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio
TOM COLE, Oklahoma
BEVERLY PHETO, Clerk and Staff Director
(II)
VerDate Nov 24 2008
22:45 Jul 07, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 7513
Sfmt 7513
50526P1
C O N T E N TS
Page
Quality of Life ..........................................................................................................
Review of VA Challenges ........................................................................................
127
Family and Troop Housing .....................................................................................
235
Pacific Command .....................................................................................................
315
European Command ................................................................................................
373
DoD/VA Medical Transition ....................................................................................
487
Base Realignment and Closure ..............................................................................
555
Outside Witnesses ...................................................................................................
653
Court of Appeals ......................................................................................................
917
American Battle Monuments Commission ............................................................
930
Cemeterial Expenses, Army ....................................................................................
941
Armed Forces Retirement Home ............................................................................
962
Central Command ....................................................................................................
985
Army Budget ............................................................................................................ 1059

Navy and Marine Corps Budget ............................................................................. 1103
Veterans Affairs ....................................................................................................... 1185
Budget Overview ...................................................................................................... 1275
Air Force Budget ...................................................................................................... 1361
Testimony Submitted for the Record ..................................................................... 1407
(III)
VerDate Nov 24 2008
22:45 Jul 07, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 0486
Sfmt 0486
50526P1
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, VETERANS AFFAIRS, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2010
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 2009.
UNITED STATES ARMY
WITNESS
KENNETH O. PRESTON, SERGEANT MAJOR OF THE ARMY
STATEMENT
OF THE
CHAIRMAN
jbell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with HEARING
Mr. EDWARDS [presiding]. I would like to call the committee to

order. I want to welcome everyone here, the witnesses, the members of the committee, and all the others for your attendance here
today at our first subcommittee meeting of the 111th Congress.
Our ranking member, Congressman Wamp, is back with us. I
want to thank you personally, Mr. Wamp, for your tremendous
leadership and a lot of the very positive accomplishments of this
subcommittee last year. And as I recall, our last bill passed by
that was about 4244 or something close to that. So I really appreciate the bipartisan manner in which this committee has been dedicated to supporting our veterans and our troops and their families.
I would like to just start out with a few organizational comments
and points before we get into the witnesses testimony.
I would like to say at the very beginning here that I think we
are literally blessed to have one of the finest staffs of any committee or subcommittee in the House. They work on a bipartisan
basis. They know their business. And I think they are the real reason why we have had such great successes in this committee in the
last few years, as well as previous years.
We have Carol Murphy as the clerk, she will be back as the clerk
for this subcommittee. We also have Mary Arnold.
And if you could all raise your hand when I introduce you. Tim
Peterson, Donna Shahbaz, Walter Hearne, all on the majority side.
And on the minority side, we have Martin Delgado, Liz Dawson,
and Kelly Shea.
And while I introduced them as majority and minority side, this
committee will continue its tradition of working on a bipartisan
and nonpartisan basis on behalf of our veterans and our troops and
their families.
I would like to just very briefly, for the record, since this is the
first meeting of the subcommittee for the year, review some of our
efforts and achievements from last year.
(1)
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6633
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
2
For the Veterans Administration, we followed up on the largest
single-year increase for veterans with an additional $4.5 billion increase. We provided funds to hire an additional 2,000 claims processors to reduce the serious V.A. backlog claims.
We increased veterans funding by $16.3 billion during the 110th
Congress, an unprecedented increase and something that I believe
the troops and our veterans earnedthese were dollars and programs that they earned through their service to the country.
On the military construction side, we provided over $25 billion
in new funding for 2009. We were also able to make progress on
a couple of areas where we identified a great need.
Between the 2008 and the 2009 supplemental bills, we were able
to secure nearly $975 million for new military hospital construction, an initiative of this subcommittee and something I think has
been long overdue.
And we secured $200 million in additional money for new training barracks, something that hasnt been the highest of priorities
coming out of budgets from OMB.
While our new recruits arent expecting to be trained and live in
Hilton Hotels, we ought to have them living in the kind of housing
conditions that show respect from our country for their choice to
sign up and serve our country.
So I am very proud of our bipartisan effort to make new inroads
in improving our training barracks. Not many lobbyists out there
are lobbying for 18-, 19-, 20-year-old recruits to the military forces,
but this subcommittee intends to continue being a lobbyist for them
in partnership with you, who has been such an eloquent voice on
their behalf.
Before I proceed, I would like to recognize again Mr. Wamp, who
had such a tremendous impact on the success that I have mentioned.
The time is yours.
STATEMENT
OF THE
RANKING MINORITY MEMBER
Mr. WAMP. Well, Mr. Chairman, thank you. Good morning.

I think it is really appropriate to start here with the top enlisted
leaders of our combined Armed Forces. Probably the only better
way we could do this is if we had your family members up here
heart is where this committees work is. Quality of life is really everything for us.
And it is still a tough world to serve in out there, and we know
that, and we want to make sure we do everything we can here at
this tableI want to thank the chairman, because I think he is exactly right. We have a lot to be grateful for, first and foremost,
your service and all the men and women that you represent. This
subcommittee has, in a bipartisan way, really kicked it in and
stepped it up.
And I tell people that at home and everywhere I go how committed, in a bipartisan way, we are to your families and to those
men and women who volunteer to serve at a very difficult time.
And I think we have made progress, but I think we can still make
progress.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6633
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
3
A little housekeeping here. I have Major Juan Alvarez that is
now on my staff, and Erin Fogleman. I have been through a little
transition.
But I want to tell you something that maybe sounds a little
strange to say, but I am now up to seven on our side in the seniority of the ranking members. And unlike the Democrats, who base
their seniority on the particular subcommittee that they choose, we
can move.
We had three retirements ahead of me on our side, and I could
have gone to a number of other committees. I said, I want to stay
right here, because this is the most important work that I can be
engaged in. And I am actually doing two jobs right now. I am running for governor of our state and serving here in Congress.
But as long as I am here, it is absolutely the highest privilege
of my professional life to serve those that serve our country in uniform, our Armed Forces in a volunteer capacity, with two wars in
Iraq and Afghanistan, and trouble in 25 countries. It is a volatile
time. It is a tough time. But there is no greater service to our country than the people that you represent.
And I especially appreciate you four men, because just about
every one of you has some real, direct connection to the state of
Tennessee. So I just want to thank you for that. [Laughter.]
And I know the chairman is going to find all those nexus to
Texas, but it is undeniable how much they know about where I
live. And I, too, have been out there.
I was with President Bush in November on the ground at Fort
Campbell, listening to our soldiers, many of whom are single. We
have housing needs for those single troops that are serving us. We
have a host of needs, still, in the area of childcare centers. And I
know that the chairman is trying any vehicle passing through town
here to help us. And that is important, as well.
But we are so very grateful. And it is such a privilege. Our numbers shrank over here. We had four members of the subcommittee
besides me. Now we have three. And Mr. Carter will be here, but
the same team, which is a strong Republican team over here is
committed to our men and women in uniform.
We stand ready over the next 2 years to do everything we can
to help our chairman and to help the majority and the President
of the United States honor your sacrifice and service. I am really
looking forward to it. We will do all that we can at a time of great
challenge and difficulty, both on the budget front and around the
world, to honor what youre doingand I just want you to know
that going in.
It is going to be a great year. And thank you for your presence
here today. I hope that you will tell us what we need to hear and
not what we want to hear as we go through this process. I know
you are in charge of doing that to the generals, and I hope you will
be the same way with us this morning.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. EDWARDS. Great. Thank you, Zach.
And let me just say, as a Texan, having studied the Alamo, even
we Texans are appreciative of Tennesseansas long as I am chairman of this committee and as long as Chairman Young chooses to
be on this subcommittee, it is going to be my tradition to recognize
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6633
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
4
him for an opening statement, as well, because he has done as
much or more than any single member of Congress to support our
troops and our veterans.
And the former chairman of the full Appropriations Committee,
former chairman of the Defense Appropriations Committee, now
the partner.
And, Chairman Young, we are honored to have you again in this
Congress on our subcommittee. And I would like to recognize you
for any opening comments you would care to make.
Mr. YOUNG. Well, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. And I
fought hard to stay on this subcommittee when we were having to
downsize somewhat. But when it comes to the well-being of the
men and women who serve in our military, there are no Republicans and no Democrats, especially on this committee, the chairman has conducted this subcommittee in just a tremendous bipartisan way, in the best interests of our country. And Mr. Wamp has
done the same.
And we are hereI know you hear this as a joke on occasion
but we are here to help, actually. I am not sure whether you have
seen your specific budget for your service or not, but I dont think
we have, have we, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. EDWARDS. No.
Mr. YOUNG. We havent gotten the budget yet. But we know
thatregardless of what the budget is, there are needs that our
men and women need. And we are counting on you to tell us what
those needs are, because I can guarantee you that this subcommittee, the members of this subcommittee are going to do
whatever we can possibly do to meet the needs to improve the quality of life and to take care of some of those little problems that are
out there that sometimes we dont hear about.
So I am going to ask, Mr. Chairman, that, as they go through
their testimony, just pretend like we have a magic wand up here
and tell us some of the things that we might not have read or we
might not have heard about. Tell us some of the things that we
need to be doing in the interests of our military personnel.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Young.
Let me welcome two new members to our subcommittee, Congressman John Salazar and Congressman Steve Israel. We are
thrilled to have both of you here.
And let me just give you a brief background. Congressman
Salazar was first elected in 2004. He is a new member of the Appropriations Committee, but he is not new to defense issues. He
served in the United States Army, a distinguished career there
from 1973 to 1976. He also reflects his values by having served on
the Veterans Affairs Committee. He was born and raised on a
farm, still an active farmer, and a Blue Dog Democrat.
John, we are very thrilled to have you. Would you care to make
any statement in your first subcommittee hearing?
Mr. SALAZAR. Well, I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, it is really an honor to be able to serve on this subcommittee. It was one of my first choices. And I want to thank you
for the opportunity.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
5
As many of you know, the Salazar family has had a long history
of serving this country. My father was a World War II veteran,
asked that he be buried in his staff sergeant World War II uniform,
and he was. And many timeswe dont ask much of our country,
but we ask what we can do for our country.
Thank you for your service.
And thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is truly an honor for me to
be able to serve on this committee.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, John. We are honored that you are on
this subcommittee.
Steve Israel is a member of Congress from the great state of New
York. He was first elected in 2000, became a member of the Appropriations Committee in 2007. He is also not new to defense issues
on several points.
He previously served on the House Armed Services Committee,
founded the bipartisan House Center Aisle Caucus, and very importantly, has been chairman of the House Democratic Caucus
Task Force on Defense and the Military. He is particularly known
for his leadership on professional military education issues, in addition to other areas of interest to him.
Welcome to the committee, Steve.
Mr. ISRAEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. EDWARDS. And I would like to recognize you for any comments you would care to make.
Mr. ISRAEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and colleagues. I truly am
honored to be on this subcommittee.
If there was only one regret in coming to the Appropriations
Committee, it was that I had to leave the Armed Services Committee. And I told the speaker, my heart remains with the Armed
Services Committee. My wallet is with the Appropriations Committee. [Laughter.]
And I have always had a longstanding interest, working with
Chairman Skelton, on the issue of professional military education
and how we are equipping our forces with the software that they
need to become effective and remain effective warriors. I look forward to continuing to work with youthank you all.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Steve. Welcome back.
And welcome backwelcome, as a new member of the subcommittee. And welcome back, also, to all the returning members
today. It is an honor. I think this is a great, great subcommittee.
Let me make a fairly brief opening statement. This is our first
hearing of the year. I think it is a reflection on our respect for your
leadership and the difference that you have made from your previous years testimony.
We felt, as Mr. Young alluded, we felt it wasnt even important
to wait until we have an official administration budget request,
that whatever the needs are that are out there that you have identifiedour troops and their families need to be heard now, as we
begin ourour budgeting process.
Members, todays hearing is on the quality of life for enlisted soldiers, sailors, Marines, airmen, and their families. The four witnesses at the table are the senior enlisted members of their respective branches. Members should knowand this is amazingthat
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
6
these four witnesses represent roughly 124 years of distinguished
military service and experience.
This hearing is a great opportunity to identify areas where we
can do more to serve those who serve us. And as I mentioned to
some of you I met with yesterday, literally, if you ever wonder all
the trouble you go to testify on Capitol Hill, does it make a difference?
Literally, the comments you made about the need for child development centers over the last several years is the reason why we
have added several hundred million dollars to those programs, and
particularly the point being that we have a lot of single moms and
dads, while their spouses are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan on
a first, second, or third tour that deserve and need that daycare.
So you have made a difference. And we know you will continue
to.
Our witnesses today are, first, Sergeant Major of the Army Kenneth Preston. He is no stranger this subcommittee.
Welcome back, Sergeant Major.
He was sworn in to his present position on January 15th of 2004
with over 33 years of service in the United States Army. He was
command sergeant major for Combined Task Force 7 in Baghdad
prior to becoming sergeant major in the Army.
And I anticipate Sergeant Major Preston will introduce him formally, but I also wanted to pay special tribute to Command Sergeant Major John Gipe of the National Guard and also Command
Sergeant Major Leon Caffie of the Army Reserve.
Thank you. Thank you both for your leadership and for being
here today, as well.
Sergeant major of the Marine Corps is Carlton W. Kent. Sergeant Major Kent is a returning witness and became sergeant
major of the Marine Corps on April 25th of 2007. He also has 33
years of military service.
And we thank you for those distinguished years of service, Sergeant Major. He served as sergeant major of the Marine Forces,
Europe, and the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force at Camp Pendleton prior to his current position.
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy Rick D. West, Master
Chief West is a first-time witness here. And this is a friendly committee. [Laughter.]
Mr. Young meant it when he said we are here to help. We are
not like some of these committees trying to make points with cameras or reporters. We are here to hear from you, and we do welcome you to our subcommittee.
Master Chief West has about 28 years of service in the Navy, entered the Navy straight from high school in 1981. And he is a submariner. His assignments include service on the staff of the commander, Submarine Force of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, and chief of the
boat aboard the USS Portsmouth.
Most recently, he served as fleet master chief of the U.S. fleet
forcesand I will let Master Chief West introduce him formally,
but I want to note that Force Master Chief Ronney Bright from the
Navy Reserve is also with us. Wright. I am sorry, Wright. He is
a bright Wright. [Laughter.]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
7
Thank you for that. Well, welcome. It is good to have you here,
also.
Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force Rodney J. McKinley.
Chief McKinley is a returning witness, as well.
Chief, welcome. Welcome back to our subcommittee in your
present position since 2006, June 30th. He has served in the Air
Force for 30 years, beginning in 1974 with a 5-year break. He
served as Command Chief Master Sergeant at the wing, Numbered
Air Force, and major command levels and deployed to southwest
Asia in support of OEF and OIF.
Thank you again for all being here. And if you can just be patient for 1 or 2 more minutes, I would like to just lay out a couple
of ground rules as we have agreed to them for this new Congress
for our subcommittee.
First, I will do everything I can to begin the committee hearings
on time. I respect your schedules. We are not going to have you sitting here for 20 minutes waiting for a 10 oclock hearing to begin
at 10:30.
For the members present in the room, when I gavel at the beginning of the hearing to open the hearing, I will recognize the members for questions in order of seniority, alternating between the
majority and minority.
For those who arrive after the hearing has started, I will recognize those members solely in order of arrival, not in order of seniority. And then the order will continue through all rounds of questioning.
I will do my best to try to enforce the 5-minute rule on questions
and answers. We will do this out of the hope that in this subcommittee, unlike the Armed Services Committee, Steve, we will
have opportunities to have multiple rounds of questioning. And
that might work better if we tried to not have our members make
a 5-minute statement and ask 20 questions in the last 15 seconds
of that.
So what I am going to do is I will gavel once when there is a
minute left. I will gavel twice, and I would ask the witnesses to finish your sentence when I have gaveled follow-up questions for the
members.
With that, we would like by tradition to begin with Sergeant
Major Preston.
STATEMENT
OF
SERGEANT MAJOR KENNETH O. PRESTON
Sergeant Major PRESTON. Mr. Chairman, thanks very much.

Congressman Wamp, Congressman Young, all the committee
members, thanks very much. It is a great honor to be here and to
testify again before this distinguished committee. I represent all
the men and women of Americas Army.
I will start out by saying that your support this past year and
your continued support today has had a tremendous impact on our
soldiers and our families. On behalf of all them, I want to thank
you for all your work and effort.
I also want to recognize Command Sergeant Major John Gipe,
who is the command sergeant major for the Army National Guard.
He is the senior enlisted adviser for Lieutenant General Vaughn
for the Army National Guard.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
8
And then Command Sergeant Major Leon Caffie, who is the command sergeant major for the Army Reserve. He works as the senior
enlisted adviser for Lieutenant General Jack Stultz. These gentlemen represent 518,000 citizen-soldiers that serve every day.
Today, the Army has more than 245,000 soldiers forward-deployed to 80 countries around the world. We have more than
139,600 soldiers currently deployed in support of Operation Iraqi
Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.
General Casey, early in his tenure as our Army chief of staff,
searched for a way to describe the state of the Army. And he uses
the term out of balance, not broken or hollow, but the era of persistent global conflict has strained our Army resources, our soldiers, our Army families, and our equipment, to a point where we
are consumed by the demands of the current fight.
The Army has four strategic imperatives to restore this balance.
We must Sustain our all-volunteer force, our soldiers, our Army civilians, and their families. We must Prepare our forces for success
in the current conflict. We must Reset our soldiers and their equipment returning from the deployment. And we must Transform to
meet the demands of the future and provide our soldiers, our Army
civilians, and their families with the predictability and stability
that they need.
With your support, we intend to restore this balance to the
Army. Our recruiting and retention programs are a success. Last
year, we recruited over 169,000 young men and women, all great
soldiers. We re-enlisted 120,000 soldiers to retain in our units. This
past July, we celebrated the 35th anniversary of the all-volunteer
force.
And your support is directly attributed to our success, and it is
greatly appreciated.
We are seeing indicators of stress on the force as we enter the
eighth year of the global war on terror. The Army had an increase
in suicide rates for the fourth consecutive year. There were 128 suicides last year, with 15 additional cases still pending determination. The total number of suicides is potentially 143. We continue
to look for initiatives to increase resources and enhance our efforts
to identify, intervene and prevent suicidal behavior.
The plan for this year is the implementation of a comprehensive
soldier fitness program. The vision of this program is an Army
whose resilience and total fitness enables soldiers to thrive in an
era of high op-tempo and persistent conflict.
Child care is a top quality of life issue. Our goal is to achieve the
OFC standard of providing 80 percent childcare and 35 percent of
the youth program demand by the end of fiscal year 2009. We currently can provide about 72,500 childcare spaces in support of our
anticipated need of about 87,500 by fiscal year 2013.
Our residential communities initiative is a successful tool in our
efforts to eliminate inadequate family housing. At the end of this
year, we will complete privatization on 44 of 45 installations, with
over 89,000 homes. By 2011, we will complete privatization of
about 98 percent of our stateside family housing inventory.
Our permanent-party soldier barracks goal is about 170,000 adequate soldier spaces funded by the end of fiscal year 2013. Allowing
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
2 years for construction, we will not complete the barracks building

plan until fiscal year 2015 for our permanent-party soldiers.
We have a plan to maintain safe living conditions in our old Korean War-era barracks until enough new facilities are built to
house our permanent-party soldiers.
Our training barracks goal to support soldiers attending initial
entry and professional development schools across the Army is
115,413 adequate soldier spaces funded by the end of fiscal year
2013. Allowing 2 years for construction, we will not complete the
barracks building plan until fiscal year 2017.
And, of course, when you look at some of our facilities that are
out there, you know, the soldiers attending the Noncommissioned
Officer Academy at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, live in World War
II wooden barracks.
We completed standing up and manning 36 warrior transition
units and nine community-based warrior transition units to support 12,000 soldiers. These facilities have a singular focus on warrior healing and support to families.
We hired 191 of the needed 254 new behavioral health providers
this past year, which adds about 16,000 additional appointments a
month. Shortages of medical providers in military treatment facilities is one of the top five issues identified by soldiers and families
in our most recent Army family action plan conference last week.
I want to thank the committee for the increased focus on our
aging health care facilities over this last year. Our medical facilities are well maintained and operated, but many are more than 50
years old and not configured, nor constructed to provide the range
of treatments available in modern medical facilities.
I am proud that this year we will2009 as the year of the noncommissioned officer. During this year, we will accelerate previously approved strategic noncommissioned officer development
initiatives that enhance training, education, capability, and utilization of our noncommissioned officers.
Mr. Chairman, committee members, thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
[Prepared testimony of Sergeant Major Kenneth O. Preston follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
Insert offset folio 22 here 50526A.001
10
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
11
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
12
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
13
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
14
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
15
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
16
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
17
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
18
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
19
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
20
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
21
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
22
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
23
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
24
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
25
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
26
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
27
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
28
29
Mr. EDWARDS. Sergeant Major Preston, thank you very much.
Sergeant Major Kent.
UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
WITNESS
CARLTON W. KENT, SERGEANT MAJOR OF THE MARINE CORPS
STATEMENT
OF
SERGEANT MAJOR CARLTON W. KENT
Sergeant Major KENT. Thank you, Chairman Edwards, Ranking

Member Wamp, and all of the subcommittee members for an opportunity to testify on all important issues that are affecting our Marines and their families today.
The well-being of Marines and families is the most important priority for our corps. Your Marines are serving at every U.S. embassy
throughout the world. They are engaged on several fronts. They are
serving aboard the U.S. ships with our brothers and sisters in the
Navy, and they are waiting on the call to go in harms way.
Marines are very proud to serve their country and their Corps.
I am pleased to report that the Marine Corps is making positive
changes for Marines and their families that will benefit them for
generations to come.
We are making stridesquality of life of our families. We like to
thank you all, you know, for what you have done for our BEQs, for
our housing, and, I mean, across the whole spectrum. And we see
that in our Corps.
As a matter of fact, I have a quick story that I told Congressman
Edwards yesterday. I was standing talking to a young corporal on
a visit recently. And I said, Are you planning on staying in the
Marine Corps? The young corporal was getting ready to answer it.
Then his wife jumped right in. She said, Yes, he is staying in the
Marine Corps, because I like the housing, I like the commissary,
I like childcare, I like everything that comes with the Corps.
So it is the families just keeping these Marines around. So thank
you very much, you know, for what you do for our Corps. And,
again, I am available to answer any questions.
[Prepared statement of Sergeant Major Carlton W. Kent follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
30
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
31
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
32
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
33
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
34
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
35
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
36
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
37
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
38
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
39
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
40
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
41
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
42
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
43
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
44
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
45
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
46
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
47
48
Mr. EDWARDS. Great. Thank you very much, Sergeant Major.
Master Chief West.
UNITED STATES NAVY
WITNESS
RICK D. WEST, MASTER CHIEF PETTY OFFICER OF THE NAVY
STATEMENT
OF
MASTER CHIEF PETTY OFFICER RICK D. WEST
Master Chief WEST. Yes, sir. Thank you very much.

Mr. Chairman, Congressman Wamp, distinguished members of
the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before
you and represent our Sailors and their families in this forum.
On December 12th, the day I took the job, I told our young men
and women that nothing would be more important to me than providing them the avenues to succeed as Sailors and as Americans.
I view this time with you as an unparalleled opportunity to speak
on behalf and uphold the promise that I made to them.
Joining me today is Force Master Chief Ronney Wright, who represents our Reserve Force, the finest group of citizen-sailors that
this nation has ever seen.
Force Wright and I believe that three traditional pillars are critical to the success of our service: Strong decisive leadership, consistent and clear communications up, down and across the chain of
command, and education to our fleet and their families regarding
the quality of life and family support programs that are available
to them.
Consistent support from Congress and a continued emphasis on
these pillars will ensure all of our sailors are ready for any mission
any time, anywhere. Your commitment to our Sailors and the unconditional support to the families both contribute equally to our
Navys success and our ability to protect Americas strategic interests around the world.
Over the last few years, cooperation between this subcommittee
and our Navy leadership has led to impressive progress in health
care, childcare, family housing, and many other support programs.
However, we will need your support as we focus on upgrading our
existing barracks and providing more quarters to support our Sailors. Approximately 9,000 of my sailors today live on board ships.
Before I took this job, I had the privilege of leading Sailors as
Master Chief in both the Pacific and the Atlantic fleets. I have met
and talked with thousands of our great Sailors. They inspire me
daily, and I am happy to report morale is high and retention is
strong.
Our Navy mission is more diverse than ever before. I have seen
Sailors operate on and below the oceans of the world, in the air,
or boots on the ground with our expeditionary forces or as individual augmentees as we prosecute the global war on terror.
And I am continually amazed to see the caliber of these Sailors
working side by side with our Marine Corps brothers and alongside
our Army and Air Force counterparts.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
49
They may not have joined with that job in mind, but every day
they are redefining their role as a United States Sailor. Your Sailors stand ready.
But sadly to say, some of these Sailors never return to their families. They present us with a serious national responsibility. As a
Navy and through your leadership, we are continually improving
the support and care that we provide our wounded warriors. Our
commitment to the heroes and their families will never waver.
But today I come before you not only as the nations senior enlisted Sailor, but also as a Navy dad. I saw my eldest son graduate
from Navy boot camp, and a few months later, I attended his graduation from Navy dive school.
In the near future, his younger brother plans to follow. I am
proud to tell you that these young men elected to follow in my footsteps out of patriotism and sense of selfless service to our nation,
but I will also tell you another fact is they have chosen to join our
Navy. The reason they joined our Navy is the lifelong exposure
that they have had to the Navy way of life and to the military quality of life that this subcommittee is chartered with.
And they have seen my wife, Bobbi, a former Navy Seabee, who
doesnt have to worry too much about my safety, but now she understands firsthand what so many of our American parents have
discovered, that a child in harms way is a kind of stress you can
never prepare yourself for.
Mr. Chairman, committee members, it is not lost on me that you
and I share very similar responsibilities. I know that your dedication to our military is stronger than ever before, and that your loyalty to our families is limitless. You have my most profound respect
for that and for your continued dedication to each of them.
I look forward to working with and alongside each of you today
and in the future. Thank you for the opportunity to address you
today, and I look forward to your questions. Hooah.
[Prepared statement of Master Chief Petty Officer Rick West follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
50
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
51
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
52
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
53
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
54
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
55
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
56
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
57
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
58
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
59
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
60
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
61
62
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you. Master Chief West, thank you for your
eloquent first statement before our subcommittee.
Master Chief WEST. Thank you very much.
Mr. EDWARDS. And thanks on behalf of all of us for your entire
familys service to our country.
Master Chief WEST. Thank you very much.
Mr. EDWARDS. Chief McKinley, welcome back to our subcommittee. I would like to recognize you now for your opening
statement.

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
WITNESS
RODNEY J. McKINLEY, CHIEF MASTER SERGEANT OF THE AIR FORCE
STATEMENT
OF
CHIEF MASTER SERGEANT RODNEY J. MCKINLEY
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. Thank you very much.

Mr. Chairman, Congressman Wamp, Congressman Young, members of the committee, thank you for this opportunity to speak with
you today about issues important to Americas Airmen and our Air
Force.
I am honored to be here alongside my fellow warriors as we collaborate on quality-of-life issues impacting all of our service members and their families. I want to take this opportunity to thank
the members of this committee and the entire House of Representatives for your incredible support.
Your Air Force appreciates greatly the expansion of pay, health
care, and retirement benefits for service members and veterans and
visits by the House members to our personnel in the field and to
our wounded warriors.
Thank you also, Mr. Chairman and committee members, for recommending additional Air Force infrastructure funding in the
House Appropriations Committees economic stimulus package.
Quality facilities and services directly impact our mission and retention efforts, so we especially appreciate this recommendation to
invest in our future.
Mr. Chairman, we also thank you for your continued sponsorship
of the Military Child College Affordability Act in which states offer
resident rate college tuition to our military families.
Recently, our Air Force has had some challenges in our nuclear
enterprise. We learned we needed to improve in many areas. But
under the leadership of our Secretary and Chief of Staff, we have
met those challenges head-on to ensure we have the right focus.
We have stood up the Air Force Global Strike Command Provisional to handle our nuclear missions. We now have the right organizational emphasis as we steward this very important national resource.
Americas Airmen continue to deliver outstanding capabilities to
the battlefield. In the war on terrorism, more than 208,000 total
force Airmen are engaged in the joint and coalition fight. We are
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
63
supporting daily operations in the air, on the ground, in space, and
in cyberspace.
We are filling joint expeditionary taskings, formerly known as inlieu-of taskings, where our deployed Airmen work alongside Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen on missions in Iraq,
Afghanistan, and around the globe.
We are focused on cyberspace, unmanned aerial systems, and the
United States African Command. Security of cyberspace is of great
importance not only to our Air Force, but also to our joint partners
in our nation. Security of the nations net-centric information architecture requires more than Department of Defense (DoD) emphasis,
so we have committed to working transparently with our interagency partners, as well.
Our unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) are directly supporting
warfighters on the ground. Air Force Predators, Reapers, and Global Hawks are finding, fixing, tracking, and attacking our enemies.
The intelligence, reconnaissance, and surveillance capabilities these
systems provide are critical to battlefield operations.
We have increased from 12 UAS combat air patrols in 2007 to
33 today. To further support United States African Command, we
have a new numbered Air Force, 17th Air Force. We are gearing
up to support the extensive airlift requirements of that new command, as well as humanitarian assistance, security operation, improved aero-safety and security, and assisting our African partners
with their efforts in these areas.
We are constantly expanding care for our wounded warriors. Our
warrior and survivor care program cares for Airmen and their families through treatment, recovery, and into the post-separation period.
We are also working with our joint partners on special monthly
compensation, which will assist the families that have catastrophically wounded service members toward maintaining financial balance with their loved ones during recovery. This compensation is
intended to help family caregivers in meeting recurring monthly
expenses, such as rent, credit card, and car payments while they
are at the bedside.
Our recruiting efforts continue to be successful, despite the decreasing eligibility pool due to increases in the nationwide school
dropout rate, a more obese youth population, and other reasons.
We met our 2008 recruiting goals and met recruiting goals in all
three areas of our total force: Active Duty, Air Force Reserve, and
Air National Guard.
We have experienced a few decreases in our retention numbers.
In fiscal year 2008, overall Active-Duty Air Force retention rates
finished slightly below annual goals, while Guard and Reserve officer enlistment rates met or exceeded their retention goals.
Although overall Active-Duty retention is trending slightly upward for this fiscal year, 2009, some of our critical and stressed
specialties continue to experience significant shortfalls.
We continue to use selective re-enlistment bonuses and quality
of service initiatives to resolve these shortages. We appreciate continued congressional support for these incentive efforts.
Childcare continues to be important to our Airmen and our families. With the current economic situation, many of our spouses
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
64
must work to supplement the family income. We have made good

progress in providing affordable childcare, and we will continue
these efforts. Right now, we have need for about 1,900 childcare
spaces and would like to cut that to zero.
Thank you all again for your continued support for our Airmen.
On behalf of Americas Airmen, thank you for this opportunity to
testify before you today. I look forward to your questions.
[Prepared statement of Chief Master Sergeant Rodney J. McKinley follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
65
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
66
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
67
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
68
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
69
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
70
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
71
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
72
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
73
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
74
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
75
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
76
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
77
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
78
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
79
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
80
81
Mr. EDWARDS. Chief Master Sergeant McKinley, thank you for
your testimony. And thank you all for beginning this years subcommittee hearings in a very positive way.
Mr. Wamp, I want to personally thank you for choosing to remain as ranking member of this subcommittee. I think that is a
reflection upon your values and commitment to this committees
work. And I would like to recognize you to begin this years meetings.
Mr. WAMP. Thank you for your courtesy and your leadership, Mr.
Chairman. You are a class act.
This is an impressive lot here. I have to tell you, it is emotional
and kind of charges you up about the men and women that you
represent just to hear your passion and your commitment to them.
SUICIDE RATES
I would like to start on the troop side. This suicide rate issue is
the canary in the mine, in a sense. I know this is the toughest
place to start, but it speaks to the overall health and wellness of
our men and women.
Is it just more the tempo, the deployment stress? Is it battle and
the asymmetrical nature of the battle? From each of your perspectives, representing those men and women who are at risk and that
take us to this place of looking at 143 potential suicides, what are
the primary factors? And is the family and our quality-of-life issues
connected to it?
This tempo has to be driving a lot of stress, but tell me.
Sergeant Major PRESTON. Sir, I will start. As I look at it, I say
it is the tempo. It is the pace, and it is the dynamics of all the
things that are occurring in young peoples lives.
We track all the statistics and the analysis behind, why a young
person felt obligated to commit suicide and what pushed them over
the edge. A lot of it is failed relationships.
As I travel around the Army, the biggest question that I get from
young soldiers and families is, Sergeant Major, when are we going
to start to see something12 months of dwell time between deployments? It is those who are deployed, those that are coming back
that ask this question.
But even those, when you look at the numbers a third of our suicides have never been deployed. It is those units that are left behind, they are also working very hard, as well.
And it is the pace. It is the tempo. It is society. It is packing up
and moving from one location to another. It is selling their house,
trying to get out of an upside-down mortgage. It is moving their
children from one school to another school. And it is transferring
the school credits from one school to another school.
It is all of those dynamics mixed in that add to the stress in a
young persons life. You could look at from how many have been
deployed or not deployed versus the majority of suicides are married, more than 50 percent of those who have deployed that commit
the suicides have been back from a deployment well over a year.
So there are a lot of dynamics. And, of course, we look at every
one of those cases very seriously. It is a tragedy. In each one of
their families, it is a crisis because their families are directly affected.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
82
And we are doing a number of things to get at, impacting that
this year.
Mr. WAMP. Before we go down the table, Sergeant Major, you
have the Guard and Reserve leadership behind you. Is there a differential between the Guard and Reserve and the active component
in this suicide issue?
Sergeant Major PRESTON. The numbers that I gave you include
the Guard and Reserve. This is all Guard and Reserve, as well as
active-duty soldiers, that are serving on active duty. And that is
how we capture those.
Mr. WAMP. Right. And, is there an abnormal ratio of active
versus Guard and Reserve? Or is it just across the board?
Sergeant Major PRESTON. Across the board. In fact
Mr. WAMP. It could indicate how much the tempo and the stress
are is the primary factors, not necessarily the battle or the nature
of the battle.
Sergeant Major KENT. We are concerned, also, sir. We went from
33 fiscal year 2007 to 41, so we increased by eight. What we are
doing, we think that the small-unit leaders are the one closer to
these young Marines. So we are educating our corporals and sergeants so they will know the symptoms and they know how to get
help for these young warriors.
But we are concerned about it. And we are keeping an eye on it.
It is a combination of things. And that is why we want to grow
the force fast, and we are, so we can get the Marines more dwell
time back in the rear, you know, because right now they are 7
months deployed and they are 7 months back.
Mr. WAMP. Just to interrupt you, the Marine Corps is recruiting
gangbusters. What do you attribute that to right now, sir?
Sergeant Major KENT. We are not recruiting gangbusters, sir. I
would tend to say that we are notexcuse me, sir?
Mr. FARR. You can have all my gang members, if you
[Laughter.]
RECRUITING
Sergeant Major KENT. Now, sir, let me tell you about the process
of recruiting. Right now, we are at a 97.8 percent high school graduate average. The way the process works, if they need a waiver,
you know, if they have a criminal record and they need a waiver,
it just doesnt start at the recruiting station. It is forward all the
way up to the commanding general of the recruiting command.
And let me give you an example of the waivers we grant. If you
have a young person, 13 years old, go out and they see a tractor
and they decide to jump in this tractor, and this tractor is worth
$20,000, and they get pulled over by the local authorities, when
they are 18, although they were pulled over when they were 13,
that is a felony.
But as they went from 13 to 18, they did great things and they
graduated. They were a star in football. But it was a felony, and
they need a waiver for that, you know, and that is the kind of people that we would be recruiting with a felony.
But as far as gangbangers, sir, you probably saw them maybe
some slipped through the cracks.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
83
Mr. WAMP. I just meant you are meeting your goalsthat is
what I am talking about.
Sergeant Major KENT. Oh, sorry, I misunderstood sir. I am just
rattling on when you said gang, gangokay, okay, sir, yes
Mr. WAMP. But you are meeting your recruitment goals.
Sergeant Major KENT. Sorry about that, sir. I am just rattling on,
sir.
Mr. WAMP. The Marine Corps is at a time of incredible stress.
And these guys are looking, and they are talking to their peers that
are already serving, and they know it is hard and tough.
Sergeant Major KENT. I misunderstood you, sir.
Mr. WAMP. I know.
Sergeant Major KENT. Yes, we are, sir.
Mr. WAMP. There is a lot of pride in being a Marine, and it is
a good product to sell, right?
Sergeant Major KENT. Well, actually, sir, we are going to make
our end-strength of 202,000 2 years early. We are going to hit it
in 3 years, sir, which is amazing.
Mr. WAMP. Master Chief.
Master Chief WEST. Yes, sir. As far as suicides, we had a slight
increase this year. When we dug into it, financial responsibility
was an issue.
What I found out that was I guess an interesting stat was 39
percent of our suicides were facing disciplinary action already, so
that gave us another indicator. That is 39 percent of them.
We had 39 this past year, all of them are serious, but we put
things in place, such as the Operational Stress Control. We have
really ramped up the financial counseling for these individuals and
tried to ease some of the pressure from payday lenders.
Everything is serious with that, but overall our numbers are fairly steady, sir.
Mr. WAMP. Chief Master Sergeant.
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. Yes, sir, our Air Force leadership, is very concerned about this. For the last 10 years, our average is 9.7 per 100,000. But right now, it is up to 12.3. So that is
a significant rise of us. And so we are very concerned.
If you peel all that back and look at the reasons why, a big percentage of that is these marriage issues, relationship issues that
lead to suicides. I think the stresses that each one of us are talking
about, not only with deployments, with mission, but also with the
financial crisis going on in America that affects every person, not
only civilians, but also gets into the military families.
And I think that adds to the stress that is out there, not only
our military members, but to the spouses and to the children. And
more stress on the family leads to things like this.
And so I think that is kind of like I said, our Air Force leadership is very concerned, very committed that we lower this. We
want it to be zero. That is probably unrealistic, but we are going
to do everything we can to combat this and take care of our members, sir.
Mr. WAMP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Zach
Mr. KENNEDY. I have trouble believing there is not a differential
between the Guard and Reserve and the standing military in terms
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
84
of the percentage of suicides. At least with the standing military,
you have embedded support systems, whereas with the Guard and
Reserve you dont.
They are just dumped back after they come back from, a mission,
and they dont havethey are spread out. They dont have their
colleagues, their counterparts, their peers around them to give
them the care, support and everything.
So does that just bear out in the statistics at all?
Sergeant Major PRESTON. In fact, the numberstalk to that, but
I think it was
AUDIENCE. None so far this year. Our numbers were up last year,
sir. They are up a little bit more for the first quarter of this year.
Mr. DICKS. Is this Guard or Reserve?
AUDIENCE. Guard, sir. There are other influences on the reserve
componentsactive componentslike the economy. Sooverseas
lose their jobs. They lose their jobs while they are back home,
things like thatactive component doesnt see.
But, overall, there is not a huge difference between what we see
and what they see. The rates are up, and we are addressing this.
Mr. EDWARDS. Sergeant Major, could I interrupt and ask the
transcribercan you hear the testimony from the first row?
TRANSCRIBER. Yes.
Mr. EDWARDS. You can pick that okay? If you cant, you let me
know. Raise your hand or something.
Appreciate that.
GUARD AND RESERVE MORALE AND COHESION
Mr. KENNEDY. Sorry, Mr. Chairmanwe have this whole issue

of whether state commandants could call up their Guard and reservists so as to keep the morale and the cohesion of the unit together when they werent off on duty so as to build thatmorale,
which was precluded under the previous law, so whenduring
their mission, they were precluded from calling up there.
Sergeant Major PRESTON. They are doing that when they come
back from deployment. It is allowing the leadership to put eyes all
on those soldiers who are deployed to make sure that they are
doing okay and they are with their battle buddies again.
But, that is the commander on the ground. That is leadership
making that
Mr. EDWARDS. Let me just say, before I recognize Mr. Farr, Mr.
Kennedy kind of foreshadowed what I would like to do.
I am going to wait for my question until the end of the first
round, but I would like to say to Master Chief Wright and Sergeant
Major Gipe, Sergeant Major Caffie, if you could be thinking, my
question will be of each of the three of you is, are there are some
particular quality-of-life issues that you would like to talk about
that may not be unique to the Guard and Reserve, but they are a
little bit different than those quality-of-life issues being faced by
the active-duty servicemen and women?
Mr. Farr.
Mr. FARR. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And thank you
for your leadership and that of Congressman Zach Wamp in increasing last years bill. It is the largest in history and I think it
is having some beneficial effect.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
85
You know, it is interesting, this committee not only deals with
active-duty military, but we deal with the veterans. So if, indeed,
problems are caused, we are going to end up picking up the pieces.
And I think what we are trying to do is make sure that the entire
experience in service of our country is so much better integrated,
both in uniform and out of uniform, and I think even more work
needs to be done to include our community support services.
I echo everybodys appreciation for your incredible years of service. And I thank everybody in uniform for their service. When you
join, you build the esprit de corps.
We provide assistance to the familiescommunity housing,
childcare, recreational centersI mean, you build a community of
support that is second to none.
It seems to me where we fail in our society in general are our
the mental health programs.
POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER
But we have still not made it very acceptable to get counseling.

It seems to me there are two cases here of how we try to deal with
what we think might be PTSD. How do we integrate in the counseling, quality counseling?
But at the same time, it seems to me what we are forgetting is
that we need to engage the community, because you have this
town-gown relationship, but not with the soldier in the mental
health field.
That is a real struggle because when military personnel muster
out they get sent back to their community. And they may be a heck
of a long way from a veterans clinic or a veterans hospital. And
there may be mental health services in that community, but nobody in the Veterans Administration or the military knows about
that.
It seems to me we need a better integration in our town-gown relationship for mental health services. And I just wondered if you
could list for us some of the needs you may have along these lines
of counseling, and PTSD, and continuing support systems?
ACCESSIBILITY AND AVAILABILITY OF HEALTHCARE
Sergeant Major PRESTON. Sir, I will start. We have made a lot

of progress in this area. And when you talk to soldiers, and especially their families, and their concerns and when you look at the
medical health care professionals working on an installation, those
medical professionals deploy along with units and organizations on
that installation, as well.
So, their biggest complaint, when it comes to medical health
careand that is across the board for all servicesis the accessibility and availability to be able to get an appointment. Very satisfied with the quality of care that is being provided, but it is just
accessibility and availability.
Now, one of the things that, our medical command and specifically the Army surgeon general, Lieutenant General Schoomaker,
has done is to expand that, as you were talking about, into the
communities to partner more with off-the-installation medical facilities to be able to open up and provide more appointments.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
86
But the challenges, too, specifically in the area of mental health
care isthere is just not a lot out there in the community. We have
been working to increase those numbers in our recruiting efforts,
but, we still have a long ways to go.
Mr. FARR. Other services?
Sergeant Major KENT. Pretty much, yes, sir.
Mr. FARR. Are there any needs that arent there and we need to
put some more resources
Master Chief WEST. Sir, from the Navy perspective, we have
come a long way, similar to all the other services, through our Safe
Harbor Program. It is phenomenal. Last week I looked at the Safe
Harbor Program and how it integrated with the local, state community governments in the San Diego area.
Mr. EDWARDS. I know I am going to end up cutting off some good
answers, but I think, as long as the committee supports this, we
are going to stick to the 5-minute rule and then that will allow
each member a second and third round. And if at any point the
committee wants to talk about doing it differently, I will certainly
respect that.
Thank you, Mr. Farr, and for your leadership on mental health
issues, both for the active duty andyou have been a real leader
on those issues, among others.
Our order will be Mr. Young, based on when they came in to the
meeting after starting, Mr. Young, Mr. Crenshaw, then Mr. Bishop.
Mr. Young.
Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Chairman, thank you very muchconversation
Mr. DICKS. I want to ask a question.
Mr. EDWARDS. Yes.
Mr. DICKS. We are going to not go back and forth?
Mr. EDWARDS. Well, what we had said for this first meetingI
was just talking to Walter about that, we are going toafter the
meeting begins, Norm
Mr. DICKS. You always go back and forth from one side to other.
Mr. EDWARDS. And I think we may go to that in a second meeting, but since I had announced before you came in
Mr. DICKS. I didnt hear you announce that.
Mr. EDWARDS. Yes, what I announced might have been before
you came in. After the meeting
Mr. DICKS. Oh, I listened to what you said. That is not what you
said.
Mr. EDWARDS. We will go by seniority first and then, after we go
by seniority, we will go based on when members come in. I think
what I may add to the second meeting is, once we get beyond seniority, it is based on who comes in, we will go back and forth, but
I am going to stick with what our intention was today.
If I didnt make that clear, I apologize to you and the other members, as well.
Mr. Young.
MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELING
Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.

The conversations have evolved around an issue that is extremely important to our military, to our country. When our oldest
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
87
son was finished with his time in the military and his deployment
to the Mideast, he said, Dadour troops need psychological help,
and there is just not enough professional care available.
So when he was discharged, he came and he has justhe is 2
months away from becoming a psychologist. And his intention is to
re-enlist in the military to be available to help some of these kids,
because he saw the troubles.
Now, my question then is, where are we, as it relates to the
young troop that needs counseling, needs psychological help?
Where are we on the availability of that type of help in your services?
Sergeant Major PRESTON. Sir, I will start. This past year, we
hired 191 of the 254 mental health professionals that we had
planned for, on our installations.
But the challenge, is finding medical professionals. There is a
shortage of medical health care professionals across the nation. It
is doctors and nurses, across the board. But, we are working very
hard to recruit medical health care professionals to fill the vacancies that we have.
The other piece of that is tied in with the other types of counseling that is done within organizations. It is the chaplains and
those types of community counselors to take care of our families
that are either at home or through the Army OneSource or Military
OneSource, to be able to provide an outreach for those soldiers like
the Guard and Reserve that are serving in remote sites, as well as
their families.
Sergeant Major KENT. We are actually doing okay right now, sir.
We are actually putting specialists in units that are forward deploying right now. And we are doing good, but we still have a
shortage of them. And we think that is the key, you know, to put
somebody in there. When they forward deploy, they would have
somebody for counseling.
Master Chief WEST. Yes, sir, we are also doing well overall. This
is the first year in a while that we have met our medical recruiting.
We did that through a very aggressive push, but it takes a while,
as you know, to grow those specialists.
But we are out there. We are using all available assets. Our
chaplains play a big part in that. And we include training in different areas of leadership so we can see that, along with those folks
that are funneling in to go do those missions.
Mr. YOUNG. You are right about how long it takes to prepare
them. I know how long it has taken our son to get this degree and
to become a psychologist. So you are right about that.
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. Congressman Young, for the
Air Force, we have 400 mental health professionals that are
trained by national PTSD experts in advanced PTSD treatment
techniques. So we have, you know, a good amount out there.
We also have a lot of other programs, like afterdeployment.org.
We have Military OneSource. But I really think probably the best
thing is thatout therethe people that they work with and being
able to recognize when someones behavior has changed and be able
to take that through the chain of command and get that person
help.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
88
Mr. YOUNG. Well, I am glad to hear that the services are aware
of the problem and doing something about it. Well, I think we have
a lotwe do have a lot more to do. And the availability of the professional counseling is really a major problem.
Mr. Chairman, the Intrepid FoundationI think most of us
know about the Intrepid foundationhas volunteered to raise
money to build a facility in Bethesda to deal with post-traumatic
stress issues. And the money is going to bethe money to build the
building is going to come from private donations.
In fact, I am going to ask theif I can be excused in about 10
minutes, because I am going to meet with Mr. Arnold Fisher, who
is the head of the Intrepid foundation, to get the details on where
they are on raising the money. And I believe he is about to report
that all of the money that is necessary for the construction is now
committed. When I get up and leave, that is where I am going. But
we appreciatethis is not a pleasant subject, dealing with suicides
and dealing with these stress issues, but it is real and we cant
I think even Congress has probably overlooked it for too long and
hoped that it would go away. But it is not going to go away.
And I am surprised that Sergeant Major Prestonbit of that
himself, because when my wife finds problems in the Army, he is
one of the first ones she goes to, to say, Hey, here is a problem.
You fix it. So I am surprised he doesnt have a lot of grey hair.
And Beverly gave that message to Sergeant Major Chen last night.
Mr. EDWARDS. Can you say it in a sentence?
Master Chief WEST. Yes, sir. I was just down at Balboa. And
what I was really impressed with, there were Army, Marines and
Sailors out there at the Balboa hospital. I could not be more impressed with the interaction with all those groups, doing the right
thing.
Mr. EDWARDS. Good. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Young
Mr. YOUNG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. For your meeting with Mr. Fisher.
So we are clear, members, the order of questioning will be Mr.
Crenshaw, Mr. Bishop, Mr. Dicks, Mr. Israel, and then Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Crenshaw, welcome back to the subcommittee. Thank you for
your past leadership. It is great to have you back.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And, you know,
I have been on the Appropriations Committee for eightthis is my
eighth year. And I have been on this Subcommittee for 8 years
Mr. Young put me on this Committee. It is the only real Subcommittee I have ever been asked to be on.
So I am glad to be back, Mr. Chairman, working with you.
Mr. EDWARDS. Good to have you.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Wamp, glad you are still the ranking member. As he said, the way the Republicans work, you get to be a
ranking member based on your seniority on the Full Committee.
The Democrats, have a pretty good way, because it is based on the
seniority on your subcommittee.
And in that case, I would be more encouraging to Mr. Wamp to
leave. But, unfortunately, I will be sitting here next year under a
new guythe ranking member.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
89
But I want to welcome you all back. I have not met our Navy
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy yet. I have two Navy bases
and a Marine base in my district, so welcome. And great to see you
all again.
HOMEOWNERS ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
I always think of this as a time where we just sit down and talk.
Mr. Chairman, when I travel around to different naval and military installations around the world, I try to take some time and
just quietly talk to the men and women and say, Look, if you had
a chance, just between you and me, what would you say to a Member of Congress, if you could talk about what you like and what you
dont like?
And you get mixed reactions sometimes. Sometimes they are very
straightforward; sometimes they are a little nervous. But I look at
this meeting as one of those meetings. It is not quite as private as
those conversations that we have in South Korea or Iraq or wherever.
But I really appreciate you alls candor and straightforwardness
when you come here and talk about the things that are important
to you and the men and women you represent.
And so the big issue I wanted to talk about isand I think it
affects everybody in our country, and that has to do with this overall economic crisis. You all touched on it in your testimony about
how that affects the quality of life.
But in particular, I was just thinking that, in terms of housing,
because we have the three bases in our communitiesand in most
places, when people buy a house, they think that is a great investment and it is an important investment.
And if people are in the military, they decide to move, they can
sell their house. In todays world, they find out their house probably is not worth as much as when they first bought it. And so
folks in the private sector can say, Maybe I wont move. Maybe I
will just stay right here.
But as you know, the men and women you all represent get a
new assignment, they have to leave a community. And I just wonder ifFlorida and California and Texas, some places where the
real estate market has been hit pretty hard, and they dont have
a luxury of waiting, I would love to hear from you all if you have
any firsthand experiences of how that has impacted people that you
represent and how they deal with it.
Are there foreclosures taking place? Are people walking away
from their homes? Are they trying to rent their houses?
And I know we passed legislation dealing with BRAC, if you
movedand there was a BRAC impact, and there was an assistance program, Mr. Chairman, that you and the ranking member
were really helpful with getting that started, is something that is
needed? Are we getting to that point?
I would love to hear kind of firsthand what you all are seeing.
Sergeant Major PRESTON. Sir, I justand we dont know the
exact numbers out there that, you know, with the current economic
crisis and the impact right now on those homeowners, but what we
do know isand this is just from experience from a lot of the sol-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
90
diers out there that I have talked to that have had to pack up families and move.
In many cases, they are leaving their families in place because
they cant afford to sell their house. They cant afford to move out.
So now what you end up with is a lot of geographical bachelors.
You have the soldier moving to the next installation or to the next
duty station and leaving their families behind.
We are working to really understand the dynamics. And one of
the things that we want to do in the Army is to take the homeowners assistance program, which was really designed to help
those affected by BRAC.
And because of poststhat are closing down, you have a glut of
housing that is in that area, to really help them sell their houses
and move, they are now looking at expanding the homeowners assistance program to take care of our wounded, ill and injured soldiers that potentially have to move and relocate, live at Walter
Reed or wherever they may be, and also to affect those that are affected by permanent change of station, when they have to move to
Texas to Colorado or, their next duty station.
Mr. EDWARDS. I think we have 1 minute left, if others of you
would like to
Sergeant Major KENT. Well, we are actually keeping an eye on
this problem. Out in California wherethe mortgage crisis is most
costly. I would tell you right now, sir, what we are looking at is
not to move someone with a financial hardship every couple of
years from California.
But ifactually working with the families to try to keep them on
base here.
Master Chief WEST. Sir, I would echo what the Sergeant Major
says. We are working that real hard.
Mr. FARR. Is there enough RCI housing to get them on base?
Sergeant Major KENT. We are working but it is not enough.
Sergeant Major PRESTON. We provide housing for 67 percent of
those that need housing that live off-post, so it is really 33 percent
on base, a very small percentage.
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. Chairman, can I have 15 seconds on this?
Mr. EDWARDS. Please.
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. Sometimes, sir all branches of
the service have to make a very difficult decision to maybe even
separate and leave the military that they love because otherwise
they would be taking a $200,000 loss on their home. That is real.
But we dont have the numbers on exactly how many people there
are.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I wouldI think this is an important problem that I am sure we are going to address. And
maybe if you have any thoughts about how we could help, we
would love to hear that, as well.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Crenshaw. I think that is an important issue that we need to talk about.
Mr. Bishop, with your okay
Mr. BISHOP. I would be happy to
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
91
Mr. BISHOP. I would be happy to yield to Mr. Dicks. He indicated
he has another
Mr. EDWARDS. 5 minutes, Dicks
Mr. DICKS. No, it is going to be much quicker than that.
WEB-BASED PSYCHOLOGICAL COUNSELING
Gentlemen, in your opinion, what is the potential utility of Webbased service to assess psychological counseling? We have some
people that are doing this, whereand I think this would be particularly good for the Guard and Reserve, where they can get online and get counseling from a psychiatrist when they need it.
And to me, I think this helps us with the problem of people not
wanting to admit that they have a problem. If they can go online
and do it confidentially, I think this should be done. We put the
money in the Defense Subcommittee to do this, and we are still trying to get the Army to do it.
And we are working with General Chiarelli and others to get this
thing moving. But why does itwhat is your reaction to that?
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. Congressman Dicksgreat
opportunity. Any time that we can give more tools out there for our
military
Mr. DICKS. At least we ought to try it.
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. Absolutely.
Mr. DICKS. Sir, you have some people that, no matter what, they
have this pride factor. They are not going to go to the supervisor
or first sergeant and say, I am having issues. But if they can do
something privately, we may save somebody. So the more opportunities, the better for all our military.
Master Chief WEST. Sir, I would just like to echo that. I think
using the advanced technologies is a great thing.
Mr. DICKS. Especially these younger kids. They understand this
stuff.
Master Chief WEST. That is what they do, sir. You give a young
Sailor or Marine or a young adult a computer and a connection,
and they are happy. They are happy there for hours.
With that said, I think leadership, communications, and education play huge into that. We have to have balance.
Mr. DICKS. I am not saying that is the only thing, but just as another tool, another way
Sergeant Major KENT. OneSource also has something on the Web
site. They can actually go onto the OneSource, and they can work
the counseling through there, sir.
Mr. DICKS. What about the Guard and Reserve guys back there?
What do you think?
AUDIENCE. Yes, sir, we currently haveprogramand this is indicative of what they are doing today. It gives thatfor soldiers to
discreetly express their desire. They feel
Mr. DICKS. Thank you. There is another question here about the
Pacific Northwestspecial problem up thereI ask you that for
the record. Well, I didnt want to take Sanfords time. But I will
just do it for the record. I will just do it for the record.
I have to get back. Thank you, gentlemen.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Bishop.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
92
SUICIDE PREVENTION
Mr. BISHOP. Thank you very much.

Let me take this opportunity to welcome all of you gentlemen
and let you know that I appreciate what you do for our enlisted
men and women.
I am particularly concerned, though, about the suicide problem,
particularly in the Army. I represent Fort Benning. And, of course,
I have a Marine Corps Logistics Base in Albany. I dont think that
the Marine Corps suicide rate is quite as bad, although it does
bother me.
I wanted to share an anecdotal experience that I had just yesterday. I received a call from a family member whose nephew was an
18-year veteran of Fort Benning, two tours in Iraq, and was in the
emergency room after having been taken there by a friend who is
also a sergeant, who went to another state, and retrieved him. He
had blacked out, been AWOLfound out that this soldier, after his
two tours, had gone through divorce, had not immediately put in
the papers for change of the quarters allowance, and as a consequence was disciplined.
And in the recoupment of the housing allowance that was overpaid, his paycheck was cut in half, which sent him into a financial
tizzy. Obviously, he was suffering PTSD, but after serious, serious
discipline, losing rank, as well as losing pay, he ended up being out
of touch with reality. He didnt know where he was, and now is
hospitalized after being in the emergency room yesterday.
His discipline and the loss of the funds accelerated the onset of
the stress, which obviously, this sergeant, with whom I spoke yesterday, who is his friend who is looking after him says that PTSD
is absolutely a factor.
But this man apparently was not screened and he was disciplined. According to the sergeant, he was probably singled out
and leaned on very heavily, which could have had the result of a
suicide.
How are you getting the word down to the commanders of these
units that they have to be sensitive to the wounded warriors? What
will be the scope of the comprehensive soldier fitness program now?
It is a serious situation. I understand from talking with many of
the families of Iraqi veterans and Guard and Reserve families that
they bring a lot home with them in the way of PTSD.
Sergeant Major PRESTON. Sir, I will start. First, for the immediate future, between 15 February and 15 March, the Army will
conduct a mandatory stand-down day for every unit and organization across the Army. It is designed to go back in and re-look at
intervention and identification of those Soldiers potentially on the
edge of committing suicide.
We will then follow up with a mandatory chain-teaching program, which, we have had a lot of success with the chain-teaching
program in October of 2007 on PTSD. It is designed to start at the
senior level, with the chief of staff of the Army, and allows commanders at the senior level to take their subordinate commanders
and, from a commanders perspective, teach the case of PTSD,
teach what PTSD is, the symptoms, and, of course, how soldiers receive help.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
93
And then that permeates all the way down through the organization to every level of command. So down at the company command
level, for our 3,000 companies across the active, Guard, and Reserve, every one will do a chain teachtheir leadership within the
organization of, what are, the symptoms of suicide and what are
the things that we should be looking for?
If you go back 4 years ago, we were doing something right. Chain
teaching is designed to make sure that we are still doing all the
right things.
Sergeant Major KENT. The most important
[The information follows:]
All Soldiers redeploying from the Theater of Operations are required to complete
the Post-Deployment Health Assessment (PDHA), either before leaving Theater or
shortly after redeployment. This policy has been in place since October 1998. The
PDHA screens for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), major depression, concerns about family issues, and concerns about drug and alcohol abuse. A primary
care provider reviews the form, interviews the Soldier as required, and refers the
Soldier to a behavioral health care provider when indicated.
Since January 2006 (retroactive to March 2005), all Soldiers have been required
to complete the Post-Deployment Health Reassessment (PDHRA) in the 90-to-180
day interval after redeployment. If the PDHRA identifies PTSD-related healthcare
needs, Soldiers are offered care through DoD military treatment facilities, Veterans
Affairs medical facilities, or by private healthcare providers through the TRICARE
network.
The Army Surgeon General directed in August 2007 that all recommendations for
a personality disorder (PD) discharge be reviewed by the military treatment facilitys Chief of Behavioral Health. The Surgeon General will be issuing additional
guidance to ensure (1) accuracy of diagnosis and (2) appropriate screening for PTSD
takes place prior to completion of separate actions.
All Soldiers pending discharge for selected administrative reasons are required by
Army Regulation 635200 to receive a mental status evaluation. A new policy published in May 2008 directs that Soldiers discharged for any reason related to misconduct must be specifically screened for PTSD and mild Traumatic Brain Injury.
Mr. EDWARDS. I need to continuesecond round. This is obviously very important.

Sergeant Major KENT. The most important thing, sir, is the stigma. And they actually come from the leadership. They have to get
rid of the stigma that it is a problem if you come forward with
these issues. And that is the key right there, sir.
So I know our commandant has been pushing it hard to the leadership that it is not a problem. You know, if they come forward,
we need to get them help.
Mr. BISHOP. Sometimes they dont recognize their need for help
because they havent been screened.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Israel.
EDUCATION BENEFITS
I want to focus for a moment on educational benefits and opportunities. Each of the witnesses alluded to educational benefits as
a retention tool, as a recruitment tool, as a quality-of-life enhancement. As I noted earlier, I focused on this as a member of the
Armed Services Committee with Ike Skelton.
I dont really need to explain the importance of it to you, but the
importance of it was explained to me by a young Marine officer,
Chris Myers, who was a military fellow serving in my office, several years ago. Chris, who, when I have talked with him about the
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
94
importance of linguistics and cultural awareness and preparation,

said to me, Congressman, I know exactly what you mean. After
you kick in the door, you have to know what to say. He was a
highly decorated Marine who was injured in Fallujah.
I visited West Point several years ago and talked to a group of
soldiers who told me that they were deployed in Iraq, fought, and
came back. During their dwell time, they went to Columbia University, got graduate degrees, then were deployed to Afghanistan,
where they thought that they were far more effective having gained
a strategic understanding and those type of skills.
Chief McKinley talked about the educational mobile program
that you have, as well as distance learning, and in-state tuition.
And I would add to that, in terms of the level of importancetalking about the tragedy of suicide rates. When people dont believe
that they have a future or broader horizons, they believe there are
no alternatives.
So my question to each of you is, what can we be doing to enhance accessibility and educational opportunities, particularly at
the junior levels?
Sergeant Major PRESTON. And I think I can speak for all of us
Mr. Chairman, I will leave this for the record, but there are currently 35 states that support in-state tuition for servicemembers in
other states. And I really would like to see the rest of the states
also come on board to support, you know, our servicemembers that
are serving out there in all those states.
In-state tuition is not only for the servicemember, but also their
children that are going to school. Education is very important.
When you look across the Army, there are 450,000 soldiers right
now going to school. And this is not just brick-and-mortar professional development schools, but it is also online education. It is
Army correspondence courses. It is amazing how much education
is a very important part of all of our servicemembers careers. So
you are exactly right.
Sergeant Major KENT. Education is very important, sir. And
spoke with you last weekendwe are actually standing up our
firstenlisted PME course, which is kicking off the ground. And it
is going to be speaking on an operational level andthings, so that
is going to be a good thing for us in the future, sir. So we are really
pushing on the PME
Mr. ISRAEL. Thank you.
As part of the Year of the Noncommissioned Officer, the Army is accelerating
changes to how the Army trains, educates and assigns noncommissioned officers
(NCOs). The NCO Lifelong Learning Strategy is the capstone NCO cohort initiative
that synchronizes all aspects of development through a holistic/integrated development approach that fosters continuous learning; synchronizes training and education with the requirements of an Army at war.
Central to this strategy is Warrior University (WU) which affords Soldiers access
to information through a single interface, the Army Career Tracker (ACT). ACT is
a portal serving as an information service broker for Soldiers to plan and track their
own career development. ACT allows every Soldier to view Army training, experiential learning, and education data from a single interface. It provides every Soldier
with an accurate picture of their completed training and life-long training transcript. Leaders will be able to provide more effective mentoring and develop actionable recommendations for their Soldiers by using ACT to identify training and
learning opportunities. WU facilitates commonality and currency of learning materials to ensure training and education resources are maximized. ACTs course cata-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
95
log helps to synchronize training and education and significantly reduces the time
and effort that previously went into scheduling and resourcing.
Another aspect of WU is the College of the American Soldier (CAS). CAS is a partnership between the Army and participating colleges and universities to expand civilian educational opportunities for NCOs. CAS links the NCO Education System
(NCOES) course evaluations with specific degree requirements and allows Soldiers
to determine which NCOES courses will transfer as equivalent college credit. When
fully implemented, CAS will provide a specific map Soldiers can follow in order to
pursue and attain a college degree. The Army is also working with partner colleges
and universities to create an advanced degree program for career NCOs.
Master Chief WEST. Yes, sir, I would say the same. We are pushing hard in the Navy too. Naval Education and Training, is looking
for all opportunities and all venues to get to our Sailors out there.
We even take, as you probably know, sir, courses which go afloat
with our ships when we go. Education onboard our bigger ships has
been a huge success for us.
We are making headway. Do we have room to go? Yes, sir, we
do. But we are making a lot of headway.
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. Sir, we have the Community
College of the Air Force since about 1974. We have graduated over
350,000 Airmen. The last two years, we have graduated the most
we have ever had per year. We just started last summer the associate to bachelor program where you take your Community College
of the Air Force degree, and we can apply that toward a bachelors
degree. We have now 35 colleges on board that you can take all 64
credit hours from the Air Force degree, and apply that toward a
bachelors degree.
We believe education is very important to keep our people pointed in the right direction. And when they do choose to leave our Air
Force, they are going to be better citizens.
Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, one of the most fascinating things I
was involved in as a member of the Armed Services Committee was
doing an all-day conference on professional military education that
General Petraeus attendedand, afterthis conference, the conclusion was everybody understands the value of education, but we
may be too busy to learn, and operation tempo really is the obstacle
to that.
And so it is important that we put value into this, but we also
have to put budgets in and we have to put scheduling in. And I
hopeeach of our witnesses andall interested partiesfigure out
ways we can make this happen
Mr. EDWARDS. That is right. Thank you, Mr. Israel.
And I am glad we took a step in the right direction. I think I
had asked Mr. Miller, and he agreed, to put into an amendment
in the higher education bill last year to say, if you have a son or
daughter who started school in, say, Tennessee and your country
has asked the family to move to Fort Hood in Texas, in Mr.
Carters district, then that son or daughter will continue their instate tuition until they finish.
I know there are other steps to take, but I think that was an important step forward to stop punishing military families, because
our country asks them to move from one state to another.
And, Mr. Israel, your leadership on this subcommittee and working with the Defense Appropriations Committee will make a real
difference on that issue.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
96
GUARD AND RESERVE QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES

Let me just finish the first round of questioning. Let me ask
Master Chief Wright and Sergeant Major Gipe and Sergeant Major
Caffie if each of youand I am going to stick to the 5 minutes
hereif each of you could just add any additional points on quality-of-life issues that you think perhaps maybe need special attention for members of the Guard and Reserve.
Sergeant Major.
DEMOBILIZATION PROCESS
Sergeant Major CAFFIE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is

Leon Caffie. I am the command sergeant major for the U.S. Army
Reserve. Let me please address something that was said earlier
about our Reserve and National Guard soldiers, that once they return home, they are left pretty much alone. We have changed that,
Mr. Chairman.
The Warrior and Family Assistance program is where the Army
Reserve starts counseling familiesonce the soldier receives a letter of intent that they will be mobilized and deployed, we start
counseling at that stage. This consists of counseling when they return from the theater.
We continue to work closely with the families. We have hired 127
family readiness assistants throughout the Army Reserve in all 50
states and four territories. I have Army Reserve soldiers inissues
that we are dealing with thatwhen we passed the bill last year
thatfor our National Guard and Army Reserve soldiers still
capped at age 60.
One component of that, if you were deployed for 90 days, you
couldso many days from that particular year. What we failed to
do is make itsoldiers that were deployed in 2001 and 2002. It is
one of the major concerns that I am getting pushback from my soldiers.
As we continue to transform the Army Reserve, we still run into
difficulty withwe will work our way through that. I think last
year I brought to your attention about IDT travel, some forms
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
Sergeant Major CAFFIE. But other than that, I think we have
made tremendous progress since last year. And thank you for what
this committee have done to support my organization.
Mr. EDWARDS. Great. Thank you, Sergeant Major.
Sergeant Major Gipe.
Sergeant Major GIPE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. EDWARDS. If you could justout of the respect for the Navy,
take about a minute-and-a-half. We will give the Navy
Sergeant Major GIPE. I will do that, sir.
Sergeant Major GIPE. I am from Kentucky, but I can speak fast
when I need to. I do want to correct one error. I said we had nine
suicides the first quarter. It was only six. So that is an improvement. It is still way too many.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
97
A couple of things that we need. I appreciate all of this committees support. Some of the things that we need to continue to work
is the funding for the yellow ribbon legislation that was passed last
year. It is critical to support our soldiers pre-deployment, during
deployment, and on return with regards to some of the issues we
have been dealing with here today, as well as their families.
TRICARE providers is where we end up having the biggest issue
when our soldiers come back home. For instance my daughter attended college in Bowling Green, Kentucky, she had to go 48 miles
to find a gynecologist that would accept TRICARE. So we have to
work that.
EMPLOYER SUPPORT FOR THE GUARD AND RESERVE
One thing that I think we really need to workit is not really

the committee thing here, it is more of a congressional thingis
employer support. We dont do enough to support the employers out
there that support our troops.
And 50 percent of the Army has employers outside of their active-duty time. And we have to do something that rewards those
employers who do support us forbecause it is extremely critical.
MILCON
And then the last thing I would suggest is military construction.

Over 69 percent of our buildings are 50 years or older.
Mr. EDWARDS. Sixty-nine percent are 50 years or older?
Sergeant Major GIPE. Yes, sir. So we have a lot of opportunities
out there and things that would go well with an economic stimulus.
So I will turn it over to my
Mr. FARR. Can I follow up on that question?
Mr. EDWARDS. Sure.
Mr. FARR. What is happeningwe have a big RCI project, but
now that the community housing prices have dropped so much,
even though these houses are primo houses, a lot of the families
will opt to live in a community where they never would have before
because the rents were too high.
So it is more than just building new housing on base. It is sort
of getting that culture of living back on baseto think about. Why
are you are not using the housing we have built? You cant complain about it. It has everything, childcare
Mr. EDWARDS. That is an interestingI hadnt thought about
people moving off-base because of lower housing. So we will look
into that.
Master Chief Wright.
Master Chief WRIGHT. Chairman Edwards, thank you for the opportunity, gentlemen.
Really, I just want to say that the Sailors that are coming back,
once we start the mobilization process, education is provided all the
way through. And I have to echo what the fine gentleman before
me said.
The process that the Navy is using is the Returning Warrior Program. And what happens with that is, once these Sailors return
home, they have an opportunity to go away to a resort. It is a nice
place for the family to go where they want to attend. It is totally
volunteer.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
98
And they have an opportunity to sit down and get guidance from
leadership, the colonels, generals that walk in and say, I have had
a problem with post-traumatic stress, and they go through their
leadership, where the message is coming from the top, that it is
okay for that young Sailorto say, I have an issue.
The opportunities are there for them to get counseling, get financial counseling, Military OneSource, and information on mental
health issues. From this point on, we have conducted about 31
events since fiscal year 2007. And we have had over 2,200 participants.
I have attended one of those. And we have leadership ensure
they attend. But I have seen folks that walk in with their arms
crossed, saying, You cant do anything for me. And by Sunday
afternoon, when they leave, they are saying, Thank you. I didnt
know that the Navy and military really cared about me.
And there has been outstanding opportunities, especially when
they are able to sit down at the roundtable. The military member
has dealt with a lot of issues while they are deployed, while their
spouse has dealt with the heating blowing out, the car blowing out.
And once they had the opportunity to interact, it all comes together
and there is a lot of healing that goes on.
And the other side of it is the TRICARE, making sure we have
the providers for that. The distance and travel are areas of concern.
I have Sailors that are traveling from one coast to another because
they love the Navy. They are losing money. When I have a Sailor
that is doing it, and they are actually losing money that weekend,
butevery weekend, I cant ask for any more, sir.
I mean, they are there because they are doing relevant work, and
we know they are making a difference.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Master Chief WRIGHT. They are volunteering to keep doing that.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Master Chief.
Master Chief WRIGHT. Thank you, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. To begin the second round, we will begin with Mr.
Wamp, Mr. Farr, and then Mr. Crenshaw.
Mr. Wamp.
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS
Mr. WAMP. Well, I have several questions in different directions,

but picking up on what Ander Crenshaw raised and the Master
Sergeant just talked about on the financial side of the troops, do
we have more payday lending and predatory lending? You talked
about their cars breaking down.
How many of them are still turning to finance vehicles that are
not good for them? Do we know if we are moving toward alternatives? This is such a hard time for everybody, and last year, gas
prices went through the roof. That becomes an issue, and people
are upside-down.
What are you seeing? Is there anything we need to do, in terms
of predatory activity around our troops that might be upside-down,
to take some of the stress off the family, because it is all about
staying ahead?
Sergeant Major PRESTON. Sir, I dont have any specific numbers,
but talking with soldiers and their families when the gas prices
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
99
were very high, it was very, very tough on them. And you have 67
percent of married soldiers living off the installation. That means
that they are commuting back and forth everyday to work. And, it
is just the cost of living every day that has gone up.
And I also sit on the Board of Directors for the Army Air Force
Exchange Service (AAFES), along with Chief Master Sergeant
McKinley. One of the things we noticed were the financial statistics. The sales in AAFES actually went up.
And when you look at the rest of the economy, Wal-Mart was the
only other one going up. So obviously, the soldiers and
servicemembers are shopping at those places where, they can get
the best buy.
Sergeant Major KENT. It is some hard times out there, sir. Payday lenders was a big problem out in California in the Camp Pendleton area. It assisted our marines/sailors when California passed
a state law for payday lenders. And the lenders have I mean, they
pretty much are going out of business because of the law that they
passed in California.
And, also, we have been very active down at Camp Pendleton,
you know, teaching them, you knowabout the financial management.
Master Chief WEST. Sir, we have held both lectures, seminars,
training on not only predatory lending, but the financial responsibilities for our Sailors and we have seen a decrease in it. And
what we have, with the Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society is called
the Quick Assist Loan. It is QAL. It is a fund of about $300 in one
shot. And when I say one shot, it is you walk in, you walk out with
a check. It is a huge success for us.
What we have seen is an increase, but they pay them back. It
gets them past what they need to get to, to get on course again.
We have really hit that hard and I think that we are headed in
the right direction.
Our Fleet and Family Support Centers have made that a priority. And they have gone proactive on the waterfronts, as well. I
dont have the numbers, but we have gotten 137,000 of our Sailors
touched this past year, which is a 51 percent increase over 2007.
So we are more out.
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. Sir, with the Air Force, it
starts in the recruiting office. We make sure that, before we recruit
somebody, that they dont have a debt ratio that is going to set
them up for failure for the future.
Once we get them to basic training, even in basic training we
teach them financial counseling and how to manage a budget and
be smart about the future. They get that when they arrive at their
first duty location and hopefully set them up for success in the future to spend wisely.
And the bill we passed on predatory lending, I think, was a tremendous success. Thank you very much for making that happen.
HOME PORT ASHORE
Mr. WAMP. Maybe we are running out of time, but, Master Chief
West, on the home port ashore provision, because I know when I
went out on the USS HARRY TRUMAN, I told you about that this
morning, it was pretty tight quarters.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
100
Master Chief WEST. Yes, sir.
Mr. WAMP. They are out there for a long period of time, unlike
the other services when they get in. Give us a little bit more detail
about what we can do to help you when soldiers are home so that
quality of life is good enough for them to go back out to sea for 6
months.
Master Chief WEST. Yes, sir. As I pointed out we have about
9,000 of our Sailors that are on a ship. Until you have done that
and experienced it, it is a pretty tough environment out there for
sailors. My hat is off to them every single day.
So now we have a master housing plan that we are presenting
to the CNO in a couple of weeks which will provide I guess a landscape on what we can do. Through a Public-Private Venture (PPV),
one of which is out in California, Pacific Beacon. I will take you if
you havent seen that. I would welcome you to come. I will even
show you the great quality-of-life living, which is going to put
about 2,900 spaces. And then, down in Virginia, in Hampton
Roads, about 3,600 spaces.
Our challenge right now is really in three locations, but we certainly do need that help. But our three locations are Norfolk, Virginia. We have, again, about 5,700 of our Sailors living on board
the ships. In Yokosuka, Japan, about 700 and in California, about
700.
Even with the plan in place, it is going to be very tough for us
to get these folks ashore. One of the things that we are asking to
do is double up, go through the Marine Corps model and the college
model, for that matter, sort of the one-plus-one, put a couple of our
young Sailors in there. I will tell you this is a success story out in
Japan, even though we have a shortfall there, we have had a significant decrease in the amount of incidents out on the economy.
And you know as well as I do, it is a big deal anywhere, but more
so in Japan with American Sailors.
I do have a couple of slides that do show that, sir. And I just
dont want to get too deep into it, but it shows the number of beds
the number of our Sailors because, again, as I pointed out earlier
to Congressman Dicks, I do believe that you give a Sailor WiFi and
a computer, that is what they want, really just to get away, get
away from that ship.
So I would ask this committee for support. And I am sure the
bachelor housing area really needs some support there. And, also,
go in and view a lot of our buildings are aging, as well. That is one
thing that we have to tackle.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Wamp. [Laughter.]
We will go with Mr. Farr, Mr. Crenshaw, and then Mr. Berry.
Mr. Farr.
CROSS-CULTURAL TRAINING
Mr. FARR. Thank you very much.

Again, thank you for all this good, lovely dialogue. I have a lot
of questions, one I would like to follow up on is something that I
am very interested in, and that is really trying to integrate the capabilities of the services and the interagency with our alliespartners across the full spectrum of operations.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
101
We have learned in this committee that our military are the best
in the world at being able to go anywhere at any time, kick down
any door, do anything we have to do. But we have not done a very
good job at winning hearts and minds. And we can get in, but we
cant get out.
My whole experience was in the Peace Corps where you actually
had to work yourself out of a job. What I have seen is that soldiers,
a lot of them, get really interested in cross-cultural experiences,
young kids parachuting into another culture and other languages,
the conditions of poverty, and so on, and develop an interest in
sharing American values with host country folks.
I think that is a much longer and stronger effort. But the only
people I think are going to do effective nation-building are our military, because they are on the ground. You can do wells. You can
do schools. You can do things like that.
I am concerned that we have 33,000 U.S. contractors performing
for the Army. And I wonder, is that getting in the wayis there
a way that we can do that? Can the military decrease violence and
leave it better than they found it?
What are we missing in this? Because it is the soldiers on the
groundembassies are all locked up and nobody can go out without being guarded, and same with USAID. But I have heard out
at conferences at the Naval Postgraduate School that the international nongovernmental organizations are on the ground with
the soldiers.
And the one thing they and the military have in common, they
are both getting shot at. And they are both trying to do the same
the military for security purposes, but in the end, to make it secure
for what?
Sergeant Major PRESTON. Sir, I would encourage you to get out
and visit with our soldiers. And I will give you a couple of examples, because the Army has done a magnificent job at working itself
out of a job. As I travel around, I get a lot of questions from young
soldiers aboutin Iraq and Afghanistan, but historically we have
done a magnificent job.
In Bosnia, December 1995, 20,000 soldiers went there. November
of 2004, when we pulled out, there were less than 900 soldiers
there. So it took us 8 years to go from 20,000 soldiers to less than
900, and then we handed that mission over to the European Union.
Mr. FARR [continuing]. Bosnia now?
Sergeant Major PRESTON. Just a couple of people in the headquarters. That is it.
Kosovo, spring, summer of 1999, 14,000 soldiers that were part
of that campaign. Today, the Army National Guard has about
1,400 there. And, they have done a magnificent job over there at
building. It is helping the government become operational, and it
is the government at all levels. It is at the national level. It is the
county, province, down to all the small towns and villages.
But you have to get the government operational. And then it is
training the security forces to take our place. And as those security
forces become competent, that allows usand I will give you a couple of quick stories from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Mr. FARR. Do our soldiers need more language training, cultural
training?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00101
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
102
Sergeant Major PRESTON. We have worked very hard. The last
couple of years, across the board, cultural training comes before
any one deploys, as well as language training.
And when we look at the different language schools that are out
there, we are leveraging that right now. And there are soldiers in
every unit and organization that are deploying right now that are
taking language training.
I will give you a quick story. I was just at Fort Polk with the
56th Stryker Brigade out of the Pennsylvania Guard. And he was
one of their trainers. And I asked him how long he had been and
he said, Sir, I have only been here about 7 months.
And I said, Where were you at before that? He said, I was in
Iraq. I was in Baghdad. I was on a training team.
And I said, Well, what did you think of that? And he said, Sir,
I would go back in a minute. And I said, Well, why do you say
that? And he said, Because I was able to make a difference and
it was the friendships that were developing.
And he said that, I was out everyday with a squad of Iraqi soldiers that I helped train. And one day, we came under fire. There
was a sniper that was firing at us. We took cover behind a concrete
barrier. And as I came up to shoot my weapon, Sergeant Oman,
who wasI was, you know, his teacher, he pushes me back down
behind the concrete barrier and he says, Stay down.
And, of course, I told him, Oman, I have to get up. I have to
be able to shoot. And Oman told him, Stay down. Today is not
your day to die. And that was the kind of close bonding relationships between us and the Iraqi soldiers.
I was just there in November. I spoke with Command Sergeant
Major Adel, who is the sergeant major of the Iraqi army, a close,
personal friend of mine. And I was there for their third annual senior NCO conference and there with all of his division command sergeant majors, across the Iraqi army, and we are all brothers, and
we are very close friends in what we are doing right now to help
each other.
In Afghanistan, the sergeant major of the army is Rashan. He is
a graduate of class 56 at ourUnited States ArmySergeants
Major Academy. He is half-American and spent an entire year
down there going through the school.
And, when you look at the relationships and what he and with
the chief of staff of the Afghan army, General Bishmail Kahn, who
spoke at their conference in November; I told General Casey that,
when he sat up there and spoke, if he had been wearing one of our
uniforms and speaking English, you would have thought he was
one of our American generals, because he was saying all the right
things.
We have done a lot of things. And I can tell you about
Mr. FARR. How about contractors?
Sergeant Major PRESTON. We have contractors out there, but
they are really in support of the soldiers there on the ground. And,
we dont have enough of the combat support, service support kind
of functions that those contractors right now are doing.
Mr. EDWARDS. Brief statement?
Master Chief WEST. Sir, as that question was asked, I was coming up out of my chair, because, I will tell you, it is a great ques-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00102
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
103
tion. We are working almost every day with NGOs, or nongovernmental organizations.
We have deployed COMFORT and MERCY. You talk about winning the hearts and minds of all these countries. It is an incredible
thing to see, the capability those ships bring, and more importantly, how many people line up and want us back.
We use our amphibs in that way, but we also have over 12,000
of our Sailors right now on the ground over there in Iraq and Afghanistan, up in the hills, and in the provisional reconstruction
teams.
I was just out there with our CNO. And we got to fly out to a
place where they are building some schools and all that stuff. It is
incredible. It is incredible the way those countries and those people
come to us and want our help.
REBUILDING IRAQ
So I have to tell you, your Navy is out there. We are engaging

every single day with those NGOs. And it is just an incredible feeling.
But if you are ever either in San Diego or able to come down to
the COMFORT or the MERCY, please, I will give you a personal
tour.
Sergeant Major KENT. Can I make a 30-second comment, sir?
Mr. EDWARDS. Sure, go ahead.
Sergeant Major KENT. Western Iraq used to be a bloody place.
I was there in 2004 and 2005. And the Marines today over there
are able to turn off kicking in the doors and they are out there actually helping the locals each and every day.
That is the young PFCs on the ground. They know when to turn
it on and kick down doors and when to turn it off and help the
Iraqi people.
Mr. EDWARDS. That is great.
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. Sir, just a second?
Mr. EDWARDS. Yes.
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. It is not only Iraq and Afghanistan, sir, but we are doing capacity-building in many countries, whether it be in the Pacific, to South America, from the African continent to all over Europe. And more funding to help with
this would be fantastic.
But to build the military through professional military education
and so forth through our Combatant Commands (COCOMs) and
each one of our services is a great thing. And it is going to make
us all safer in the long run.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Thank you all.
Mr. Crenshaw.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
QUALITY OF MILITARY HEALTHCARE
Yes, that whole discussionthatyou really cant surge friendship, and the things that you are doing in the front end, such as
Southern Command (SOUTHCOM), in the Caribbean, those potential hotspots I think what your men and women are doing, just to
build relationships, you just dont walk in one day and say, Now
we are your friendlet me go back towe started the conversa-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00103
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
104
tion about a specific part of health care, suicide preventionbig
picture, health care is so important, the quality of life of not only
the men and women who serve, but the families.
And I know we have done a lotthe Chairman has been real active in the military construction projects. We have built some new
facilities, new clinics, new hospitals. And we want to keep on doing
that.
But I want to ask you all, just in terms of overall health care,
just the delivery of health care, what would you say are the good
things that we do? What are some of the things that we ought to
do better?
And what do you hearwhat do your troops say when they talk
about health care? What are some of the, when people are sitting
around talking, We wish you did a little better, or, We are really
thankful for this part or that part, can you touch on that, just
some real-world examples that you see? Because I have to believe
that is so important for families, particularly.
ARMY FAMILY ACTION PLAN
Sergeant Major PRESTON. Sir, I will start. Last week, we had the
Army Family Action Plan. And this is a conference that we did
here in D.C., but it stems out and it starts all around the Army,
overseas, as well.
And it starts with the soldiers and families at installations and
they raise issues to those representatives at the installation level
to present to the annual conference. And then to the leadership.
The Secretary of the Army and the chief of staff of the Army are
thereand one of the top five issues that was raised this last week
that has now been added is there is a shortage of medical providers
in military treatment facilities.
And that is hands down, has always been a concern out there as
you travel around. It is accessibility and availability. The quality
of the care is very good, once you get into it, but it is accessibility,
it is availability.
TRICARE
And, of course, we have tried to stem that by partnering with

medical communities and facilities off post as well, but there is still
not enough. The Army is very big, and being able to get out there
into all those remote sites, as Command Sergeant Major Gipe,
Command Sergeant Major Caffie said, it is to TRICARE providersto travel to get somebody that takes TRICARE. And that
is a concern.
Sergeant Major KENT. The quality of medical service is very
good, sir, but the shortage of doctors is the issue.
Master Chief WEST. Sir, the same here. I will tell you, I could
not be happier with our Navy medicine and Marine Corps aspect.
They do a lot of good things.
I would say if there is any one thing, it is continue to keep that
ball in the air for us. You know, sir, you drop that ball, and we
start missing things, but, you know, you see the assistance you
could provide, that would really be of value.
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. Sir, I think we have come a
very long way since 1995 when we started TRICARE. But I think
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00104
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
105
one of the big improvements we can do to make it more attractive
for civilian health care providers is to take out a lot of the bureaucracy that we can right now.
You may have someone who goes to visit a doctors officeBlue
Cross-Blue Shield in just a matter of a few minutesto see the
doctor, and the paperwork is taken care of. You go to the doctor
with TRICARE and it is an hours worth of paperwork. And a lot
of doctors just dont want to put up with it.
We need to clear up the bureaucracy and make it easier and
more attractive for civilian doctors that want to take
Mr. CRENSHAW. Thank you, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thanks. Before I recognize Mr. Berry, I want to
take the privilege of welcoming to our subcommittee Mrs. Zach
Wamp, Kim Wamp, and their son, Weston.
And as chairman of the committee, let meI dont want to embarrass the ranking member of the committee in your presence, but
I want to thank you both for the sacrifices you have made, for the
time Zach often has to spend away from family, to his leadership
in this committee. We are thrilled to have you both. The subcommittee is very privileged to have Zach as our ranking member.
Zach, would you like to
Mr. WAMP. I am going to rat out my son, who is a senior at the
University of Tennessee and about to graduate magna cum laude
May the 1st. He and Kim are here for the National Prayer Breakfast, which I am very involved in each week, and they just came
into town.
But they had not been to a committee hearing in this room since
I joined as ranking member. I have to tell you that my son, when
you were under consideration as Vice President, started rooting for
that ticket just because of our relationship. So you had one Republican working for you, soat least we would have somebody in the
White House that we know.
Mr. EDWARDS. And my Republican campaign opponent was rooting for me, as well. But, Weston, thank youthank you very much.
[Laughter.]
And it is great to have you both here.
I think the top enlisted leaders of our services that are here symbolize the people making a difference for our country, and our military arent only those that have on the uniform or wear the title
of member of Congress, but spouses and the children. So we welcome you.
Mr. Berry.
Mr. BERRY. Well, I would just thank all of you for your service
and the great job you do. I think this committee is committed to
doing the best that we can to see that you have what you need to
do that job and do it well.
Master Chief West, you are from the same neck of the woods as
our colleague, Mr. Wamp. I am wondering, what made you turn out
so well? [Laughter.]
Master Chief WEST. Sir, I just have to say that I am just across
the Georgia line.
Mr. BERRY. That explains it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Berry.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00105
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
106
And welcome back to the subcommittee. You have been a great
member of the subcommittee. And you are here personally at every
committee hearing unless you have an absolute conflict with other
hearings. And we thank you for that. Thank you for being here.
TOP QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES
Let me continue a tradition of this subcommittee, if I could, and

just ask each of you really two questions. First would be, in terms
of quality-of-life morale issues, would it be fair for me to say, or
to conclude from your comments, that time away from family is
number-one right now? Would that be a yeslet the record show
that time away from family is the number-one quality-of-life issue
right now.
Moving beyond that and putting aside pay, because we know
that is always crucial to those serving our country, if we were to
be arbitrary and to, say, take education, whether it is for the serviceman or woman or their family, education, health care, housing,
and daycare, while we have a responsibility to address all of those
four areas, could I ask you to make your own judgment and say,
speaking for your respective servicemen and women and their families, which would you rank as the number-one challenge where we
need to put more resources? What would be number two, number
three, if you want to?
Sergeant Major KENT [continuing]. Marine barracks?
Mr. EDWARDS. Yes.
Sergeant Major KENT. I wouldsir.
Mr. EDWARDS. So barracks improvement
Sergeant Major KENT. Yes, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Sergeant Major KENT. As we grow the force, we are going to need
other space.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. How about second, Sergeant Major?
Sergeant Major KENT. Second would be daycare, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Daycare after barracks?
Sergeant Major KENT. Yes, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Sergeant Major Preston.
Sergeant Major PRESTON. Childcare which is working in the
right direction and is a priority right now, but childcare, barracks
are the top two, and then health care.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. The two of you, the sense is we have made
progress on family housing. It is not that we need to stop, draw a
line in the sand and stop improving military family housing, but
we at leastour servicemen and womenand they are seeing real
change, so we are behind the curve more on barracks versus family
housing?
Master Chief West.
Master Chief WEST. Sir, I have to agree over here. I will tell you,
the bachelor housing is absolutely the number-one priority. With
that said, the family housing, what this committee has done and
through our PPV partnerships, is phenomenal. In my 28 years in
the Navy, I have never seen better housing and daycare is another
one. I know we have made huge strides. We have a very successful
rate as we roll out, so we are making headway there.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
107
And also with health care, we have to keep all three of those up
in the air, but my number-one priority without a doubt is housing.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Master Chief WEST. Bachelor housing.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay, bachelor housing.
Master Chief WEST. Yes, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Chief Master Sergeant McKinley.
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. Sir, I dont think that I would
really necessarily put them as a one-two-three. I think it is a package deal. You know, I think each one of them are equally important. And you cant really have one without the other, so we have
made tremendous strides in each one of those. But each one of
those is still very important.
Mr. EDWARDS. Sure. And I dont want to make the third or fourth
list on the priority list seem less important, because they are very
important. But if you only had enough money to put into one of
those four areas, where would you put that money?
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. Continue with housing. I
think housing is very
Mr. EDWARDS. Family housing or barracks?
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. Both.
Mr. EDWARDS. All right, if you could only put money into barracks or family housing, where would you put it?
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. I would right now put it into
barracks, because we still have Airmen out there living in barracks
that are very old. The infrastructure needs to be redone. You cant
put lipstick on a pig.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right. Right.
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. You have heard that one before. So you have to go in and work with infrastructure. And that
takes money.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. And forgive me for trying to put you in a
box, but I think just trying to get that sense of priorities, with limited resourceswe dont have an unlimited check here. We should
not ignore any of those areas. We want to keep making the kind
of progress we have had in the last several years in all of these
areas, but that is good to know.
Mr. FARR. Is your BAH for a barrack the same as for a house?
If you stay in a barrack, you still receive a housing allowance, dont
you? Or if you stay in a house on base, you pay your
Master Chief WEST. You forfeit, at that point, your BAH, if you
stay. However if you have a public-private venture, then you do get
paid the BAH, but then you turn around and hand it back to the
PPV.
Mr. FARR. Are the economics better for the private venture, better in building housing than in building barracks?
Master Chief WEST. We have a few barracks that are going PPV.
BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR HOUSING
Sergeant Major PRESTON. What you have to look at is that, for

a married soldier, they receive a basic allowance for housing. And
they have a choice. They can
Mr. FARR. On-base or off-base?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
108
Sergeant Major PRESTON. On-base or off-base. But they pay either way. But for the single soldier, they dont receive a housing
allowance if they are living in a barracks. And, of course, if you
want them to live off-baseand we have done that to free up space
in the barracks we have taken some of our senior noncommissioned
officers who are single and paid them an allowance for housing to
allow them to go off and find an apartment, but, that is a cost, as
well.
Mr. EDWARDS. Could I ask Master Chief Wright and Sergeant
Major Gipe and Sergeant Major Caffie. Starting with you, Master
Chief Wright, could you come up to Mr. Carters seat again? And
you dont have to choose from those same 4, because housing,
health care, education are obviously different sometimes in terms
of the challenges for the members of the Guard and Reserve.
But the quality-of-life issues, what would be the first, second,
and third priorities that Congress needs to take a look at, in terms
of supporting quality of life and morale for our members of the
Guard and Reserve?
Master Chief Wright.
Master Chief WRIGHT. Thank you, sir. Just trying to do some
quick thinking here. But I think the distance and travel, I think
that is a main one.
Number one.
Mr. EDWARDS. Any other of the concerns you hear?
Master Chief WRIGHT. The other is TRICARE, a follow-on with
that. I know they are paid at the Medicaid levels. And a lot of
times, when you are dealing with the medical facilities and the providers, it is all about the patriotism. They are looking at the flag,
and that is wonderful, but there is not a lot of incentive there for
it.
And on the other side of it, just making sure we have good, quality facilities for these folks to come and train, too. A majority of
that time, they are training with the units and doing everything
they have to. But when they are at the reserve site, or the NOSC,
Navy Operational Support Center, they have quality facilities to
work in.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Master Chief WRIGHT. These are my top 3, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Master Chief.
Sergeant Major Gipe.
Sergeant Major GIPE. Again, sir, without a doubt, health care is
our number-one issue. Education is up there, but with the G.I. Bill
and most states providing tuition assistance for Guard and Reserve
members, so without a doubt it is the TRICARE and the yellow ribbon piece of the health care that relates to post-traumatic and
those kind of
Mr. EDWARDS. What training equipment
Sergeant Major GIPE. We are doing very, very well on the equipping course. We are not where we need to be yet, but there is a
plan to get there. And the funding is dedicated long term to get
there.
The military construction to improve the facilities that we have
to train in would have to be up there, as well. But there is a great
plan in place forup there. And the Army has done a phenomenal
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
109
job with getting this, as well as Congress, funding the money for
that.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thanks, Sergeant Major.
Sergeant Major GIPE. Thank you. Yes, sir. That is really what
the issue is. It is the provider issue. And then we alluded to Military OneSource for counseling sessions and the online things.
Things are getting better all the time, but TRICARE providers
is a huge issue for us, because they are just not out there and
available and where they should be. If we could get that fixed, that
would be huge.
Mr. FARR. Military clinic are for the uniformed military personnel, but the spouses and children have to go to the private sector, and they dont want to take TRICARE reimbursements
Sergeant Major GIPE. Of course, we have many soldiers that
dont live anywhere near a military facility, so
Mr. EDWARDS. Thanks, Sergeant Major.
Sergeant Major Caffie.
Sergeant Major CAFFIE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Priority number one for me would be health care. I think we
have already addressed the issues with bureaucracy and paper
flow. We need to enhance thephysicians and nurses within that
program.
Second for me would be the distance. As we transformprimary
concern. I have soldiers driving excess to 250 to 300 milesthat we
do not compensate them for.
And third would be equipment and renovating the installations
that I haveReserve.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you all.
Any membersany of you want to follow up on that? Okay.
Mr. Carter.
Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. EDWARDS. Welcome back to the subcommittee
Mr. CARTER. I would like to thank these fine gentlemen for being
with us, and I apologize for being late. I had to go to a meeting
with the leadership.
AGING FAMILY HOUSING
Sergeant Major Preston, I want to talk to you a little bit about

this Army Family Covenant you talked about. Chairman Edwards
has played a major role in establishing RCI, the housing program.
We have made great strides in military housing. We are all well
aware of it, as all of you are.
However, I visit Fort Hood many times each year and have
toured several times a housing area called Chaffee Village. Are you
familiar with Chaffee Village?
I dont know what year it was built, but it had to be in the 1950s,
because it looks old. Chaffee Village has 674 units for enlisted soldiers and their families, and is part of the RCI program. We are
spending about $40,000 a unit to make them more livable, but,
quite frankly, this is, in my opinion, like putting lipstick on a pig.
I mean, these are old units. We are patching them up, but in reality, there is nothing around here that old that is patched up like
that.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
110
And the real issue is we have to provide the quality of life that
we promised them, that we keep this Army Family Covenant.
Now, even if these additional funds are provided to patch it up,
it is not going to be to the standard it ought to be, as compared
to the other housing that we are providing on Fort Hood and other
installations.
I know that Chairman Edwards is well aware of this, as are
quite a few others. I guess my question to all of you is, do you have
housing issues like Chaffee Village on other facilities you visit that
are still in use. They are old and being patched rather than completed?
Have you informed the powers-that-be, this committee and others, of your needs for housing areas like Chaffee Village so that
they can be in the next budget that we have to deal with? Because
I think this is something that it is time for us to put a spotlight
on. It is livable, but it is not quality living.
Sergeant Major PRESTON. Mr. Carter, I know Chaffee Village
very well. And having been there as a battalion sergeant major and
I sponsored Comanche II. For those houses that did not meet the
quality of life, the private partners have gone in and completely
torn them down and built a new house. And specifically at Fort
Hood, you can go around and see out on West Ford Hood, hundreds
of brand-new houses that have been built.
I get asked by a lot of soldiers that are living in the old houses
like Chaffee or Comanche II why they have to live in the older
house while somebody else has the newer house. And it really gets
down to, what is the capitalization plan for that housing?
Before privatization, we as an Army did not do very good at planning for the capitalization for housing as well as our barracks. And
that is why we have a lot of old stuff out there that we are now
trying to play catch up.
But with our private partner, they have a capitalization plan so
that, you know, as those houses reach the end of their life cycle,
you know, they will be torn down and those soldiers, you know,
aseither as they leave or as they, you know, transition away from
the installation, will be moved into, you know, new and upgraded
housing.
So the good thing now with the private partnerscapitalization
plan, and you rotate through, and you eliminate the oldest stuff,
and you build new.
Mr. CARTER. Well, almost every visit I make to Fort Hood, I get
brought through Chaffee Village when there is a change of command. The first place I go is for a drive through Chaffee Village.
This is something that really is on the minds, especially of the enlisted men.
Sergeant Major PRESTON. And, sir, the private partnersfor a
lot of money
Mr. CARTER. They have.
Sergeant Major PRESTON [continuing]. Chaffee Village and fixed
them up. And, when I was at Fort Campbell when we first started
the capitalization process, these old ranch-style houses, very, very
old, and Command Sergeant Major Hill, who is now with General
Petraeus down in CENTCOM, he was still the installation sergeant
major there.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00110
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
111
And he and I have walked in and taken a look at this brand-new
house that they have renovated. And he and I both looked at each
other and said that, you know, if we were both specialiststhe
rank that was looking at those houses now, we would re-enlist, to
live in a houseso the private partners have really done, a very
good job at renovating and fixing up the old places, to provide the
quality of life that we want.
Mr. CARTER [continuing]. Other response from anybody?
The Armys Residential Communities Initiative (RCI) privatized housing projects
are developed, operated, managed, and maintained in accordance with a detailed
community development management plan (CDMP). Project-specific CDMPs define
the plan for housing recapitalization efforts during the 3 to 11 year initial development phase (IDP) and the remainder of the 50-year project, including housing renovations, demolitions, and new construction.
During the IDP, RCI housing recapitalization is funded through a combination of
private debt, private equity, and/or government equity. Following the IDP, RCI
housing recapitalization is funded from a project reinvestment account. The project
reinvestment account is funded through the project cash waterfall at a sufficient
level to sustain project housing at contemporary standards throughout the 50-year
project.
One of the biggest advantages of military housing privatization is the speed at
which houses can be renovated and constructed during the IDP, and the high quality of housing and housing maintenance that can be sustained over the project life.
Sergeant Major KENT. Well, we have a plan to fix housing.

Thanks to all of you, the funding that we get for our quality of life
I will tell you, we have some great housing on our military installations.
Mr. CARTER. Well, I am aware we have some great housing units.
Master Chief WEST. Yes, sir. With the Navy, we are on track to
eliminate anything that is out there in fiscal year 2011, but what
is important is our private companies. They are working real well
with our family housingnaval installations.
So like I told the members earlier, sir, it is the best housing I
have seen in 28 years of service.
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. Sir, I am very passionate
about this, and so are all of us here. And I have used this comparison before, but I think it is very valid. As you walk through Arlington National Cemetery, we have a standard. We take care of the
fallen. They have the same markers; they have the same plot, so
there is a standard, no matter what service you are in.
It is a shame we dont do this while we are wearing the uniform.
We have some that we take care of, some that we dont. We need
to make sure we provide that standard while we are wearing the
uniform.
HOUSING PRIVATIZATION
Mr. EDWARDS. You know, Mr. Carter, if I could jump in, I think
generally we would all agree that privatized, public-private partnership programs work very, very well. That doesnt mean this subcommittee couldnt, you know, expend some effort reviewing it and
seeing where it is working better than other areas.
And the question I couldnt answeris, how do you make a decision that at what point that developer at Fort Hood gets to put
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00111
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
112
more money in his pocket as a profit? We want him to make a reasonable profit.
Mr. EDWARDS. And it seems that we ought toif nothing else, we
ought to use the bully pulpit of this subcommittee to pressure the
developers, salute them where they are doing well, but if in some
cases they are, you know, renovating a 50-year-old house rather
than building a new one, and yet they are making very, very solid
profits, maybe we ought to let them know we are going to keep an
eye on them.
Mr. CARTER. That is the thing. You know, if you are a soldier,
and, you know, one guy is living in a brand-spanking-new house
and his wife and kids have this really nice house, the other guy
comes back, he is coming to a clean, refurbished house built in
probably 1955, and then refurbished, you cant help but saying he
is in a substandard housing, even if it is perfectly clean, perfectly
functional, and everything works. It is not what the other guy has.
Refurbishing costs a lot of money. Fixing up all the houses costs
a lot of money. Maybe our money would be better spent if we started going in and tearing these things down and building new
houses.
Sergeant Major PRESTON. Mr. Chairman, I would recommend
that you take a look at it. And the best analogy I have for RCI
housing is that it is just like getting a haircut. We are halfway
through the haircut right now, so depending on which side of the
head that you look at, one side looks good, but there is a plan that
they are working through.
Mr. EDWARDS. In some cases they are spending $40,000 or
$50,000 renovating the unit where they could spend $150,000 just
rebuilding a brand-newand, again, I dont know that I have an
answer to that. I dont know if any other members do.
I assume it is done again on an installation-by-installation basis
where they negotiate an agreement. But I think it might be
healthy. You know, we have all talked about exercising oversight.
And maybe we could bring the developers in and othersagain, salute them for the good work they are doing, but also let them know
we are going to look over their shoulder and make sure that they
are in a time of war and multiple deployments and the sacrifices
representing are making that we are going to expect them to err
on the side of, you know, putting that extra dollar into unit housing.
Mr. CARTER. I think our partners would give us a fair analysis
of what they see as needed.
Mr. EDWARDS. Might be a good basis for a future subcommittee
hearing.
Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. I think we are almost through. I asked Mr.
Crenshaw. He has no more questions.
Judge Carter, do you have any more questions?
CROSS-CULTURAL EXCHANGEHORN OF AFRICA
I just have a couple of points and then we will be through on our

side. I know time is getting late.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00112
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
113
Going back to Mr. Farrs question, I want to publicly say how
much I appreciate and was so impressed with his insight into
things around the world.
But this issue of hearts and minds. Chief Master Sergeant
McKinley, you mentioned AFRICOM earlier. I was so impressed
with General Kip Ward, who is the commander.
I wanted to ask you if we have any permanence there? I know
that there was a temporary status in Djibouti and we really
havent established permanent base for AFRICOM headquarters.
But I want to tell you this. One of our guests for the prayer
breakfast is a former general who is now in the top civilian leadership of Kenya, and I was with him last night. And I asked him
about this. He told me how impressed he was with General Kip
Ward and the fact that our military presence there, while it is not
permanent yet, is about making peace and winning the hearts and
minds of people in northern Africa.
Now, of those 25 countries I mentioned earlier, quite a few of
them are on the continent of Africa. And I am asking you, because
I was in Tanzania to the south not too long ago, and I asked him
about that former Arab coast, Mombasa particularly. Actually, I
think some things are turning in a better direction.
Part of it is because our presence is welcomed. I know, from Kenyas standpoint, this is a Maasai general who is now in civilian
leadership, and he was really impressed with the U.S. presence in
northern Africa, which I think bodes well for this hearts and minds
issue.
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. Sir, I was just in Djibouti in
November. The leadership there is very committed, but they are
dealing wih the tyranny of distance of Africa. You can basically put
the United States of America in Africa three times.
So when you are looking at how we get from Point A to Point
B, we have to work that out. But the goodness that we can do
there, winning the hearts and minds, it is just astronomical. So we
have to stay committed and make sure that we take care and have
a plan in how we can get from Point A to Point B to Point C.
Mr. EDWARDS. Sergeant Major, you wanted to say something?
Sergeant Major PRESTON. You know, sir, I was Djibouti. And we
have a lot of stuff there for thearmy to help train them, as well
asin Kenya.
But I flew up into Ethiopia. This is a great kind of joint team
flew into Ethiopia, the city of Dire Dawa. It is the second largest
city in Ethiopia. It is a city of about 300,000.
And I was met there on the ground by Staff Sergeant Colson,
who is an Army Reserve staff sergeant, who was the NCOIC or
noncommissioned officer in charge of a 17-member team. And his
commander was on leave so he was gone. So this staff sergeant was
in charge.
And he had a team of Navy Seabees as well as a squad of artillery soldiers from Fort Sill, Oklahoma, that are doing force protection. He had an airman and a signal NCO who was doing the
comms to keep him in touch with Campbut we traveled around
the city.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00113
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
114
And he took me out and showed me the 21st and 22nd water
point that the Seabees have put into place for the locals to draw
water from, fill up their water jugs.
They took me out to a $200,000 school project, primary, secondary school that they were putting into place for first grade
through eighth or ninth grade.
And while we drove around the city, it wasyou could tell the
relationship that he had built with all the locals, because they were
allthey all knew him. They were all waving at him.
But here is a young, staff sergeant with 7 or 8 years in the
Army, and then he is helping to build a city. You know, he built
a school and, helped to provide water, to the citizens. And, it is just
amazing out there to see the things that are being done.
I visited the chief of staff and sergeant major of South Africa. I
was went around to their training facilities. And they are trying to
build a noncommissioned officer corps like ours.
And that is one of the reasons why we are celebrating the year
of the NCO. And, South America has some unique challenges down
there, as well. But, we are partnering with every one of those countries.
Master Chief WEST. Sir, if I could just add one quick point to
that, it is not necessarily the 30-, 40-, 50-year-olds that are making
a difference. We are having 19- and 20-year-olds going out there,
negotiating deals, and working with these tribal leaders or these
leaders of those communities. It is just an incredible thing.
Sergeant Major KENT. And we are actually doing that with the
Navy every day, sir. We are actuallyportand we win hearts and
minds each and every day.
Mr. WAMP. And one other closing thing that I want to bring up
through several hearings as we go forward, Mr. Chairman, and
that is that what we heard from the deputy chief of staff of the
Army and Mrs. Casey, when they met with us after the election
and they said that the Congress still needs to change the law so
that outside foundations can support our soldiers. We talked about
Fisher House, an example, but there are still some impediments of
our free enterprise system to support the military.
We need to look at ways to take those walls down, especially
with the needs that we hear about and the stress that is there with
multiple deployments. If our private sector is willing to help and
in any way the law keeps that from happening, we need to take
those things down.
They brought that to us in December at that dinner I attended
2 weeks after the election. I thought, That is something we need
to bring up over and over again until we figure out exactly how to
take down these barriers to get all the support. I know they wanted help, and they know that there are stress points, and lets let
them do that. We will look into that every time.
Mr. EDWARDS. Good suggestionbring in our authorizer friends,
but it would certainly be something that would be important to do.
Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Do any members have any additional questions? And, obviously,
you can all turn in written questions.
Mr. Farr.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00114
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
115
TRICARE PROVIDERS
Mr. FARR. I wasnt going to have one, but I want to get back to
this TRICARE issue. As I understand TRICARE, it essentially
models the Medicare reimbursement rate. It establishes rates by
region.
The problem is that providers dont want to take that rate because it is too low or the process is too much of a hassle. It is very
difficult to change the rate.
How much of this problem is rate? And how much of it is bureaucracy? Because we contract out a huge multibillion-dollar contract, and then process blows up, and with a new provider every
6 years, all the forms, telephone numbers, and contacts, and appeals change.
Do you have any suggestions of how to improve this?
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. Sir, I think a lot of the health
care providers out there, they are dedicated Americans. They love
our military, like everybody else, and they are probably willing to
take that little less money. But if the bureaucracy, if the paperwork was much easier for them, I think that would help a lot.
Mr. FARR. Do you have a memo on that?
The question is a good one because reimbursement rates are, indeed, sometimes
part of the problem. I should explain that when we say TRICARE is tied to or as
you say modeled on Medicare rates. It doesnt mean that we match those rates
dollar for dollar. In some locations we actually pay more than Medicare, but if those
Medicare payments go up or down, our rates tend to match the same rate of increase or decrease.
Does TRICARE pay enough? TRICARE participation is voluntary. If we pay too
little, providers do not participate. We have been able to find ample TRICARE-accepting providers in most markets. We interpret this as meaning we pay acceptable
market rates. It is a delicate balance.
You also mention that providers feel that the TRICARE process is a hassle. Providers deal with numerous private insurers, plus the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), TRICARE, Medicare, etc. It is difficult to deal with multiple billing systems, but we do not perceive the TRICARE billing process to be more onerous than
other payers. TRICARE has an excellent record of paying on time and paying accurately. We monitor timely payment continuously and have an excellent history of
rapid payment. We also strive to minimize changes for beneficiaries while giving
them the greatest choice.
Our benefit is excellent and TRICARE is rated the best health plan in the nation.
An independent healthcare research firm polled 71,000 American households and
found that TRICARE had higher customer satisfaction rates than any other
healthcare insurance carrier in the United States. It exceeded Aetna, Blue Cross
Blue Shield, CIGNA, Kaiser Permanente, the VA, and others. (Independent research
was conducted by Wilson Health Information. Third party information source found
on
Business
Wire:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/milmOEIN/
isl2009lJanl16/ailn31198561)
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. We can get back to you on

that, sir.
Mr. FARR [continuing]. The specifics.
Chief Master Sergeant MCKINLEY. Yes, sirabout what that bureaucracy is?
Sergeant Major PRESTON. I know for the health care providers
out there, they have a kind of balance. They are very patriotic, and
they try to balance the number of people that they are seeing between the high end and the low end. So they have a balance.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00115
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
116
But there is a stigma, but I have to give them credit. They have
been working very hard to improve their process of paperwork and
make it more automated.
But there is also a stigma out there. A command sergeant major
of the Texas National Guard was living in Midland or Odessa, and
to find a health care provider, the specialist his family needed, they
had to go all the way to Fort Worth.
And that is the challenge. It is now working through and demonstrating that some of the processes have improved. They have
gotten better. And it is getting more of the civilian health care
folks out there now to sign up and take TRICARE.
To date there are more than 325,000 providers in the TRICARE network with
over 1 million non-network providers accepting TRICARE patients. In order to make
TRICARE more attractive to health care providers, the TRICARE Management Activity (TMA) has a variety of tools to include: reducing the administrative burden,
increasing the number of providers willing to accept TRICARE patients, and lastly,
exercising an active outreach program.
TMA is engaged in a comprehensive effort to reduce the administrative burden
on TRICARE providers. Efforts include expediting the claims process for providers.
Currently more than 99% of retained claims are being processed to completion within 30 days. Additionally, more than 97% of claims are now filed electronically. Providers have online capability to check beneficiary eligibility, update their information for beneficiaries appearing in TRICARE provider directories, check claim status, and submit referrals. Lastly, monthly provider bulletins and quarterly provider
newsletters are used by providers to communicate important facts about the
TRICARE medical benefit and business processes to the various TRICARE beneficiaries.
TMA conducts surveys to determine the numbers of healthcare providers accepting new patients under TRICARE. TMAs fiscal year (FY) 0507 surveys covered
network/non-network providers in various geographic areas nationally, including remote areas. Together, the three year findings across all states and health service
areas reveal that approximately 87% of all physicians surveyed are aware of the
TRICARE program and about 81% of physicians accepting new patients would also
accept new TRICARE patients. For physicians who do not accept new TRICARE patients, the most commonly single cited reason is due to reimbursement, which accounts for approximately 25% of all comments received. Reimbursement concerns include low and insufficient fees, fee schedules that do not cover overhead costs, or
reimbursements that take too long to receive. The remaining reasons for not accepting TRICARE include a variety of other non-reimbursement factors such as providers accepting no new patients, inconvenience, and other miscellaneous reasons.
The FY08 National Defense Authorization Act has directed DoD to continue this
survey process through 2011.
Title 10 U.S.C. 1079(h)(1) requires the TRICARE program to follow the reimbursement rates of Medicare to the extent practicable, unless DoD can justify a deviation. TRICARE rates and Medicare rates are identical for most services. Medicare rates are adjusted each year. These rates will vary by location and service provided. In areas where access to care is severely impaired because of low reimbursement rates, TMA can use its authority to increase TRICARE reimbursement rates
by issuing locality waivers that increase rates above the TRICARE reimbursement
rate for specific procedures in specific localities. Secondly, TMA can issue networkbased waivers that increase some network civilian provider reimbursements up to
15% above the maximum TRICARE reimbursement rate to ensure adequate numbers/mix of civilian network providers. Directors of the TRICARE Regional offices
work with their managed care support contractors to address requests for reimbursement waivers. A variety of stakeholders can request a waiver to include providers, beneficiaries, managed care support contractors, or military treatment facilities.
Expanding the network through outreach is a top priority of TMA. TMA is reaching out to state officials, medical associations, and individual physicians to educate
them and appeal to their sense of patriotism in accepting TRICARE. This outreach
is showing promising results. For example, the Oregon legislature approved incentives including a one-time tax credit for new providers in the TRICARE network,
plus an additional annual credit for treating patients enrolled in TRICARE. Since
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00116
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
117
2004, Oregons TRICARE provider network has increased by 35%. In addition, the
governors of 20 western states have supported TRICAREs efforts to encourage more
health care providers to accept new TRICARE patients. Their combined efforts led
to an overall increase in western region TRICARE network doctors from approximately 80,000 in 2004 to more than 125,000 today.
Mr. EDWARDS. Important issue. Thank you, Sam.

Let me finish as Mr. Wamp began the meeting. We are privileged
and humbled to be at the table with you and to have an opportunity to thank you with a word for what you have done for our
country and all of those men and women that you represent so ably
have done.
And we want to thank you with our deeds, as well, with better
health care and housing and quality-of-life support that the servicemen and women you represent deserve.
So this is a great way. I cant think of a better way to start up
the new Congress than to have this, our first subcommittee hearing. Again, that is a testament of our respect to you.
Thanks to each of you for your leadership. We look forward to
working with you in the months and years ahead.
With that, we will stand adjourned subject to the call of the
chair.
Let me just say to all the members, my staff just sent me a note
that said there is a bill scheduled for vote any moment now. So before you can go running back to your office building, you might
want to check on the floor.
Thank you very much.
[Questions for the record submitted by Congressman Dicks:]
Army:
Question: Are there any special challenges to supporting quality of life for the
military at installations in the Pacific Northwest region? What changes or improvements would have the greatest impact on improving facets of quality of life in the
Pacific Northwest region?
Answer: There are no challenges specific to supporting quality of life for Soldiers
and their Families stationed in the Pacific Northwest region. Fort Lewis serves as
home to approximately 25,000 Soldiers and civilians, 29,000 Family members, and
120,000 retirees. Fort Lewis delivers on the Army Family Covenantthe Armys expression of commitment to quality of life commensurate with service; recognition of
the mutual bond between the Army, Soldiers, and their Families; and dedication to
improving Family Readiness. We are continually improving quality of life across all
componentsActive, Guard, and Reservethrough implementation of the Army
Family Covenant, regardless of geographic location.
Marine Corps:
Question: Are there any special challenges to supporting quality of life for the
Answer: There are no special challenges to supporting quality of life (QOL) for the
military installations in the Pacific Northwest. Housing, child care, school and single Sailor programs are all important elements to improving quality of life for sailors. In the Pacific Northwest, these programs are resourced consistent with the rest
of the Navys QOL programs in CONUS.
The PB09 FYDP contained one Physical Fitness Center project for NAS Whidbey
Island at a cost of $24.4M that would improve facets of QOL in the Pacific Northwest region.
Navy:
Question. Are there any special challenges to supporting quality of life for the
Answer. There are no special challenges to supporting quality of life (QOL) for the
military installations in the Pacific Northwest. Housing, child care, school and sin-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00117
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
118
gle Sailor programs are all important elements to improving quality of life for sailors. In the Pacific Northwest, these programs are resourced consistent with the rest
of the Navys QOL programs in CONUS.
The PB09 FYDP contained one Physical Fitness Center project for NAS Whidbey
Island at a cost of $24.4M that would improve facets of QOL in the Pacific Northwest region.
Air Force:
Question. Are there any special challenges to supporting quality of life for the
Pacific Northwest region? .
Answer. There are no specific challenges to supporting quality of life at installations in the Pacific Northwest region that are unique to McChord AFB, Mountain
Home AFB and Fairchild AFB. The Air Force will continue to improve the investment in our people to avoid unacceptable risk to combat capability and to people
and family programs. Quality of Life projects are a priority at these bases and include quality housing, fitness centers and child care centers.
[End of questions submitted for the record by Congressman

Dicks.]
[Questions for the record submitted by Congressman Bishop:]
SUICIDE PREVENTION
Question. Last week it was reported that suicides among soldiers in 2008 rose for
the fourth year in a row, reaching the highest level in nearly three decades. At least
128 soldiers killed themselves last year, and the Army suicide rate surpassed that
for civilians for the first time since the Vietnam War. This suicide count, which includes soldiers in the Army Reserve and the National Guard, is expected to grow.
Fifteen deaths are still being investigated, and the vast majority of them are expected to be ruled suicides according to Army officials. Gen. Peter W. Chiarelli, the
vice chief of staff of the Army, who is leading suicide-prevention efforts has stated,
We [the Army] need to move quickly to do everything we can to reverse the very
disturbing number of suicides we have in the U.S. Army. What is the Army doing
to address the problem?
Answer. Since my testimony in February 2009, the Army has taken major steps
to address the tragedy of suicides within our ranks.
From February 15 to March 15, 2009, the Army conducted a service-wide Suicide
Prevention Stand Down and Chain Teaching, a first according to the Center for
Military History. During the stand down, the Army trained every Soldier on suicide
risk identification and intervention, and addressed the stigma associated with behavioral health counseling, using an interactive video titled Beyond the Front.
Feedback from Soldiers about the video was so positive that new, similar videos are
being created for Families and DA civilians; and the Army National Guard and Reserve plans to tailor these videos for their Soldiers as well. Also during the standdown, the Army distributed thousands of ACE (Ask, Care, Escort) wallet cards to
Soldiers; these cards provide a quick reference on how to identify and care for a potentially suicidal buddy. Follow-up to the stand down included chain teaching on
suicide prevention tactics. Chain teaching remains underway through July 1.
In March and April 2009, General Chiarelli conducted an eight-day, six-installation fact finding visit. He also organized a multidisciplinary team of experts from
across the Army Staff, which conducted a review of those findings and Army programs and policies relating to suicide, behavioral health, and suicide risk factors.
The team developed over 200 separate actions to be taken to improve existing systems and programs. Those actions form the nucleus of the Armys strategic approach
to the suicide issue: the Army Campaign Plan for Health Promotion, Risk Reduction, and Suicide Prevention.
The Army issued the Plan in mid-April. A senior level Council, chartered by General Chiarelli, meets twice a month to review and refine the action plans for his approval and implementation. Some of those plans include efforts to combat the problem of stigma; expand the number of Army Chaplains and behavioral health providers to improve access to care; and ensure funding for popular resources such as
the Strong Bonds Program, a family-relationship initiative of the Chaplain Corps
which fosters relationship-building skills. The Council review process will continue
for several months while the Council develops recommendations for strategic, enduring changes Army-wide. Another part of the Plan directed Army leaders and medical
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00118
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
119
treatment facilities to immediately optimize existing policies and resources to prevent suicides and set the stage for the longer-term strategic changes.
Another long-term effort by the Army in this area is the October 2008 agreement
with the National Institute of Mental Health for a five-year longitudinal study of
suicides, designed to assess factors contributing to suicide and identify training to
reduce suicides and other mitigation techniques.
General Chiarelli holds frequent, periodic briefings with commanders and a Senior Review Group on Army suicides. This ensures top Army leadership maintains
appropriate focus on this important issue. It also allows for information sharing and
learning from individual cases.
The bottom line, however, is that Soldiers have always taken care of Soldiers. The
Army team is an unbroken chain from the Chief of Staff to the newest recruit, and
the team has been mobilized to help one another. I firmly believe that ultimately,
it is our Soldiers who will turn this problem around.
ARMY MEDICAL ACTION PLAN
Question. Last April GEN Casey stated that at the core of the Armys strategy
to maintain an all-volunteer force lie in two programs that the Army leadership had
developed-one of those was the Army Medical Action Plan (AMAP) which deals
with the Armys initiative to develop an integrated and comprehensive continuum
of care for Warriors and their families at home and in battle. How has that program initiative fared and how has the money to that program been used to deal
with the suicide crisis in the Army?
Answer. The transformation of US Army Warrior Care began in April 2007 with
the development of the Army Medical Action Plan (AMAP), which outlined an organizational and cultural shift in how the Army cares for its wounded, ill, and injured
Soldiers. Over the past two years, the AMAP has evolved and changed its name to
the Army Warrior Care and Transition Program (WCTP), fully integrating Warrior
Care into institutional processes across the Army, and achieving many of the Armys
goals for enhancing care and improving the transition of wounded warriors back to
duty or into civilian life as productive veterans. The Army has made tremendous
progress in transforming how it provides health care to its Soldiers, with improvements impacting every aspect of the continuum of care. During this period, overall
Soldier and family satisfaction with the care and support they receive as a result
of the efforts of the WCTP has increased significantly. Two years ago, only 60% of
those in the legacy medical hold units were satisfied with the care they receive.
Today, 80% of Soldiers and Families who now receive the focused and comprehensive care and support provided by Warrior Transition Units indicate satisfaction
with the care they receive.
Funding for the Armys suicide prevention efforts is separate and distinct from
funding for the WCTP. The money directed to the AMAP/WCTP is used to provide
the necessary care, support, and infrastructure that wounded, ill, and injured Soldiers require. Part of this support, however, includes staffing the Warrior Transition
Units with one behavioral health provider for every 100 Warriors in Transition. In
addition, Warrior Transition Units conducted a safety stand-down starting on January 30, 2009, to review unit compliance with the 18 preventive measures that were
implemented in February 2008 after an Army assessment team completed a comprehensive review of suicides and accidental deaths in Warrior Transition Units. Finally, the WCTP complies with guidance promulgated by the Army Suicide Prevention Task Force and the Army Suicide Prevention Council.
COMPREHENSIVE SOLDIER FITNESS

Question. For the fourth consecutive year, the Army has seen an increase in suicide rates. There were 128 suicides last year in the active Army, with another 15
cases still pending a determination, according to data compiled by Army human resources officials. This was up from 115 suicides in 2007. The Army stated that over
the past two years, it has increased its efforts and has enhanced resources and initiatives aimed at identifying and mitigating the causes of suicidal behavior; however, the suicide rates continue to increase. How does the Army plan to change its
past strategy in order to stop this increasing trend? What is the Comprehensive Soldier Fitness program and how will it enhance Soldiers resiliency and total fitness
in this era of persistent conflict? What other programs are being offered to Soldiers
to deal with the difficult situations which are the results of repeated deployments?
Answer. The Army is implementing the Army Campaign Plan for Health Promotion, Risk Reduction, and Suicide Prevention. The Plan represents a strategic
change because it is the first strategy to employ a comprehensive approach to suicide prevention across the spectrum of Army policy, doctrine, organization, training,
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00119
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
120
materiel, leadership, personnel, and resources. Due to the breadth and nature of
that strategy, the Plan widens the aperture of the Armys approach from a narrow
focus on suicide to the broader context of risk reduction and health promotion. The
Plan is also unique because it stems from efforts led from the top down by the
Armys Vice Chief of Staff, as compared to earlier initiatives welling from lowerlevel Army Staff elements up to senior Army leadership. In short, General Chiarelli
is leading this critical issue; it is too urgent to wait for resolution through normal
Army channels.
Comprehensive Soldier Fitness (CSF) is an Army strategy to provide each Soldier
the opportunity to maximize his or her potential in life: socially, emotionally, spiritually, physically, and through a strong Family. The program assesses the holistic
fitness of all Soldiers, encompassing all dimensions. It begins when you join the
Army, and like physical fitness, includes re-assessment at routine intervals. The results of the assessment give each Soldier an individualized program of education
and training as needed. CSF provides the training and tools to enhance Soldier resiliencethe ability to grow and thrive in the face of challenges and bounce back
from adversity.
The Program will enhance Soldiers resiliency and total fitness by systematically
training each Soldier in positive life-coping skills and the ability to identify incipient
behavioral health concerns before they seriously affect the Soldiers well-being and
readiness. The Program includes training to encourage Soldiers to seek behavioral
health and other counseling before problems arise. The training will also indirectly
discourage stigma associated with seeking counseling, because all Soldiers will be
accustomed to discussing psychological health issues.
The Programs resiliency training will be initiated in training schools and will continue throughout each Soldiers career. For example, the Program includes
BATTLEMIND training for major junctures in a Soldiers career from Basic Training to the Pre-Command Course. There are also pre- and post-deployment modules
for both Soldiers and spouses. To date, BATTLEMIND is the only resilience training
program demonstrated to reduce symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress upon redeployment. People who participate in BATTLEMIND also feel less reluctance to seek
mental health counseling than people who have not had the training.
Other programs offered to Soldiers to deal with the difficult situations arising
from repeated deployments include the Strong Bonds Program, a family-relationship initiative of the Chaplain Corps, which fosters relationship-building skills; the
Military and Family Life Consultant Program, which embeds counselors into units
during post-deployment, and enables counselors to meet informally with Soldiers in
non-clinical settings to avoid stigma; and the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program,
which provides information, services, referral, and proactive outreach programs to
Soldiers of the Army Reserve and their Families through all phases of the deployment cycle.
FAMILY PROGRAMS
Question. Can you discuss the state of Army and Marine Corps families, especially
families that have had a service member go on more than one deployment? The recent suicide levels, divorces, and issues with reintegration point to a stressed force?
What steps are the services taking to counter-balance these trends?
Answer. Army Families remain resilient in the midst of extraordinary sacrifices
as their loved ones advance the cause of freedom around the world. They have set
aside careers, interrupted their education, and when living far from a military base,
struggled to locate child care equal to the price and quality available at military installations. Quality of life programs continue to contribute to Soldiers and Families
sense of belonging to a caring military community, which reinforces their desire to
choose the Army as a way of life, despite the serious strains they experience as a
result.
The Department of Defense conducted two Status of Forces surveys of active duty
service members in 2007 to assess the impact of frequent deployments on troops and
their Families. Their top concerns were spouse employment and education, household repairs, yard work, personal vehicle maintenance, maintaining emotional connections with spouse or Family, safety of Family in the community, anxiety or depression, marital problems, and problem behavior at school. Although Soldiers cited
marital problems as a concern, a recent RAND study found little support for the
hypothesis that deployments caused an increase in divorce rates across the Services.
Under the Army Family Covenant, the Army began to implement aggressive improvements to a broad range of family-oriented, quality of life programs and services
to standardize and fund existing Family programs and services; increase accessibility to health care; improve Soldier and Family housing; ensure excellence in
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00120
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
121
schools, youth and child services; and expand education and employment opportunities for Family members.
Since the Covenants inception, the Army has made significant progress and improvements in quality of life programs across a range of Family programs. Examples
include implementation of the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program to minimize
stresses of military service, particularly the stress of deployment and family separation; deployment of 200,000 training products to strengthen resilience in military
children; increased staff for the New Parent Support Home Visit Program; additional funding for respite care; implementation of Soldier and Family Assistance
Centers; and employment of thousands of spouses.
The Army has also implemented plans and programs to address specific Soldier
and Family issues. The Army Campaign Plan for Health Promotion, Risk Reduction,
and Suicide Prevention is a comprehensive approach to suicide prevention across
the spectrum of Army policy, doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership,
personnel, and resources. Additionally, the Chaplain Corps expanded the Strong
Bonds program, a research-based, Chaplain-led training initiative helping Soldiers
and spouses strengthen their marital and family relationships. Strong Bonds began
in 1999 with four events and 90 couples and has grown into a program with commanders planning 3,200 training events this year in order to provide nearly 130,000
participants with the knowledge and skills to sustain resilient relationships during
multiple deployments.
While we are moving in the right direction with the Army Family Covenant, we
still have much work to do. The Army remains determined to provide a strong, supportive environment where Soldiers and their Families can thrive.
Question. Can you discuss the state of Army and Marine Corps families, especially
families that have had a service member go on more than one deployment? The recent suicide levels, divorces, and issues with reintegration point to a stressed force?
What steps are the services taking to counter-balance these trends?
Answer. Stress on the Force. There is no question that continued OPTEMPO puts
stress on the force, not just for deploying Marines, but for those who remain behind
and face increased workloads. There were year on year increases for 2008 in suicide
incidents and divorces.
Marine Corps commanders are fully engaged in promoting the psychological
health of our Marines, Sailors, and family members. To enable leaders, individuals,
and families to prepare for and manage the stress of operational deployment cycles,
the Combat and Operational Stress Control (COSC) Program provides a set of policies, training, and tools to prepare for the upcoming deployment, recognize stress
reactions early and manage them more effectively within operational units. Marine
leaders are assisted by mental health professionals, chaplains, and COSC regional
training coordinators in the operating forces, to detect stress problems in
warfighters as early as possible, and are provided the resources to effectively manage these stress problems in theater or at home base. Resources are also provided
for the family members left behind to provide support, communications, and information flow.
This training is being incorporated in formal Professional Military Education
schools for both officer and enlisted Marines, such as the Expeditionary Warfare
School and the Staff Non-commissioned Officer Advanced Course. We have staffed
full-time COSC training coordinators at each of our Marine Expeditionary Force
headquarters.
To assist with prevention, rapid identification, and effective treatment of combat
operational stress, we are expanding the Operational Stress Control and Readiness
(OSCAR) Programour program of embedding mental health professionals in operational unitsto directly support all active and reserve ground combat elements.
This year, we begin placing mental health professionals organic to the active Divisions and Marine Forces Reserve. By FY11, full OSCAR teams will be fielded to the
Infantry Regiment level. OSCAR will eventually be expanded to all deployed elements of the Marine Air-Ground Task Force.
Our Marine Operational Stress Training (MOST) program was developed with
Tri-Marine Expeditionary Force (TRI MEF) Commanders based on the USMC COSC
stress continuum model, now adopted by OSD. Our program supports the full deployment cycle by focusing on Leaders, Marines and families from pre-deployment
through post-deployment, providing information on whats to come, what to look for,
and what to do when stress reactions appear. COSC concepts have also been incorporated in family readiness training.
Stress on the Families: To mitigate the stress on military families and children
facing the multiple challenges of having a loved one at war, we are partnering with
the US Navy Bureau of Medicine and Surgery (BUMED) and UCLAs Center for
Community Health and the National Center for Child Traumatic Stress to sponsor
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00121
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
122
a program called Project FOCUS, Families OverComing Under Stress, at our
major deploying bases. The family-oriented program is designed to work with Marines, spouses and children to improve family communications post deployment by
through specialized resiliency training.
FOCUS is founded on leading evidenced-based family intervention models for atrisk families which have demonstrated positive emotional, behavioral and adaptive
outcomes for families over time. Working with the existing teams of dedicated military family services personnel, FOCUS staff will assist families to better understand
how combat operational stress affects them and their service family member, how
to manage it, and how to strengthen themselves and their children in readiness for
tomorrow. This program is currently being provided at Camp Pendleton,
Twentynine Palms, Camp Lejeune, MCB Hawaii, and MCB Okinawa. Next year it
will be expanded to include MCB Quantico, the Wounded Warrior Regiment and
Battalions, and Marine Corps Reserve units in the Los Angeles Basin.
Suicides and Suicide Prevention Programs. Suicide prevention is a high priority.
The loss of any Marine through suicide is a tragedy for the Marines family and
unit, and can never be accepted. With 42 suicides recorded in 2008, the Marine
Corps experienced its highest suicide rate since the start of Operation Enduring
Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. The number of confirmed Marine suicides
has increased from 25 in 2006 to 33 in CY2007 to 42 in CY2008. Our suicide rate
in 2008 of 19.5 suicides per 100,000 approaches the national civilian suicide rate
for a demographic similar to the Marine Corps. Through April, there were 12 suspected or confirmed suicides in CY09.
We are actively engaged in prevention and early identification of problems that
may increase the risk of suicide. Marine Corps leadership is taking proactive action,
focusing on the important role of leaders of all ranks in addressing this issue. Understanding that there is no single suicide prevention solution, we are committed
to having an effect on the individual Marine through leadership and command involvement at all levels and we recognize that we must reduce the stigma sometimes
associated with seeking help.
Suicides are monitored monthly and annually for deployment related trends such
as the number of deployments and dwell time. Although it is not unreasonable to
assume that one or more deployments may cause an increase in suicides, to date
we have been unable to establish a direct relationship between the two. The Marine
Corps Combat Development Command Studies and Analysis Division is conducting
further analysis of the data on dwell time and deployments. Additionally, we will
participate in the Army longitudinal study being conducted by the National Institute for Mental Health.
Regardless of duty station, deployment, or duty status, the primary stressors associated with Marine suicides are: problems in romantic relationships, physical health,
work-related issues such as poor performance and job dissatisfaction, and pending
legal or administrative action. This is consistent with other Services and civilian
findings. Multiple stressors are almost always present in a suicide.
The Commandant and Marine Corps leadership are taking proactive action to address this issue. I selected a senior enlisted Marine leader to add unique insight to
our efforts in suicide prevention, and the Assistant Commandant (ACMC), through
the Executive Safety Board, is directing a series of initiatives which are currently
in accelerated development:
Training: An ACMC-directed all hands training on suicide prevention was conducted during the month of March. Since 90% of suicides have tended to occur in
the ranks of El-E5 Marines, a half-day, high impact, relevant workshop has been
designed to reach the NCO/FMF Sailor community and facilitate their work with
junior enlisted Marines. This training is expected to be ready by this summer.
Leadership Suicide Prevention Video Messages: All 06 and higher commanding
officers were directed to produce videos focusing on leadership and suicide prevention to set the tone for stigma reduction and an imperative of prevention.
Integration of Suicide Prevention and the Marine Corps Martial Arts Program
(MCMAP): A prevention message was incorporated in the MCMAP program in a
manner appropriate and engaging to reach all Marines.
Relationship Distress Hotline: Relationship problems, both romantic and marital, remain the number one associated stressor related to suicidal behavior. Suicide
is complex and while this is not the only problem, it is the most common. A hotline
by phone, email and live internet chat that is marketed specifically to assist with
relationship distress and questions may reduce risk of suicide related behaviors that
result from this type of stress. In the interim, we have partnered with Military
OneSource to strategically market their relationship building resources to Marines
and family members.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00122
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
123
The Marine Corps will continue to aggressively pursue suicide prevention initiatives; reevaluate existing programs designed to reduce the stressors most correlated
with suicidal behavior; develop and distribute new prevention programs; and refresh
and expand training materials.
Reintegration Programs. The Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program is a national
combat veteran reintegration program that assists National Guard and Reserve
members and their families throughout the entire deployment cycle: Pre-Deployment; Deployment; Demobilization; and Post-Deployment. The program provides
servicemembers and their families with information, services, referral, and proactive
outreach opportunities which help them prepare for mobilization, sustain them during mobilization, and reintegrate servicemembers with their families, communities,
and employers upon post-deployment. To provide servicemembers and their families
with a wide range of options as close to home as possible and to leverage scarce
community and state resources, Defense Department officials are working to unify
efforts among the services, the reserve components, other federal agencies and nongovernmental organizations.
The Department Of Veterans Affairs also provides services to returning Veterans
(including those who are active duty), surviving spouses and dependents, disabled,
minority, and women Veterans. The VA offers health care, mental health care, information about benefits and eligibility, job and business opportunities, and information about education, home loans, and more. The VA offers free care for combat-related conditions for 2 years after returning from deployment. Mental health services, including care for PTSD and substance use treatment, are available and include individual and group treatment options. Outpatient and residential programs
are available, depending on location. Treatment providers include psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, and addictions counselors.
RCI HOUSING
Question. How can use of privatized housing improve the overall quality of life
and better family housing in the military?
Answer. Use of privatized military Family housing has improved the quality of
life for Soldiers and their Families by providing world-class housing communities
and amenities faster and at a higher standard than traditional methods. Since the
start of Army housing privatization, we have built over 19,000 homes, renovated another 14,000 homes, and built community centers, playgrounds, walking trails, and
other amenities. Further, privatization is designed to ensure sustainment of the condition of the housing at those higher standards over the 50-year terms of the Armys
privatization projects.
Answer. In 2001 the Marine Corps had close to 17,700 inadequate housing units,
with the majority of those units requiring significant revitalization or replacement.
Based on Public Private Venture (PPV) contracts now in place, the Marine Corps
will have successfully met the Department of Defense goal to have contracts in place
by 2007 to eliminate inadequate housing and will complete the build-out by 2014.
With ninety-six percent of our world-wide inventories privatized to date, we continue to see success from our PPV projects across Marine Corps installations. PPVs
have not only improved the homes in which our families live by being built to modern standards, they are also providing community support facilities such as community centers, playgrounds and green spaces that help create neighborhoods and a
sense of community.
Congressional support of the PPV program allows us to continue to address the
deficit requirement for additional family housing resulting from Grow the Force increases by providing seed money for new construction projects. The PPV program
allows the Marine Corps to leverage private sector funds and buy more investment
in family housing. The private sector contributes development capital for PPV
projects in addition to the government funding. The ratio achieved to date is over
5 to 1. In turn, as homes are privatized, the requirement for government Operations
and maintenance is lessened.
With nearly our entire domestic inventory privatized, we will continue to build on
our prior successes and use PPVs to help us address most of our remaining housing
deficit requirement.
Overseas we are engaged with the Government of Japan in developing a Special
Purpose Entity (SPE) for Family Housing on Guam. Similar in concept to our domestic PPVs, this SPE will supply the housing for Marines and their families relocating to Guam from Okinawa, Japan.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00123
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
124
Answer. Privatized housing has brought about a dramatic improvement in housing conditions for service members and their families and has increased their quality of life, readiness, morale, and retention. Through privatization, the Navy is able
to leverage a tremendous amount of capital (about 18:1) for a relatively small investment to reduce housing deficits, upgrade homes, and perform maintenance faster than traditionally using military Family Housing appropriations. Privatized housing is designed to market-based standards, which requires developers to include
community centers and events, swimming pools, and family-oriented amenities to
foster a sense of community and attract residents.
Answer. Privatized housing is providing more new homes faster than ever before.
Project Owners are bringing the best of private sector housing and community
standards onto our bases. New homes with energy efficient appliances, programmable thermostats, two-car garages, spacious kitchens, and carpeting are creating
on-base neighborhoods where Air Force families choose to live. Not only are we getting over 200 new homes a month, but we now have a funding mechanism in place
to maintain, renovate, and replace these homes over the 50year life of the project.
Today our Air Force members and their families are choosing privatized housing,
not because they have to, but because they want to.
HOUSING
FOR
REDEPLOYING SOLDIERS
Question. President Obama has indicated that he wants to withdraw from Iraq
in the next 16 months. Some senior commanders have expressed concerns regarding
an overly aggressive withdrawal from Iraq. What are your views and what impact
would that withdrawal and redeployment have on your ability to house returning
service members? Would the reduced timeline significantly impact your ability to
absorb the increase in troops onto your bases? Would there be any housing or infrastructure issues absorbing these service members?
Answer. The acceleration of the drawdown plan for Operation Iraqi Freedom is
expected to place stress on the Armys current facility support plan. The return of
forces, coupled with unit modularization, requires the Army to address and improve
unit operations and maintenance facilities, as well as barracks, Family housing, and
quality of life requirements to support the All-Volunteer Force. Upon release of a
drawdown plan, the Army will complete its barracks facility support analysis to gain
greater fidelity on the impact on our installations and their ability to adequately
house Soldiers and their Families.
servicemen? Would the reduced timeline significantly impact your ability to absorb
the increase in troops onto your bases? Would there be any housing or infrastructure issues absorbing these servicemen?
Answer. The Marine Corps is conducting detailed planning to develop potential
force sourcing solutions which incorporate the potential drawdown of Marines from
Iraq, as well as the potential increase of Marines deploying to Afghanistan. Were
every Marine to return immediately, we would meet the increased bachelor housing
demand with a combination of relaxed occupancy standards, interim relocatable
billeting structures, and a greater reliance on the local economy through approval
of Basic Allowance for Housing for noncommissioned officers and junior enlisted Marines.
The reduced timeline should not significantly impact our ability to absorb the increase in troops to our bases. The Marine Corps had funding in place by FY 2005
to eliminate permanent party gang head barracks.
Our robust FY 2009 Military Construction program will provide over 12,000 new
spaces on our installations. Many of these projects will be completed in 2010 and
2011. This new construction will mitigate many of the expected bachelor housing
issues. However, temporary use of some gang head barracks has been and will be
required while renovations take place in permanent facilities. We are using temporary facilities to support our immediate growth requirements with funding provided by Congress in the 2007 GWOT Supplemental as well as other measures (such
as slowing down demolition of older facilities). Current deployment cycles are helping to alleviate space crunches at the installations.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00124
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
125
Answer. The Navy would not have any difficulty absorbing returning Sailors into
housing. Sailors returning from deployments in Iraq are accommodated much like
those returning from a ships deployment.
Answer. There will be no impact to Air Force housing or infrastructure. Air Force
members deployed to Iraq are on temporary duty from their permanent duty station. Housing requirements at each Air Force installation are determined based on
the full complement of Service members permanently assigned to an installation
this includes consideration of the suitable housing available in local communities.
Military families continue to reside in family housing at the permanent duty station. For unaccompanied Airmen deployed to Iraq, dormitory rooms are kept available at their permanent duty station.
Question. President Obama also stated that he would like to see a surge in Afghanistan. Given recent lessons learned in Iraq and Afghanistan, is it your view
that the U.S. can effectively win the fight in Afghanistan alone or will we need a
like or similar commitment from our major alliesGermany, France and Great Britainwho are currently reducing the number of their troops? Will this create any
further strain on our soldiers and what are the military plans to address this?
Army:
Answer. I defer judgment on these important questions to President Obama and
Secretary Gates, who continue to work on how best to address the challenges you
raise.
Marine Corps:
Answer. The Marine Corps defers judgment on these important questions to President Obama and Secretary Gates, who continue to work on how best to address the
challenges raised by Congress.
Navy:
Answer. Respectfully defer judgment on these important questions to the President and Secretary of Defense, who continue to work on how best to address these
specific challenges.
Air Force:
Answer: I defer judgment on these important questions to President Obama and
Secretary Gates, who continue to work on how best to address the challenges you
raise.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00125
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
126
SINGLE SOLDIER HOUSING ENTITLEMENTS
Question. Is the Army transferring the cost of not having sufficient barracks space
to soldiers by giving them a certificate of non-availability to move off post but not
providing them with a dislocation allowance? Why are soldiers forced to break their
lease, pack up their home goods and shut off their utilities upon deployment?
Answer. The Army is not transferring the cost of having insufficient barracks
space to Soldiers by giving them certificates of non-availability to move off-post. The
Army programs housing for single Soldiers in the ranks of Private through Sergeant
in the United States and Private through Staff Sergeant overseas. For those ranks,
a certificate of non-availability is provided to Soldiers to authorize payment of Basic
Allowance for Housing at the without dependents rate when barracks space is not
available. If a Soldier is authorized to reside in barracks, and that Soldier is denied
accommodation due to lack of adequate space in the barracks, that Soldier is paid
a dislocation allowance. The Army is not aware of any such instance where a Soldier
has been denied a validated dislocation allowance.
Garrison commanders develop local housing policies based on individual garrison
needs that may require Soldiers living off-post to break a lease when being deployed. If a Soldier is required by the commander to break his or her lease prior
to deployment, the Soldier returns to the barracks, and household goods are stored
at government expense.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00126
Fmt 6633
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
THURSDAY, MARCH 12, 2009.

REVIEW OF VA CHALLENGES
WITNESSES
JOHN D. DAIGH, JR., MD, CPA, ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR
HEALTH CARE INSPECTIONS
RANDALL B. WILLIAMSON, DIRECTOR, HEALTH CARE, GAO
VALERIE C. MELVIN, DIRECTOR, INFORMATION MANAGEMENT AND
HUMAN CAPITAL ISSUES, GAO
BELINDA J. FINN, ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR AUDITING
MAUREEN T. REGAN, COUNSELOR TO THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
STATEMENT
OF THE
CHAIRMAN
Mr. EDWARDS [presiding]. Good morning. I would like to begin

the hearing and welcome our witnesses and everyone here in the
room.
When I had the privilege of becoming chairman of this subcommittee 2 years ago, I said I would have three goals in regard
to veterans: one, that we would increase funding so that we provide
the resources needed to provide the care and services that our veterans have earned by their service to the country; secondly, that
we exercise more oversight of the V.A. and how those dollars are
being spent; and, thirdly, that we work together with the V.A. and
VSOs and others to find innovative new approaches to providing
better care and get a bigger bang for the buck for our taxpayers.
Todays hearing is going to focus on the second of those three
goals, our responsibility as a subcommittee to exercise oversight of
the V.A. I am proud of the fact that, by working together on a bipartisan basis, we have increased V.A. funding in the last 14
months by $17.7 billion, an unprecedented increase.
But with that unprecedented increase comes responsibility to
taxpayers and our veterans to see that those dollars are being
spent wisely. So the specific purpose of this mornings hearing is
with the help of our witnessesto evaluate some of the challenges
being faced by the V.A.
We all know we could have an entire week of hearings on all the
good things going on in the V.A., but today we are going to make
improvements. We have got to focus honestly and directly on challenges. And so that is what we are here to try to accomplish.
I want to welcome both the Office of Inspector General for the
Department of Veterans Affairs and the United States Government
Accountability Office here to be part of this panel.
The hearing this morning will be conducted in two panels. The
first will focus on V.A. health care, and the second will review information technology and other challenges of the V.A.
Let me just say very briefly that, in recent years, Congress has
provided unprecedented increases, as I mentioned, to the Depart(127)
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00127
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
128
ment of the V.A., $17.7 billion since the beginning of the 110th
Congress.
The Office of Inspector General and the GAO play a vital role in
ensuring that these appropriated funds for the department are
spent efficiently and for the highest priorities. Congress relies on
both of these highly professional, nonpartisan offices to alert us to
the problems with department operations and to recommend actions that can be taken to resolve these problems.
I will be introducing our two witnesses in just a moment. But,
again, welcome to our subcommittee.
And with that, I would like to recognize our ranking member,
Mr. Wamp, for any opening comments he would care to make.
STATEMENT
OF THE
Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, the goals you stated are laudable. I
think we are on the path to achieving those goals, and we have a
great bipartisan team that is an absolute privilege and honor.
I just want to say briefly before we hear the testimony and ask
a lot of questions that need to be asked as we begin this budget
cycle year and the appropriations that follow, the I.G. and the GAO
are very helpful. And those statutes that created inspector generals
and the fact that the GAO is a watchdog, birddog, the eyes and
ears for the Congress, and it is very helpful.
I appreciate the people that you represent when you come today
that are doing the research and turning the rocks over to find out
what is under them so that we can actually do our job more effectively, because this is the one piece of the congressional responsibility that neither party has a lot to brag about. The oversight of
the Congress, in my opinion, in the modern era is not adequate.
It is more complicated than it has ever been, so it is harder to
oversee, but at the same time I think we are too inclined as a body
to go do things and then just let it happen, as opposed to going
back and deciding, are we still on the right road? Or do we even
have any business doing this?
We know we have business doing what you are here today to talk
about. But the question is, is it done as efficiently as it possibly can
be? And that is where you can really help us, because there are a
lot of ways that we can tweak, improve, and rewrite language in
our bill, which has to go forward.
That is the difference between this committee and a lot of other
committees. You might give testimony before the Veterans Affairs
Committee and the legislation you are talking about never becomes
law. Our bill will become law every year.
Therefore, we really appreciate what you are bringing to it. I just
want to re-state the value that it can bring to these professionals
that will actually put our bill together soon, even though we dont
have much idea of what the Presidents budget request says yet.
That prescription is not there, but we have to go ahead and get
started. I think I speak for both of us there.
And with that, I look forward to the testimony and I yield back.
Mr. EDWARDS. I just want to thank you very much for your very
important, insightful, and appropriate comments.
Let me first introduce Dr. John Daigh. Dr. Daigh was appointed
assistant inspector general for health care, health care inspections
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00128
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
129
in January of 2004 for the Department of Veterans Affairs. Colonel
Daigh retired in 2001 after 27 years of active-duty service in the
United States Army.
And, Colonel, I thank you for that service, as well.
Dr. Daigh earned his medical degree from the University of
Texas Southwestern Medical School and wouldnt want to suggest
that is why he is here today, but it is good to have a fellow Texan
here today. And he actually graduated prior to that from the
United States Military Academy, class of 1974.
Let me also add an extra note. I am proud that this subcommittee, against the wishes of most administrations, Democrat
and Republican alike, are not always the first to volunteer a request for additional spending for inspector generals.
We felt that this was awfully important, given the unprecedented
new money that we have put into the V.A., that the V.A. inspector
generals office be adequately funded. So we actually plussed that
up on a bipartisan basis. And I think that will help us in our oversight efforts.
Mr. Randy Williamson is currently director in GAOs health care
team and is a staff member of GAOs Seattle field office. He has
been with GAO for over 40 years. He has managed audits covering
a wide range of federal activities, most recently health care, transportation, and homeland security issues.
He currently manages GAOs portfolio of work on health care
issues for veterans and members of the Armed Services, two very
important responsibilities, Mr. Williamson, and we thank you for
that. He attended the University of Washington, where he received
a bachelors degree in accounting.
To both of you, we will put your entire written testimony in the
record, but we would like to ask you to take 5 minutes each to
make your opening comments. I know there will be a lot of dialogue and questions and answers and discussion after your statement.
Dr. Daigh.
STATEMENT
OF
JOHN DAIGH
Dr. DAIGH. Yes, sir.

Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, I would like to
thank you for the opportunity to discuss with you the critical challenges facing the department. We appreciate your support of our efforts in the inspector generals office.
First, I would like to state that I believe that V.A. provides highquality health care to veterans. I do, however, believe, as I stated
before the House Veterans Affairs Committee during the Marion,
Illinois, hearings, that the internal controls do need to be improved
to assure that there is a uniform high-quality benefit. Secondly, although our published work in this particular area of computerized
medical records is limited, I am concerned that the rate of innovation of the V.A.s computer medical records has not kept pace.
And if that rate of innovation doesnt improve, I think it will be
progressively more difficult for V.A. to address the challenges of
the future.
Thirdly, I believe that it is beneficial to review the current management structure of VHA, which emphasizes that all health care
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00129
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
130
is local. This has resulted in the creation of business rules that
vary too widely across the V.A. system.
I would offer as an example of that policy, there are many copies
of the medical record. It is not one set of code; it is 50 or 80 different sets of code. So to change the medical record or to innovate
is really quite a difficult issue.
The VISNs are all organized quite differently. Hospitals are organized quite differently so that, to make a change or to manage this
enterprise there is a burden that is unnecessary.
Lastly, I would urge support for a project that is known as the
DOD/V.A. Reporting and Analysis Data Mart. This data mart
works to combine data from both DOD and V.A. It is an outgrowth
of the efforts on transition to care, which would create a universe
of veteran data that when fully implemented, I think, would make
it easier to derive innovative performance metrics, improve budgeting and forecast modeling, and analysis of V.A. and DOD business processes.
And with that, I am pleased to be here today and glad to answer
your questions.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Dr. Daigh.
Mr. Williamson.
STATEMENT
OF
RANDALL B. WILLIAMSON
Mr. WILLIAMSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the

subcommittee. I am pleased to be here today to discuss V.A. healthrelated budget issues as you consider V.A.s 2010 budget request.
The V.A. faces major budget challenges as it prepares to meet
the needs of both an aging veteran population, as well as a growing
number of veterans who have served their country in Afghanistan
and Iraq.
V.A. faces a major budget challenge in its budget formulation
process to accurately estimate the cost of providing quality services
to our nations veterans. This will not be easy. By its very nature,
budget formulation is challenging because it is based in part on imperfect data and assumptions, which is further complicated in the
changing environment the V.A. faces.
Budget execution will also be challenging. If the presidents proposed budget increases are enacted, V.A. faces a prospect of hiring
thousands of new health care providers and support staff, serving
new veteran populations, and expanding current services and developing new programs to better serve our veterans.
As V.A. moves forward to address these challenges this year and
beyond, it must do so thoughtfully and with diligence. Our work
over the past 3 years has shown weaknesses in V.A.s budget formulation and execution processes, and I would briefly like to discuss a few of these areas. Many of these issues involve V.A.s longterm care budget.
Regarding budget formulation, we reported in 2006 that V.A.
made unrealistic assumptions about the impact of some of its policies, made inaccurate calculations, and did not obtain sufficient
data for useful budget projections.
These factors were largely responsible for V.A. having to request
supplemental funding totaling $975 million in fiscal year 2005 and
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00130
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
131
amending its fiscal year 2006 budget to increase its request by almost $2 billion.
Early this year, we again reported on budget formulation issues
for the long-term care portion of V.A.s budget. Specifically, in its
2009 budget request, V.A. may have made unrealistic assumptions
about the cost of both its nursing home and non-institutional longterm care.
For example, V.A. projected that the cost of a day of non-institutional long-term care would not increase at all, when available data
showed that it was increasing at a rate of 19 percent. Assumptions
like these call into question the credibility of V.A.s budget information.
Budget execution has been a problem in certain respects, as well,
and this area poses a major challenge for V.A., as it faces a potential budget increase of about 10 percent in fiscal year 2010.
For example, our work in 2006 on spending for V.A.s mental
health initiatives shows that V.A. allocated $300 million in fiscal
years 2005 and 2006 for new mental health initiatives, but the
agency was not able to spend all of this in those years due to
delays in both hiring staff and locating space.
Similarly, in our recent report on long-term care, we found that
V.A. assumed in its 2009 budget request that it would increase its
non-institutional long-term care by 38 percent over the previous
year, which means that V.A. would have to hire and train significant numbers of staff in a one-year period. V.A. did not explain
how it planned to achieve this increase.
Tracking the use of funds for new initiatives has also been an
issue. We reported in 2006 that the V.A. did not have adequate
methods for tracking spending on its mental health initiatives and
could not determine whether monies allocated were actually spent
on those initiatives.
This ability to track funds, especially for new initiatives and priorities, is critical for effective and cost-efficient budget execution
and congressional oversight.
Mr. Chairman, as I close, I would like to re-emphasize again the
importance for V.A. to adopt a thoughtful, well-planned approach
to budget formulation and execution. To its credit, V.A. has implemented a number of our recommendations to address past budget
issues, but continued vigilance is necessary.
Anticipating and sufficiently planning for changes and
proactively addressing workload and spending challenges are critical, including the need for forward-looking and careful strategic
planning.
Equally important is the need to keep the Congress well informed, including developing and reporting data that will help the
Congress oversee and hold V.A. accountable for the funds entrusted
to it to best serve our nations veterans.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement. I would be happy
to answer any questions.
As we begin questions, members, let me say, out of respect to everyones schedules, since we have two panels this morningand actually two hearings, with a second hearing this afternoonI am
going to go on and gavel us all to close when we hit 5 minutes. And
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00131
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
132
I will begin that process, asking staff to do that with me. And that
way we can get through more rounds of questions.
So if you are in the middle of an answer when I gavel, if you
could finish that sentence. You can make it a long sentence
[Laughter.]
Mr. EDWARDS. Butwe would appreciate that.
Mr. Williamson, let me begin by asking you, dealing with the
issues, the problems that you mentioned, has GAO come out with
specific recommendations about how to address those?
Mr. WILLIAMSON. Yes, we have come up with a number of recommendations as far as long-term care programs, both in terms of
strategic planning, as well as budget execution and formulation.
One of the things that we found in looking in the strategic plan
was that V.A. was not being totally transparent in looking at the
total workload that it would serve by not fully communicating this
information in its plan.
Instead V.A. reported only workload for priority one vets that
were going to receive nursing home care, but did not report the
lions portion of the workload in long-term care which is discretionary. We think it is important that the entire workload be reported. We made a recommendation to do that.
On the budget formulation side, the important thing there is to
come up with good cost assumptions. The cost assumptions for both
nursing home care and non-institutional care were far below the
current experience of the V.A. So we made recommendations that
V.A. use better estimates in that regard.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Very good. Thank you.
And we welcome additionalinformation. I am sure staff has
copies of some of your reports. We could take a look at those
Mr. WILLIAMSON. Okay.
Mr. EDWARDS. Dr. Daigh, you talked about the management approach of the V.A., that all health care is local. I would like to
apply that to mental health care. I understand each hospital has
a certain culture and individuals, and you respect that, but neverthelessand mental health care is an exampleI am worried
about, do we have the best practices, particularly since the mental
health problem is going to be the signature challenge of the Iraq
and Afghanistan wars, we deal with veterans health care needs?
Are we making any progress in terms of trying to find best practices and then apply those throughout the V.A. health care system,
and particularly on mental health treatment for our vets?
Dr. DAIGH. Let me address that in a couple of thoughts here.
First I think it is extremely difficult to treat PTSD, which would
be the most common condition servicemen have. There is, in fact,
a set of treatments that have been viewed as best practice in that
data does support that they do work.
We are saddened that these treatments have not been rolled out
more aggressively and that the wars have gone on for a number of
years and the treatment or the training of providers to provide that
set of practices has not been rolled out as aggressively as we would
like.
Having said that, I think people who are psychologists and psychiatrists and social workers and properly trained in mental health
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00132
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
133
can deal with these issues effectively. I think adding that extra
arrow into their quiver helps their ability to treat these patients.
The new plan that V.A. has to roll out a mental health services
standard set of programs across the system, I think, is a good effort. I think it sets a very high mark, in terms of having every hospitalbeing able to provide a standard package of care.
I am concerned that it is aggressive. In my view, V.A. is comprised of a series of hospitals that are low-volume providers. It is
difficult for a low-volume provider to economically provide a complex set of treatment packages where you have individuals dedicated to only one program out of many. In our reviews of the millennium health care programs, we found that larger places in big
cities could easily tap into resources andsmaller places had a
more difficult time.
So I think there does need to be the flexibility to allow local providers to pick which of these plans they think would be better suited to their population. And I think the plan does address that in
its formulation.
The other question with PTSD that we have looked at is, are veterans being treated well for PTSD? And I will say that we think
they are being treated well. We have looked at this at Temple. We
have looked at this in a variety of hospitals across the system.
And although we find problems occasionally with the delivery of
the care, I think that V.A. is trying to make the right diagnosis on
the clinical side and in VBA a different stovepipe effort has to deal
with the benefit side.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Mr. Wamp.
POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER
Mr. WAMP. Well, Mr. Chairman, I have never seen a chairman

gavel down like that. [Laughter.]
Just keep on this line of thought about PTSD, because you talked
about how hard it is to treat. How hard is it to actually bring mental health professionals in that have any experience in the battlefield or with multiple deployments, all of the things that we know
contribute mightily to these mental health problems?
It is one thing to know how to treat it, but I would think that
it would be real important to also know what the veterans in some
way, shape or form have been through.
I have been worried about the rapid increase in funding because
it doesnt always translate into efficiency, especially when you
spend money really fast like in a stimulus bill. You come back 12
months later, 18 months later and say, Man, this is ugly. You
know, we are not efficiently spending the money.
In this case with this ramp-up, I noticed in 2008 $319 million directed at PTSD. You talk about the numbers in previous years but
that is a lot of money. Do you think it is efficiently being spent?
Do you think that these mental health care professionals are adequately meeting the needs of the veterans, and do they have the
experience in the war, in serving? Where do they come from?
How do you, over the next 3 to 5 years, keep ramping up? How
would they, how should they ramp up their capabilities to meet
these needs? The suicide rate is, like I said, the canary in the mine
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00133
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
134
here. We know that that is the stress point, so mental health is a
big topic of discussion as we go through these hearings.
How do we try to help the V.A. ramp up this piece?
Yes, sir, Mr. Daigh.
Dr. DAIGH. Well, sir, I would make the point that, although I
agree that military PTSD, both whether it is sexual trauma or related to combat exposure, is by and large a military event, it is not
totally a military event.
For instance, police officers and firemen also, through the course
of their life, see horrible things repeatedly. So the civilian trained
and functioning psychologists and psychiatrists and social workers
do have experience with the phenomena of PTSD that is not the
same, but it is close.
So I think one can then, where resources are constrained and
where the population is relatively small, try to leverage people who
are not fully employed by the V.A. to try to improve access.
We have recently completed a report on access to mental health
care in a state, which we plan to publish in the next week or 2.
They leveraged community mental health care centers, I think, to
great advantage. And I think it is possible to ramp up access to
care, assuming that you have some metric to ensure that people
see providers who are qualified to provide the care and you dont
rely totally on the fixed facilities the V.A. seems to have.
So I think there are some ways one could improve access that
would be helpful.
As to the efficiency and dollar values you talk about, I am not
able to address that issue, sir.
VA MEDICAL PROCEDURE PROBLEMS
Mr. WAMP. I dont know if I can get to this whole question in this
5 minutes, but I will come back, but in Tennessee, we have had a
problem that has come out, beginning February the 13th, about
certain people in Murfreesboros being exposed to body fluids of
other people during colonoscopies.
And 6,400 people were kind of put on notice that they may have
been affected. And now this week, Johnson City, another health facility, notified some people that it might have bled over into their
facility, as well, where patients are being treated at both places.
Is this a systemic problem? Is it being addressed? Another canary in the mind. When it happens in one system, you have got to
say, What do you know? And so we can come back after 5 minutes, but let me know what you know.
Dr. DAIGH. Yes, sir, I think that repeatedly in health care there
are going to be instances where instruments are defective or procedures are defective and patients are exposed to environmental contaminants.
So we recently reported in Las Vegas where, in doing
colonoscopies that were purchased care, a huge number of people
were exposed to hepatitis and potentially to AIDS. There have been
other instances where specific instruments were noteither the instructions to clean them were not appropriate or the cleaning process done at the hospital broke down.
V.A., through their patient safety program, aggressively tries to
pre-emptively deal with these issues. When they find a problem,
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00134
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
135
they notify veterans and try to get it addressed. In the last couple
of years, the SPDthat would be the rules that pertain to how one
cleans instruments and uses the infectious disease protocols to ensure that sort of thing doesnt occurhave been rewritten and
strengthened.
So I think the problem is important. It will not go away.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Dr. Daigh.
Members, since this is our second hearing, I have incorporated
some of the suggestions made at our first hearing. So let me just
quickly reiterate what we are going to do in terms of the list of who
asks questions.
Those members that are here when we gavel the meeting into
order will be recognized based on seniority, rotating between Republicans and Democrats. After the meeting has begun, members
will be recognized based on the order in which they showed up
again, rotating between Republicans andand Democrats.
With that, I would like to recognize Mr. Salazar.
COMMUNITY-BASED OUTREACH CLINICS
Mr. SALAZAR. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Now I know the
importance of getting here 15, 20 minutes early. [Laughter.]
I do appreciate it. But as many of you know, my district is one
of the largest congressional districts in the country. It is all of the
western and southern part of Colorado. Much of the services provided to veterans is in CBOCs, some that are contract-based
CBOCs, some that are V.A.-run CBOCs.
Can you tell me
Mr. DICKS. What is a CBOC?
Mr. SALAZAR. Community-based outreach clinics. They are small
clinics that are
Mr. DICKS. Thank you.
Mr. SALAZAR. Dont havewith very basic services to veterans.
Do you know or have you done any research as to who does a better job? Is it the contract-based CBOCs or V.A.-run CBOCs?
Dr. DAIGH. We think that is a very important question. And we
brought that to the attention of this subcommittee last year, and
we have been provided money to take a look at some of those
issues.
We will begin to review CBOCs like we currently review hospitalsand we will specifically have sorted CBOCs into those that
are contract-run and those that are not contract-run. There are
about 800 CBOCs nationwide.
We have sampled them. And we will try to come back with an
answer toboth on the quality side and on the certain aspects of
the budgetary side of that with an answer to that question.
So I cannot answer it right now, but we will have reports this
year that directly address it.
Mr. SALAZAR. What percentage are contract-run versusdo you
know that?
Dr. DAIGH. If you will allow me toI think about a third or less
are contract. Most are V.A.-run. I can get you the abstract data
with numbers on that, if you would like thatget that back to you,
sir.
Mr. SALAZAR. Thank you. Appreciate that.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00135
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
136
[CLERKS NOTE.The responses are included with the questions
for the record.]
I yield back, Mr. Chairman, so somebody else can ask.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Salazar.
Mr. Crenshaw.
BUDGET ESTIMATES

Let me askyou know, Mr. Williamson, when you talked about
thethe V.A. and the budget process, it sounds like, you hit and
miss from time to time. It seems to me you have gotto have the
right kind of budget, you needfirst, you have got to have the
plan. Then you have got to have the correct estimates. And then
you have got to timely execute it.
And it sounds like they have been missing on, you know, some,
if not all of those. What, like, when you sit down and talk to them,
whether they underestimate it or overestimate, what has been the
reaction? And do you see improvement from year to year? Or do
you find that sometimes the same mistakes get made? Or are they
justis it just really difficult to do that?
I mean, how does it fit in, when you sit down and say, Here is
a better way? What is their attitude toward that? And do you find
that the correction is being made?
Mr. WILLIAMSON. The V.A. reacts positively to our recommendations. But, it seems to be a little different situation every time.
Some of the answers we get, in terms of why they underestimated or why they came up with unrealistic cost estimates, for example, the answer we get would be, well, we wanted to be conservative. Well, that wasnt a very satisfying answer to me, because,
you know, in the face of much higher estimates or experiences they
have had, so there must be, you know, some other things going on
that they are not telling us.
I think the big thing in terms of planning is, whenever you get
a fairly large infusion of money, it is very important that you have
good goals and priorities ahead of time. And that is why strategic
planning is so important, in terms of setting the priorities of the
agency, the goals of the agency, setting strategies.
And we havent seenat least in the long-term care budgetany
thoughtful consideration of that. And I think, in a larger sense, as
we harken back to our work on the mental health report in 2006,
the same kind of thing.
They decided to allocate money, $300 million in those 2 years,
2005 and 2006, and yet didnt really have a good idea and didnt
really carry through with distributing that money to their VISNs
and to their health care facilities.
When we did that work, a lot of the VISNs were not aware of
the fact they were supposed to use those allocations for mental
health. And as V.A. allocates money, it is really important that
they communicate between headquarters, the VISNs, and their
medical centers. And sometimes that communication is lacking.
We point those things out, and they are very receptive, and they
fix them, but other things then occur.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Well, like on thewhat you are talking about,
discretionary care and kind of the long-term care, that what they
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00136
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
137
call discretionary seems to me it is really not really discretionary.
It is part of the long-term care, but it is maybe an effort to shorten
the stay to save money.
When you point that out, do they recognizeI mean, that is like,
fudging the numbers to say, well, this iswe are going to have a
short-term stay, but the long-term stay is discretionary, but it really is not discretionary, because it is part of some, acute situation
that is going on.
Mr. WILLIAMSON. What I meant by that was that V.A. is only required by law to serve priority one vets in their long-term care facilities, but most of the vets they serve are not priority one. Twothirds or more are lower priorities.
Soand they only feel responsible for reporting the priority ones.
And it is useful information to you as you deliberate. You need to
know the totalyou know, the total workload. And so we pointed
it out. And they are going towell, we dont know what they are
going to do yet, because while they agreed with our conclusions,
they have not yet responded to our recommendations on that.
IDENTITY THEFT
Mr. CRENSHAW. I want to ask about identity theft, because I noticed that was something you are focusing on. And we used to see
it in the big sense, like the big massive loss of data, when that
laptop got stolen.
But how is that working? In terms of individual identity theft,
how do you find out when that takes place? Is it very common?
How is the V.A. doing, trying to protect against that?
Mr. WILLIAMSON. anything about that? The identity theft?
Dr. DAIGH. I am unable to comment on how V.A. is doing. My
office investigated Birminghamone of the larger data losses. I
would just say that I think they provide the ability for you to check
whether or not your identity has been stolen through civilian providers of financial information, but I am unaware of it.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Got you. So not a great, big problem right now
on an individual basis that you have seen?
Dr. DAIGH. I have no information.
Mr. CRENSHAW. I got you. Thank you.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Crenshaw.
Mr. Dicks.
VA AUDITS
Mr. DICKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And we appreciate your

fairness in applying the rules. I just wanted to say that.
Let me, first of all
[Laughter.]
Mr. EDWARDS. I appreciate the gentlemans suggestions.
Mr. DICKS. Since we have a University of Washington alumnus
here, I want toBremertonthis is too good to be true.
Let me ask you this. We haveon my subcommittee, we have
been checking on whether an agency can pass an audit. Can the
V.A. pass an audit on how they spend the money at the end of the
year, financially?
Ms. FINN. And I can tell you that V.A. has received
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00137
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
138
Mr. EDWARDS. Ms. Finn, for the record and for the transcription,
could you please identify yourself?
Mr. DICKS. Maybe you ought to just come up to the
Mr. EDWARDS. And maybe come up and sit here?
Mr. DICKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. FINN. Okay.
Thanks. I am Belinda Finn. I am the assistant I.G. for audits at
the V.A.
The V.A. has successfully passed and received a clean opinion on
their financial statements for about the last 10 years.
Mr. DICKS. Good.
Ms. FINN. It doesnt mean they dont have problems. They have
three material weaknesses, one over their I.T. systems and their
security, their need for better financial systems, and a third weakness that I cannot recall at this moment.
Mr. DICKS. Dont they also have a problem communicating with
the Department of Defense health care, that that is still an issue?
Ms. FINN. They do, but that is not a financial statement.
Mr. DICKS. Okay, that is a separate
Ms. FINN. Yes, weakness.
Mr. DICKS. That is a separate problem?
Ms. FINN. Yes.
Mr. DICKS. Well, for the record, why dont you give usand you
can figure out what the third one was.
Ms. FINN. I will do that.
Mr. DICKS. Yes.
TELEMEDICINE
Mr. DICKS. Dr. Daigh, let me ask you this question. I have been
promoting this idea, and I am having a hard time with the Army
getting this done. Now, maybe the V.A. could help them.
When these kids come backand this is not just for the Army
and the Marine Corps, but this also could be for the Guard Reserve, the National Guardwe have had people come in who have
this idea of online psychiatric care. In other words, with the concern people have about privacyand even you could maybe even do
this in country. If they had a problem, there could be a network
of psychiatrists that they could go online and talk to and to try to
help relieve their problems.
And with this escalation in suicides, it seems to me that something needs to be done. Now, the Army is working its way through
this methodically, and it is going to take 4 months to have a competitionan RFI on this.
I just wonder, is there any way we can figure out to do a pilot
project or something to see if this works while they are working out
these competition rules and things of that nature? What do you
think of that?
Dr. DAIGH. By online, you mean telephone or do you mean
Mr. DICKS. No, on computer.
Dr. DAIGH. On computer.
Mr. DICKS. On the Internet.
Dr. DAIGH. Okay. So there
Mr. DICKS. And this has been done in some places already, but
it is not being done on a systematic basis.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00138
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
139
Dr. DAIGH. Right. So there is a nationwide V.A. suicide hotline
which we were advocates of andhas been very successful. Online,
if you mean video, wouldunder another rubric would be sort of
mental video telehealth is a standard way that professionals provide medical consultation either directly to patients or to other providers with less experience.
So, for instance, you might have an expert ina psychiatrist sitting in a desk who you could go and project his image and conversation to a social worker at some other location with the patient, and you could talk about a mental health issue or you could
talk about a skin disease or you could talk about a variety of
issues.
Mr. DICKS. Well, what about the troopthe person who is having
mental problems, and he wants toand maybe he wants to do this
confidentially, can he talk to a psychiatrist and get some help?
Dr. DAIGH. I am always concerned about trying to understand
the emotion that is in speech and information that is transferred.
Mr. DICKS. Yes.
Dr. DAIGH. So I would think that either the telephone or seeing
them and hearing them would convey a lot more information that
would be useful to the mental health provider than simply a chat
room or an Internet conversation.
Mr. DICKS. Well, maybe you couldcould that be done? I mean,
could you do it so you could have the conversation on a video basis?
Dr. DAIGH. I believe that the military currently does it all the
time now
Mr. DICKS. Yes, I mean
Dr. DAIGH. across the world to Walter Reed. The V.A. does it
or telehealth infor example and many other states. So the answer
is, yes, I think it can be done, and I think fairly easily.
Most people, if you have a computer and you have a video camera, then I would think you could do that.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Dicks. An important line of questioning.
Mr. Berry.
COMMUNITY-BASED OUTPATIENT CLINICS
Mr. BERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

As you addressed Mr. Salazars question about CBOCs and outside contractors, I would think it should include a comparison
about how small business set-asides that get these bids, that basically have no expertise or background in health care, get a bid and
see how the carewhich is all any of us care about on this committeeof course, we have all got to be concerned about money
but is to see that our veterans get the best possible care that they
can get.
And I would encourage you to compare that in the study that you
do. And if you have any information about it at this point, I would
like to know about it. But I would like to see that done.
Dr. DAIGH. That is not an element in our current plan, but we
will lookI will go back. And when we have the dataquality of
care between those that are contracted and those CBOCs that are
not contracted, we will look at that and get that back to you.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00139
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
140
Mr. BERRY. Okay, thank you.
Dr. DAIGH. It may not besince the samples werent selected to
answer that question, it may not be statistically significant, but I
will give you the data we have on it.
Mr. BERRY. Okay.
That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Farr.
Mr. FARR. Thank you very much, Chairman.
Mr. Daigh, I want to just thank you for your public service. I
think it iswe are very fortunate to have you with a medical program and CPA background being able to do this. And I think with
this committee we are almostwe like to have these hearings in
a conversational mode so that we can really kind of fix things that
are broken.
Do you have a chanceI mean, you are the inspector for, you
know, health care inspections, but in that you get to see how things
areas you said in your opening comments. I think the policy of
our committeeat least I have been saying ever since I have been
in this committeethat our goal is to leave no veteran behind.
My hope and feeling is that if there is any model in government
that could really reach out and provide all those kinds of services
that are needed to leave no person behind, no veteran behind, that
it is the Veterans Administration.
I am glad Mr. Wamp is here, because he may be a governor of
a state, and it seems to me the Veterans Administration can be
modeling for a lot of people, a lot of states, a lot of interests in this
whole health care reform, which is also, hopefully, mental health
reform, so that we have an accessibility of services.
HOMELESS VETERANS
And I loved your statement that all health care is local. In that,
I have lots of questions, but I am really concerned about what we
are doing with the homeless veterans. We heard that we have
250,000 homeless veterans that are sleeping on the streets of
America. That is a lot. And we ought to be, as a country, embarrassed.
For some of them, there are no facilities. We have been trying
to allow the civilian community to be contracted, particularly with
PTSD, for local psychologists who are licensed and can treat these
folks, so that the veterans dont have to go a lot of miles to get access to a clinic or a hospital.
How we can close these gaps and what things we can do? I have
a Vietnam veterans association that has received a bunch of houses
from the closure of Fort Ord that are rundown and not up to code.
They actually have homeless families that they are trying to put
in these houses. And we dont have anymoney to rehab the places
and bring them up to code.
How do we, in your position, bring the recommendations to how
to close these gaps so that we can really have a much better, seamless delivery of care? You are pioneering. You are pioneering the
medical records. You are pioneering these clinics and these community-based clinics.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00140
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
141
I think you are really pioneering a lot of things that the Department of Defense doesnt do, nor does the other deliveries of health
care that we have in the U.S.
So in your professional role, do you see a bigger picture of how
we might be able to address the gaps?
Dr. DAIGH. Yes, sir, I do. The last effort that I asked for support
for was the DOD/V.A. reporting and analysis tool. And I think if
one understands who veterans are and understands their characteristics and where they live and has access and understands what
their mental health needs or physical health care needs are, then
one can begin actually to look at the V.A. care that is available,
where they access the V.A. system.
You can access and see where they access DOD. You could see
where they access the Medicare or Medicaid, where they are getting their care from. You can begin to see if there are other HHS
clinics out there that they are getting their care from.
So you can build a picture of where they are getting care. And
you can also build a picture of where they are not getting care and
where you need care or you need to procure care of some type.
Mr. FARR. We are not doing that?
Dr. DAIGH. I think that we are currently focused on and the
metrics we submit with the budget are focused on transactions. If
you show up at this hospital and ask for care, were you provided
it? Not, if you live on the other side of the mountain and you are
the same person are you provided that care?
Mr. FARR. Thank you
Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. KENNEDY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Appreciate it.
Welcome. I know the chairman got into this at the outset, but
I would like to revisit it, and that is the standards. I am enormously impressed and what is so impressive about the V.A. is that
it is the biggest public health system we have in our country and
that it has scale and that we can measure outcomes on a scale
basis and take what works and bring it to scale.
But we have it for MRSA. We have it for cancer. We have it for
every illness under the sun, but we dont have it for mental illnesses.
Now, the big debate now in the mental health community is between clinical outcomes and functional outcomes. And the real
meat and potatoes here are functional outcomes. You know, we can
debate all day about clinical outcomes, but we know what functional outcomes are. We know whatpeople can get up and go to
work, hold down a job, not drink as much, be able to stay compliant with their meds.
There are pretty basic measures. And those arent measures that
are hard to get. We can get them from the NIDA, NIAAA, and
NIH. And until we employ some basic measuring sticks, we are not
going to know whether your methadone clinic or your out-patient
clinic in Chicago or your PTSD clinic combined with your methadone clinic in Houston or your Providence V.A. and whatever it is
doing with their vet-to-vet program is, which program has had
more success in terms of getting veterans back on their feet, going
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00141
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
142
to the local community college, and having the greatest success
academically and in the working world, so forth and so on.
So I cant implore you enough. We have got to lay down standards. As, you know, rudimentary as they may initially be, we have
got to start somewhere. And I am wondering, why havent we?
Dr. DAIGH. Do you mean standardspopulation at risk or do
you
Mr. KENNEDY. Standards by which to measure how we are doing.
We are never going to get anywhere knowing what is working and
what is not working out there if we dont know first what the objective measuring stick is, what we are after.
Dr. DAIGH. I would agree with you that the current metrics that
are used and submitted with the budget are usually transactional
or process metrics, which I agree are what you are against. We are
looking for, you know, functional outcome and
Mr. KENNEDY. Right, functional.
Dr. DAIGH. So what I am suggesting is that, again, if you know
who the population is, one can have outcome measures to apply to
a population to see if folks are going where you would like them
to go, the outcomes are what you would like.
For instance, there might be a unit that comes back from Iraq
that decides to demobilize in a way that they provide specific training to their soldiers or do specific things to try to ensure that they
dont have PTSD or that
Mr. KENNEDY. Right.
Dr. DAIGH [continuing]. Outcome. And there might be another
unit that had similar activity that didnt take those steps or took
a different set of steps. So if you know who was there and you then
can go and look and see several years down the road what the outcome was, one can look back and see if one idea of how to deal with
this on the battlefield or after the battlefield made a difference.
So I am completely on board and advocating that this sort of
data be put together so one can do the kind of analysis you are suggesting to ferret out which ideas seem to be working the best.
Mr. KENNEDY. So speaking of audits, we need to be tracking all
the different data that is beingand employ it in terms of how it
is being collected, so we know what is working and what is not
working in a manageable way. And how do we proposehow do
you propose we get about doing that?
Dr. DAIGH. In my office, I have to rely on psychiatrists or mental
health professionals to identify what they think the best outcome
metric would be for a mental health issue or on a cardiologist, for
example, but DOD and V.A. are currently working to try to get
this
Mr. KENNEDY. Okay.
Dr. DAIGH [continuing]. Together.
Mr. KENNEDY. Well, that is what, Mr. Chairman, we need to
work on, bring the mental health and DOD folks up here and get
them to answer what they are doing in terms of mental health
metrics.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Kennedy, may I interrupt?
Mr. KENNEDY. Sure.
Mr. EDWARDS. I am going to stick to the 5-minute rule on this
round, but we are going to go directly into a second round.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00142
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
143
Mr. KENNEDY. Okay.
Mr. EDWARDS. And recognize members. And let me just say,
members, on a second round, the policy will be we will recognize
members by seniority, as long as they were here when the second
round began.
So we will go with Mr. Wamp, and then we will go with Mr.
Farr, Mr. Salazar, Mr. Kennedy, and then Mr. Berry.
Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. It may be Farr, Kennedy, Salazar, Berry, Salazar, in
that order.
Anyway, and this will be my last question for these two, because
I know we have got to move on with the other panel in this.
The 30,000-foot view, Mr. Chairman, where I wonder often, having been in Congress for over 14 years and really worked at expanding our out-patient clinics capabilities. Watching the whole
CBOC process evolve, and now super-CBOCs, and watching the
V.A. stiff-arm contracting care as much as they could, and certainly
any kind of demonstrations where they might contract with local
health care providers for in-patient care, which they have resisted
I think all across the country, but certainly in my area they have.
We dont have a hospital within 2 hours of where I live. So the
CBOC becomes more and more important. And super-CBOCs can
really fill that gap of care.
So my question is, do you think from your studiesand every
year we need to checkare the trends towards super-CBOCs and
trying to keep as much care available to the veteran, without having to drive 2 or 3 hours to get in-patient care, is a good trend?
I thought when care was the big thing that we were somehow
going to take some of these older facilities in the Northeast that
are not fully utilized, and maybe close them and redirect some of
the resources to where the veterans had actually moved, which in
many cases was the warmer climate where there might be a little
water. A lot of it is in my backyard, but I havent seen that happen.
And I just wonder, are there regions of the country that are more
efficient than others? Are there regions where we are spending
money and doing things better? Or is it a uniform outcome across
the country, I.G. and then GAO?
Dr. DAIGH. I would like to try to answer your question this way.
One of the issues that arose after some adverse events in the last
year or 2, where in trying to provide procedures at relatively small
hospitals there were some catastrophes, V.A. has agreed to our recommendation to determine what procedures can be done at each
hospital by the level of staffing that they have.
So they have gone through and identified what sort of care they
have for pre-op, op, post-op, and then ward care, if you will. And
they have gone through and looked at the surgical procedures that
they have done and categorized them into sort of three groups, you
know, relatively straightforward, and complicated, and very complicated.
So they have agreed with us that there are certain things that
you just shouldnt do at a relatively small facility. So I think that
the push to do too much at a facility, hopefully, will not occur, and
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00143
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
144
therefore then one will have to come up with strategies to deal
with patients who are distant from a CBOC, which has, frankly,
you know, capability, but limited capability, or hospitals, which all
have limited capability, dependingyou know, there is always another bigger hospital someplace that can do more.
So I am hoping that the V.A. will then be able to arrive at some
practical solutions to address that issue that you are talking about.
Mr. WILLIAMSON. A couple of issues you raised are interesting.
I think, in the discussion of CBOCs, we shouldnt forget vet centers, because for mental health issues especially, vet centers are
the entry point for more and more vets these days. I think close
to 65 million vets a year use these facilities.
And I just recently visited a couple vet centers in Southern California. And I think there are a number of issues relating to staffing, to training, especially for things like military sexual trauma,
whether these folks are being adequately trained for all of these
things that veterans are presenting, I think, is a question.
The other issue you mentioned, in terms of cost comparison, V.A.
has in place performance metrics which allow them to look at how
efficient each hospital throughout the countryeach of their hospitals are. And I think there is a question of whether the headquarters or the VISNs are actually looking at that data, looking at
indicators, that maybe there are some outliers, and really saying,
Why is that happening? Is there anything we can do about it?
I mean, some of it might just be due to the fact that health care
costs are higher in certain locations. That is certainly true. But I
would want to look at that process and something that we are interested in, in the work we are doing.
Mr. WAMP. How many veterans you say go to VA medical facilities?
Mr. WILLIAMSON. I think we are close to 65 million.
Mr. WAMP. You mean
Mr. WILLIAMSON. I mean
Mr. WAMP. I heard that, and I said there are only, I think, 23
millionso I was wondering where this number came from?
Mr. WILLIAMSON. That is 65 million outpatient visits for VA
healthcare. That is the visits, yes.
Mr. WAMP. I understand. But I knew it wasnt 65 million.
Mr. WILLIAMSON. No, no, no, I know.
Mr. WAMP. Okay. I yield back.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Wamp.
Mr. Farr.
ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORDS
Mr. FARR. There are 23 million veterans? Do we have the capacity to have them all in a computer? I mean, you have to know that
they are a veteran if somebody comes in. There has to be records
of it, right?
Dr. DAIGH. There are records of that.
Mr. FARR. How do we develop an individual plan for each veteran, for what the options are?
Dr. DAIGH. There are
Mr. FARR. We want them to know that, hey, you are a veteran,
you are in a priority. You are this priority. Oh, by the way, even
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00144
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
145
in the county that you live in or community that you live in, there
are these resources available and in the region there are others.
Because what you are saying is, all we are doing is keeping track
of sort of a check-off system, if somebody enters by asking for services. And we count the ones that are using the services. We are not
keeping track of the unmet needs of veterans.
Dr. DAIGH. I have probably said it a little too harshly. I think
that there is a view of all the veterans, and all veterans need care,
but if you get down to the actual metrics that people apply, most
are transactional. So there are limitations in going backward where
data is not as well computerized as we would like, pay records, for
instance, so you can identify people.
But if you look at the different computer systems, the amount of
data available degrades fairly quickly once you get back into the
1990s, and you can build it back, but only at the current level we
are with limits.
So I agree with you that we should try to identify where our
folks are, what their priorities are, and then try to assist them to
get the care they need.
Mr. FARR. The reason I am asking is, I am on the Agricultural
Committee, and we are looking at the school lunch programs, and
I found out from California that we can find out where all the poor
kids live who would qualify for the school lunch program better
than the method the schools use. That method essentially requires
the parent to come in and say, well, yes, I am poor, I want my kid
to have a lunch. And I thought, well, we can do that by using the
Medicare and census data.
Dr. DAIGH. Yes, sir, there
Mr. FARR. It tells you exactly where these people live and who
they are. We need to do that with veterans. I mean, we are all so
insular, and we can look at all these other resources that governments have, whether they are federal, state or local, but we have
got that kind of data now. We just havent arrayed that data in a
way that makes it helpful.
It is also not only the data, but are there, do we know, some
proven results? What does it take to get the treatment you need?
To make sure that you have some functional functionality. It seems
to me that it is really a matter of knowing how good our records
are and then using other resources that the federal and state governments have to put a list togetherIf it were good for one veteran in one community, it would be good for all the veterans in
that community.
All health care is local.
Dr. DAIGH. Yes, sir.
Mr. FARR. What is that health care?
Dr. DAIGH. Well, sir, we are going to publish a report where we
took the population of veterans living in a state, sampled them,
geocoded where they lived, geocoded all the care providers that
V.A. owned, V.A. contracted with, and that V.A. had fee basis
Mr. FARR. Yes.
Dr. DAIGH [continuing]. And then calculated drive time for all
those folks, breaking the care up into those folks who could write
prescriptions or those folks who could offer counseling
Mr. FARR. Yes.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00145
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
146
Dr. DAIGH [continuing]. And then looked at what that care in
that state looks like. So I am right there with you. I think that is
exactly
Mr. FARR. How long is it going to take to do that?
Dr. DAIGH. I am going to publish that in a couple of weeks for
one state.
Mr. FARR [continuing]. Will you bring those back to this committee
Dr. DAIGH. I would be
Mr. FARR [continuing]. What those recommendations are, as you
look at that data?
Dr. DAIGH. I will. And I think that data exists and that it can
be used to address needs for different areas. So the needs of this
state might, in fact, be different than the needs of another.
So I am right there with you. I encourage that. We have begun
to look more at populations, at the needs of populations, driving
down to individual care plans, which is what you are saying.
Mr. Salazar.
Mr. SALAZAR. Just one brief question. You mentioned that the
V.A. had different codes for their electronic medical records and
how they enter information, one of you did, I think. Have they
taken your recommendations as to how they can
Mr. WILLIAMSON. In terms of medical
Mr. SALAZAR [continuing]. Record. Isnt that what you said? I
thought that is what you had said, that they had different codes
as to how they entered different material into the electronic medical records. Maybe
Dr. DAIGH. My understanding is that there is a standard system
of codes used across country for government and non-government
to describe the activities in a hospital. And the V.A. uses those
standard codes in their medical records to define what care was
provided.
Now, there might be many, many codes in medical records, so I
am not sure exactly what
Mr. SALAZAR. But didnt you say that that was one of the weaknesses
Dr. DAIGH. What I was talking about, sir, was innovation in the
medical records. For example, we went back and looked at how
V.A. compared in their treatment of patients with deep venous
thrombosis, so, for instance, you are admitted to the hospital. You
have a broken leg. You are at risk of getting a clot that would then
travel to your lungs.
Are the outcomes for that specific entity for which there are
standards of who should be anticoagulated, you know, out there,
how did the V.A. compare? We found that the V.A. compared well
with the rest of the country. Their rate of deep venous thrombosis,
embolisms about the same.
Where we had a problem was that the medical record, if it were
more intelligent, could say, You are admitted with this diagnosis.
Has this medication been ordered? So there are medical record
systems that have that business intelligence in it. V.A.s doesnt. So
there is frustration by the physicians in the field that that innova-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00146
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
147
tion hasnt been put into it already, since everyonesince that
would be one of the things that you would like to see.
All I am saying is that that rate of innovation, the way that the
medical record can change and keep up with science needsis important. And if that rate of innovation doesnt keep up, then V.A.
is going to fall behind.
So I bring that to you as a risk for which I apologize I dont have
a lot of work, other than what people tell me and this one piece
on deep venous thrombosis. But I think that is a very important
issue.
Mr. SALAZAR. Thank you.
Mr. Berry.
Mr. BERRY. Thank you. I will be very brief. And I thank all three
of you for being here and for the work you do.
Back to the CBOCs and the comparison study you are doing and
all that. How long will it take to complete?
Dr. DAIGH. Well, we will begin actually going to CBOCs in April.
We will, at the end of the fiscal year, roll up the data that we have
in a cumulative report. We will report on the quality of care at
each of the CBOCs on an every-other-month basis, and so it will
be four or five CBOCs that will be visited.
And then there will be a report on the financial issue of contracting that willto be honest, I havent figured out whether it is
going to be a separate report or part of the roll-up report at the
end of this fiscal year.
Mr. BERRY. It seems to me that it might be a reasonable thing
to do to suspend further solicitations until we have the results of
that report.
Dr. DAIGH. I cant comment, sir. I have no data. And
Mr. FARR. Can I follow up on that? Is this part of the other alternative way to get private financing through the health care center
for facilities program, where you have a private developer build the
facilities and then lease them back? Is that part of that?
Mr. BERRY. No, not that I am aware of, Sam. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
TELEMEDICINE

Let me just finish with one quick question. And let me say, also,
I know we have just scratched the surface. I know a number of
members will have additional questions in writing to send to you.
Let me just askone better use of psychiatrists, psychologists,
we have in the V.A. is the use of telemedicine. Is there any other
way we can bring more psychiatrists and psychologists into the
tremendous competitionis out there in the marketplace. You have
the private sector and the V.A.
Anything we can do with loan forgiveness for young psychiatrists
coming out of medical schools, anything else that either of you
would recommend?
Dr. DAIGH. I havent looked at that issue. I think you would be
better to ask the mental health professionals at V.A. as to what dif-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00147
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
148
ficulty they have hiring and what they think would work. We simply have not addressed that in our work.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Mr. Williamson.
Mr. WILLIAMSON. No, Iwe havent addressed that, either.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Let me just conclude then to allow time for
the second panel by thanking both of you.
You know, I know that, given your responsibility, sometimes you
are probably welcomed as warmly as a bank auditor by bank executives. But you are genuinely welcome to this subcommittee, and
we see you as real partners and carrying out a responsibility that
I think we all want to see Congress do more of, and that is the
oversight responsibility.
I am so impressed by the experience and the commitment that
I see with your two positions and those others testifying with us
in just a few moments. It is obvious to me it is a genuine commitment to help our agencies be better served, in this particular case,
help our veterans receive the care that they have earned and so
very much deserve.
Thank you for the important role you play. Please consider yourselves partners with this committee. You are welcome to contact us
at any point. From here forward, you would be returning our call.
And so work closely with our staff on ideas and recommendations
you have about how we can address some of the challenges that
you have outlined today or challenges that we didnt have time to
get into today.
Thank you, Dr. Daigh.
Thank you, Mr. Williamson.
Members, I would like to call the second panel forward. And we
have three witnesses in that panel.
As they come forward, let me just say that the goal of this panel
is to address issues regarding I.T. interoperability, the implementation of the new G.I. Bill. I think we are facing some real challenges
trying to meet the deadlines thereissues regarding auditing, contracting, and claims processing, recognizing that the backlog of veterans waiting to have their claims processed has been a major
issue of veterans and veterans organizations.
To address these issues, we have three witnesses today. First, as
introduced previously, Ms. Belinda Finn is with the Office of Inspector General. She was appointed assistant inspector general for
auditing in the V.A. in January of 2007.
Prior to joining the V.A., Ms. Finn was a deputy assistant inspector general for the Department of Homeland Security. She has also
worked as an accountant and arbiter with the Department of
Treasury, the Department of Defense I.G., the Department of Energy I.G., and the U.S. House of Representatives I.G., making very
well the point to her service that I was just trying to make about
the degree of professionalism and experience in these positions
with inspector generals positions is very impressive to me.
Thank you, Ms. Finn, for being here.
Ms. Maureen Regan, welcome, Ms. Regan, to our subcommittee.
Ms. Regan was appointment counselor to the inspector general in
1989, once again showing a deep depth of experience and commitment to your position. She began her government career in 1984
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00148
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
149
as a staff attorney with the Department of Veterans Affairs Office
of District Counsel in Washington, D.C. Ms. Regan is a graduate
of Columbus School of Law at the Catholic University here in
Washington.
Again, and welcome.
Our third witness this morning is Ms. Valerie Melvin.
Ms. Melvin, welcome to our subcommittee.
She is the director of information management and human capital issues with the GAOs information technology team and is primarily responsible for issues concerning health information technology and I.T. human capital. And we have a lot of issues to discuss on that front.
Ms. Melvin has led studies of information technology management issues at several agencies, including the V.A., the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Social Security Administration. Ms. Melvin is a graduate of the University of Maryland, with a bachelor of science degree in business administration
and a masters degree in management information systems.
Again, I thank the three of you for being here today. And I would
like to recognize you for opening statement of approximately 5 minutes. Have you selected any order?
Ms. Finn? Well, lets just begin with you, and then Ms. Regan,
and then to Ms. Melvin.
STATEMENT
OF
BELINDA J. FINN
Ms. FINN. Thank you, Chairman Edwards.

And thank you to the members of the subcommittee for having
me here this morning. I am pleased to be here.
I am going to be speaking on the issues related to the VBAs
claims processing problems, their progress in implementing the
new G.I. Bill, educational benefits, and finally the challenges involved in spending the stimulus funds and our oversight of those
funds.
My office has been tasked with monitoring V.A.s progress in implementing the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Act, now basically
called the new G.I. Bill.
We have foundV.A. has made some progress in the last few
months, in that they werent doing very much at all before. But
they still have several challenges before they can get to a successful implementation.
These include the inherent difficulty of fielding a new software,
limited I.T. development resources, developing staffing requirements, and a really aggressive project schedule.
Elsewhere in VBA, they are facing the challenge of large backlogs of pending claims for compensation and benefits. This has
been a challenge for many years. Increases in funding at V.A. have
enabled them to hire additional claims examiners, but this presents
its own challenge in developing a productive workforce.
We are currently working on a review where we are looking at
claims over 365 days old, and we believe we will identify a number
of ways that V.A. can help to improve their processing time over
their claims. We expect to issue the final report on that work over
the summer.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00149
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
150
We are currently also standing up an inspections unit that will
be performing systematic reviews at individual regional offices. Our
charge there is to review operations and the accuracy of claims
processing to determine how well the R.O.s are providing accurate
and timely benefits to veterans.
In the I.T. area, I know your main focus is the sharing of information. I work in the area of I.T. security and management at V.A.
V.A., of course, faces continuing challenges related to I.T. security
and the management of their projects.
Although the consolidation of functions and activities under the
CIO has addressed some security issues, we continue to find problems related to access controls, configuration management, change
management, and service continuity.
We are also concerned greatly about the management of I.T. capital investment, because these projects present great risks and can
become costly, risky, and unproductive, if not effectively managed.
In the stimulus funding, V.A. is not a major player. They have
received about $1.4 billion to do maintenance and repairs in VHA
and the National Cemetery Administration, hire additional employees, and develop some new I.T. systems.
Even though VA has not received as many funds as the rest of
the government, it is still a challenge to spend $1.4 billion wisely
and efficiently, so we are going to be providing oversight upfront
over the requirements definition and the controls over the spending
of these funds.
Chairman Edwards and the subcommittee, thank you again for
the opportunity to be here today. And as Dr. Daigh said, thank you
very much for the continuing support you have given the OIG. I
will be happy to answer any questions.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Ms. Finn, for your testimony, for
being here and for what you are doing.
Ms. Regan.
STATEMENT
OF
MAUREEN T. REGAN
Ms. REGAN. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to address issues and challenges facing V.A. and maintaining an effective and efficient acquisition program.
Before I start, I would like to say that your entire panel here is
University of Maryland graduates. I think it is the first time I have
been on such a panel, so go Terps.
Mr. EDWARDS. Well represented today.
V.A. spends approximately $10 billion a year on procuring supplies, equipment, and services, and that number is growing every
year. Despite efforts to implement policies and procedures to improve the acquisition program, procurement remains one of V.A.s
five major management challenges.
In addition to more than 80 pre- and post-war reviews in contracting that are issued directly to contracting officers, in the past
year, we have published more than 10 reports that have identified
deficiencies in the manner in which V.A. plans, solicits, awards and
administers procurement action.
We attribute the problems to many factors, including the lack of
sufficient personnel in those acquisition and program offices that
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00150
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
151
have the knowledge, experience to develop awards and administer
these contracts.
In addition, there is little to no oversightparticularly conducted
at the local levels, in the field. Our work has shown that requesting
program offices are often not able to identify the requirements or
properly administer a contract after award. We have also found
that acquisition personnel are not always familiar with or fail to
comply with procurement laws and regulations.
The impact of these deficiencies is exacerbated by the decentralization of V.A. acquisition programs and the absence of a comprehensive system to accurately record and monitor contracts and
purchases.
With respect to the latter, in 2007, V.A. activated a new Electronic Contract Management System. It is called eCMS. And the
purpose was to standardize the procurement process and to provide
visibility regarding V.A. procurement.
After it was initiated, V.A.s Office of Acquisition, Logistics and
Construction issued a policy telling everybody how to use this system to generate and issue contract documents to record relevant
contract information on both new and existing procurements.
We recently completed an audit that showed that contracting entities in V.A. were not complying with the policy. They are not
inputting the data; they are not using the system as required. In
fact, we found one VHA policy that they were following that was
inconsistent with the overall policy as issued by the Office of Acquisition.
One of the things it did was exempted all your prosthetics from
using the system, and prosthetics is a large amount of VHA purchases and supplies.
In addition to our work with the CBOCs that is ongoing, we are
doing a review at the request of the Secretary of the interagency
agreements between the Navys Space Warfare Systems Command,
otherwise known as SPAWAR, and an audit of disability examinations conducted by V.A. personnel and those conducted by contractors, a review and an audit of the award administration of V.A.s
federal supply schedule contracts for health care services, and we
are also looking at the Medical/Surgical Prime Vendor Program
that V.A. has in place.
One area that V.A. has expended resources for considerable oversight is on the federal supply schedule contracts that V.A. awards.
As you know, this is really a GSA program. But for about the last
40 years, the delegation has been to V.A. to do all health care contracts.
V.A.s programsand that is for medical and surgical supplies,
equipment, pharmaceuticals, and health care services. V.A. entities
spend about $7.5 billion per year on V.A.s FSS contracts. About 60
percent of that, those dollars are V.A. dollars, and so V.A. has a
great interest in keeping the prices fair and reasonable, because a
lot of our money is going to those contracts.
Of great concern to us in the past year, GSA convened a Multiple
Award Schedule Advisory Panel. Some people call it the blue-ribbon panel. And the purpose was to review the structure used in
pricing of FSS contracts.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00151
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
152
On this panel are two representatives from industry organizations. At their request and the request of industry, the panel is
considering removing key clauses from the contracts. These are
clauses that we believe ensure not only that government gets fair
and reasonable pricing at the time of award, but that pricing is
maintained throughout the term of these contracts, which are 5
years or longer.
We believe if these clauses are taken out of the contracts, and
I know there was at least a vote on it at one point in time to take
them out, V.A. will be paying significantly higher prices for these
products than similarly situated commercial customers.
This completes my oral statement. Thank you for the opportunity
to address these issues, and I would be happy to answer any questions.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Ms. Regan.
Ms. Melvin.
STATEMENT
OF
VALERIE C. MELVIN
Ms. MELVIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee.
I am pleased to be here today to comment on V.A.s efforts to
achieve interoperable electronic health records with the Department of Defense. The two departments have been working for over
a decade to share electronic health data, and Congress has directed
them to jointly develop and fully implement interoperable electronic health record capabilities by September 30, 2009.
The departments experiences in this area are also relevant to
the broader effort to advance nationwide health information technology initiatives. As current and past administrations have recognized, information technology has the potential to help improve the
efficiency and the quality of health care by making patient information more readily available to providers, reducing medical errors, and streamlining administrative functions.
Federal efforts to realize this potential are being led by HHSs
national coordinator for health information technology. We have
performed numerous studies of V.A.s and DODs efforts to share
electronic health information, and my testimony today will describe
some of the departments achievements and challenges in this area.
I will also briefly comment on how these apply to the broader national initiative.
In summary, V.A. and DOD have made important progress, but
they continue to face challenges in managing the activities required
to achieve this inherently complex goal. Over the years, they have
increased the types of information shared and succeeded in sharing
computable data, that is, data in a format that a computer can understand and act on.
For example, the departments are now exchanging computable
pharmacy and drug allergy data on over 27,000 shared patients,
permitting their health information systems to alert clinicians to
drug allergies.
Sharing computable data is considered the highest level of interoperability, yet achieving this level is not always necessary. Data
that are viewable but not computable also provide important infor-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00152
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
153
mation, and the departments are sharing many types of health information in this manner.
However, they have more to do since not all electronic health information is yet shared, and although health data at V.A. are all
captured electronically, information is still captured on paper at
many DOD medical facilities. One challenge facing any effort to
share data is the need for clearly defined standards to allow different systems to work together.
For example, technology standards must be agreed on. And a
host of content issues must be addressed, such as the need for consistent medical terminology. V.A. and DOD continue to work on
standards to extend their own data sharing, and they also participate in standards-related initiatives led by the national coordinator
that are focused on transitioning to a nationwide health I.T. capability.
Their involvement in these initiatives is important, both because
of the experiences that these departments can offer and to help ensure that the standards they jointly adopt are consistent with applicable federal standards.
Nonetheless, V.A. and DOD face challenges to effectively meeting
the September 2009 deadline for full interoperability. While they
have plans to further increase their electronic sharing capabilities
by then, these plans do not effectively define the extent of data
sharing expected to be in place to meet the interoperability goals
or consistently identify results-oriented performance measures that
are essential to assessing progress toward the delivery of that capability.
Further constraining their effectiveness is their slow pace in setting up an interagency program office that is to be accountable for
achieving the interoperable capabilities. Defining results-oriented
performance measures and ensuring that they are met would be an
important part of this offices mission.
V.A. and DOD concurred with our recommendations that they
give priority to these matters, but they have yet to be fully addressed. Until they are, however, the risk is increased that the departments will not achieve interoperable capabilities to the extent
and in a manner that most effectively serves our nations military
servicemembers and veterans.
Mr. Chairman, this completes my prepared statement. I would be
pleased to respond to any questions that you or other members of
the subcommittee may have.
PRESCRIPTION DRUGS
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you all.

I want to be sure I understand one of the points that you were
making. This came to my attention very briefly yesterday for the
first time.
Right now, the V.A. buys a massive amount of prescription
drugs. And I have heard ballpark numbers that, compared to
standard retail prices at pharmacies, maybe the V.A. gets and the
taxpayers receive about a 40 percent discount. Is that in the ballpark? Is that approximately right?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00153
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
154
Ms. REGAN. You cant compare to retail because you have to
know what the pharmacy paid for it versus what you are paying
for it as a consumer.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
Ms. REGAN. VA is probably more comparable to what the pharmacies are paying for covered drugs. We are getting excellent
prices because of the statutepublic law which sets the price.
Mr. EDWARDS. So millions of dollars in savings to taxpayers and
to the V.A. by paying
Ms. REGAN. That is correct.
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. By negotiating? Okay.
Ms. REGAN. They are actually not negotiated prices. They are an
established price bythere is a formula for covered drugs. And the
formula is, I think, 26 percent below the non-Federal Average Manufacturers Price. There is a calculation that is used, so they use
all the pharmaceuticals that go through a wholesaler, and they
come up with a price.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Ms. REGAN. And then once you have a contract, you can only increase the price each year by a certain percentage
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
Ms. REGAN. That is not negotiated. It is part of a formula.
Mr. EDWARDS. If I could jump in, I want to be sure about the
GSA role. Is there a panel at GSA that is recommending changes
in clauses that wouldthat would change that so the V.A. could be
charged significantly higher prices for prescription drugs?
Ms. REGAN. The law requires, in order to get any money from
any federal agency, including Medicare, even though they dont buy
off the schedule, you have to have the drug on a federal supply
schedule at what we call the federal ceiling price.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
Ms. REGAN. So what their changes will do will not affect the calculation. But once an award is made, there is a clause in the contract called a price reduction clause, and you track certain customers. If the price to a customer goes below a certain price, then
we get those discounts. That is the one clause that industry does
not want in the contract.
So the impactwith respect to covered drugs, there will be an
impact on the covered drugs. There will be a bigger impact financially on generics and on all your Med/Surg items and equipment.
Mr. EDWARDS. And this isyou said there are two industry representatives on a panel or a board at GSA?
Ms. REGAN. It is called the Multiple Award Schedule Advisory
Panel, and it is made up of various people from various agencies.
In fact, V.A. was not even invited to be on the panel until the
House Veterans Affairs Committee, I believe, wrote a letter and
asked that Mr. Frye, the deputy assistant secretary for acquisition
Mr. EDWARDS. And this is an advisory panel? Who will make the
final decision on this?
Ms. REGAN. I am not sure. I think when they make the recommendations, it goes to another body within GSA to be reviewed
and then up to the administrator.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00154
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
155
Ms. REGAN. We do know they have voted to remove the price reduction clause both from services contracts, where maybe it doesnt
have that big an impact, to the other commodities schedules. And
there would be
Mr. EDWARDS. So it could affect prescription drug prices?
Ms. REGAN. It will affect definitely generics. I think there will be
an impact. And what you will have is that you may have a fair and
reasonable price the day of award on all of these Med/Surg, all of
these items that are on federal supply schedule contracts. You will
not have a fair and reasonable price the next day.
What we found in industry is that they will wait to award better
contracts until after ours gets awarded. And then the discounts
start coming in.
I presented to the panel in August, and basically that was part
of my presentation, is the impact it will have.
Mr. EDWARDS. Well, we are going to see that that decision isnt
made behind closed doors without public attention. Thank you for
bringing that to our attention, and I believe all sides ought to have
a chance to present their facts, but I dont want anyone making a
decision without great public knowledge and taxpayer understanding of what the implications could be to them, in terms of increased cost for hundreds of millions of dollars in prescription
drugs purchased by the V.A.
Mr. Wamp.
INTEROPERABILITY

A two-part question, Ms. Melvin. If not September 30th, when?
Second, on the medical records piece of the interoperability, if the
V.A. still has the premiere reputation for medical records and information technology and health care, which I assume they still do
from year to year, what about DOD? Is it a problem with one side
not being up to par with the other? What are the problems? I know
organizationally and funding and all that, but is there a disconnect
between the two systems quality?
Ms. MELVIN. In answer to your first question relative to when,
if not by September 30th, that is a question that I dont have an
answer for you on, the reason being we have repeatedly reported
on what V.A. has been doing, V.A. and DOD, in terms of interoperability.
And one of our concerns is that, as they move forward with this
initiative, we have not seen the level of planning that would articulate specifically what the final outcomes will be by this September
30th date.
Now, having said that, I think it is important to note that V.A.
and DOD do have, as I mentioned in my earlier statement, levels
of interoperability that they have achieved, they have achieved at
the highest level in terms of the computable data for the pharmacy
and drug allergy data.
They also have lower levels of interoperability relative to having
viewable data that is structured, for example, to have lab reports
that are in place within their records. And they also are able to see
unstructured data that perhaps is scanned in, like clinical notes.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00155
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
156
The bigger question on our part is, when you get to September
30th, what has been defined as the end result for that date? And
today we have not seen from V.A. any specificsor from DODany
specifics as to what that ultimate end state will look like.
We do know that they intend to continue increasing their sharing. They have indicated, for example, that they will continue to include scanning and imaging in what they are doing. Our concern
and what we would like to see more ofand we think is necessary
for accountabilityis for them to set an end state for what at September 30th and then what more beyond September 30th.
There is sure to be a need for more beyond September 30th. I
think laboratory data, for example, is data, computable data that
they are trying to achieve, but it would be beyond September 30th.
And then, to the extent that there are other data that are defined by their board that has been put in place to set those priorities, we would assume that would also occur much beyond September 30th.
As far as why the two departments have not been able to come
together yet, I would go back, actually, to the very beginning with
the systems. One of the things that is important to recognize is
that, even though V.A. and DOD are both modernizing their health
information systems and they have over time stated that these systems would be the platform for achieving this integrated capability
that they were working towards, it is important to recognize that
as these systems were developedthey went down separate tracks.
There wasnt a plan that we have seen that was ever intended
to bring those two systems together in quite the way that would
be necessary. So I think that where they stand today, and certainly
through our work and what we have been able to discern, there are
issues still relative to reaching agreement on what such a system
would like.
There are significant questions that would have to be answered
relative to what capabilities would be needed to serve each departments mission. I think there are cultural issues relative to really
being able to overcome those barriers, to step outside and say, Is
my system better than the other?
They are both modernizing. They are both at different stages in
their modernization. And while we have not looked specifically at
the system that DOD is modernizing, we do know that V.A. is
working on it. We have had concerns with some of the progress
with what they are doing relative to overall planning and the integration efforts that are necessary to make that system come to fruition.
So there are many challenges toreally being able to decide, I
think, first and foremost, what it is that they want to accomplish
and to start the dialogue. And to Secretary Shinsekis credit, if I
understand, there has been some recent dialogue in that regard,
but much more, in our view, is necessary for them to come to
agreement on what would be necessary and how to meet the needs
of both of those departments, especially those unique needs that
each would have.
Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I have two questions for Ms. Finn. I
will wait for the next round.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Wamp.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00156
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
157
Mr. Farr.
Mr. FARR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [Laughter.]
Are I.T. standards worked out so that the I.T. standards in veterans is compatible with I.T. standards in Medicare and Social Security?
Ms. FINN. In the area of I.T. security, generally the government
agencies all try to follow the NIST standard
Mr. FARR. One standard?
Ms. FINN. Yes.
Mr. FARR. And then in the presidents stimulus budgetrecovery
package, there is a lot of money for medical records, for going to
electronic records. And I imagine they are going to have companies
bidding for that, hospitals bidding. Everybody is going to be bidding. Are they going to the follow the model? I mean, you are way
ahead of thisV.A. was sort of the beginning of all this, wasnt it,
in having the best medical records?
Ms. FINN. That is my understanding.
Mr. FARR. So does that become kind of a standard that everybody
will try to achieve? Are we now going to get a million different software programs out there that arent compatible and
Ms. MELVIN. I could share a perspective on that.
Mr. FARR. Because you are talking about interoperability, and
that is
Ms. MELVIN. Yes, the key is the standards that have to be developed. You are correct that V.A. and DOD have been out there and,
as I mentioned, should be able to provide some experiences in those
areas, and they have set standards to achieve the levels of interoperability that they have.
However, moving forward, one of the critical things from a national perspective, the standard-setting process is not a fast process. It is an extremely complicated process that is involving many,
many players
Mr. FARR. Well, we are going to be letting the money out before
the standards are developed.
Ms. MELVIN. You are correct in a lot of respects. There are standards that have been defined, but at the same time there are many
more that still need to be defined.
The critical factor relative to V.A. is that while, yes, they could
pursue standards for their own interoperabilityand they have to
certain degreesthe question is, how far out ahead of the national
standards do they want to get from the standpoint of being able to
make sure that, once a national initiative is in place, that they, in
fact
Mr. FARR. What is our priority here? What is the one thing we
as a committee in dealing with the budget for V.A., what is the
highest priority, your recommendations to this committee that we
need to focus on, put some money in, or some language in?
Doctor, you talked about the I.T. systems havent kept up with
demand, with the workload, and, in fact, the financial systems
havent kept up. Dr. Daigh said that we were pioneers, but we are
falling behind. What is it that this committee should be focusing
on?
Ms. REGAN. I would say one issuethere are a lot of issuesbut
one of them I think we are seeing is personnel that can do the
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00157
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
158
work. And there is increasing contracting out for different things
that theymaybe they should be doing in house because they lack
the number and the quality of the people to be able to do it.
What we hear everywhere we go is that V.A. cant hire the personnel whetherit may be financial, it may be some other rules
that are in place. I mean, for example, we need to go out to the
hospitals. V.A. is doing a lot of contracting for positions, but they
are not personal services, so you cant supervise them while you
are in your facility.
So even an authority for personal services authority like DOD
has would be an advantage, if you have to hire outside doctors
Mr. FARR. Among that personnel, is there a priority of the type
of personnel?
Ms. REGAN. I think if you ask each part of the agency, they all
need personnel. The health care needs to be able to hire more personnel to take care of the patients. That would be V.A. employees.
I.T. needs more personnel who can develop systems who have the
knowledge even how to develop a contract to go out and contract
for somebody to develop the system, the acquisition workforce
needs to be built up so that you have contracting officers. V.A.
needs more VBA examiners to come in and be trained.
Mr. FARR. So the money is there, because we appropriated a lot
of money. And the money is there to hire the people, but then we
cant acquire them in the federal service for whatever reason, so we
are using that money to contract out to the private sector to provide what we cant do on our own?
Ms. REGAN. We understand there are some FTE ceilings and that
they cant surpass the FTE ceiling, so they have to go out and hire
people. So that would be one issue to look at. And I think the department can answer that question.
I mean, right now, I think with hiring, we are getting more applicants for jobs than we have seen in years, so it is not the number of people. It is whether or not we can hire sufficient numbers
of qualified people and pay
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you very much.
Mr. Berry.
MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE ADVISORY PANELS
It looks like we once again are uncovering more snakes than we

can kill. [Laughter.]
And I share your concern about this procurement of pharmaceuticals. I think that might be worth a hearing all by itself sometime.
Mr. EDWARDS. With your background, I would like to follow up.
Mr. BERRY. Some of thosedo you call them advisory panels?
Ms. REGAN. It is a Multiple Award Schedule Advisory Panel. It
was published in the Federal Register because it includes non-government employees.
Mr. BERRY. The V.A. doesnt have anyone that sits on that panel?
Ms. REGAN. They have one person. After a letter from the House
Veterans Affairs Committee, they put person from the V.A., even
though the only agency other than GSA that awards schedules is
V.A., and we do $7.5 billion worth of business a year.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00158
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
159
Mr. BERRY. All right.
Mr. EDWARDS. Seven-and-a-half billion?
Ms. REGAN. Yes. And that is growing every year, too.
Mr. BERRY. That used to be a lot of money. [Laughter.]
Do you ever have any problem getting a company to participate?
Ms. REGAN. Yes, in fact, there are certain product lines, for example, cardiac stents, where I dont believe there are any on the
federal supply schedule program. It is voluntary for companies to
come in, but none of the manufacturers have come in and put
stents on contract.
Cardiac devices, such as pacemaker, they were on contract up
until only one company, I think, was left by about 2004. V.A. then
did a competitive award, national contracts that went to two companies in 2004. One failed because there was a big recall, and the
other company, I guess the contract expired. They just now awarded another one in November.
So they do some national competitive contracts for some items,
but there is a lot of items they havent done that on. And like I
said, stents is a big one.
Mr. BERRY. I bet recalling stents is an interesting process.
Ms. REGAN. Yes, V.A. has a fairly good program for the recalls
that it gets out to the facilities. And they actually have a pretty
good database telling you what patients and what stents were
used.
Mr. BERRY. Thank you once again for your service.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Berry. And I look forward to
leveraging off your expertise in health care, to follow up on the
issue that we discussed there regarding that advisory panel.
Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, it looks like you all are efficient
enough, we might actually get a lunch break here between these
two hearings. And I am grateful.
Ms. Finn
Ms. FINN. Yes?
ENROLLMENT
Mr. WAMP [continuing]. In 2007, we had 23.6 million veterans

number is up somewhat, but we all know that not every veteran
is enrolled in the V.A. What is that percentage?
And as the economy continues to weakenand I dont want to
scare anybody, but I heard testimony yesterday that we may be in
the 15th month of a 60-month recession, based on the global economic picture right now, if we are in the 15th month of a 60-month
recession, what does that do to V.A. enrollment?
I would expect it to increase as more and more veterans that
arent enrolled in the V.A. system have no choice but to come to
the V.A. system?
Ms. FINN. Mr. Wamp, I do not have any statistics at hand on
how many veterans are enrolled in the system.
Mr. WAMP. Even with Iraq and Afghanistan?
Dr. DAIGH. That is correct, sir.
Mr. WAMP. Okay. Did you say 5 million users? So it is only about
20 percent?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00159
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
160
Mr. EDWARDS. About 5.5 million, 5.8 million were the projections
I think this year.
Mr. WAMP. So 25 percent is a better number? Which leads me
to my second question, because I dont think we have had the kind
of rapid redeployment, downsizing that we are going to expect
under President Obama. What does that do? We are talking the
next 16 months or thereabouts, you should see more people entering the veteran pool.
Are we ramping up or ready for that? Or is it going to be this
great influx of new veterans enrolling in the V.A. system as they
come home?
Ms. FINN. I dont think V.A. is ramping up for that, and I am
not sure what their expectation or their projections are for enrolling those veterans. You know, just as a layman in this, I would anticipate that, as the economy has worsened, if people cannot obtain
health care through other means, they may look to the V.A.
Mr. WAMP. You and Mr. Daigh both can answer this question. I
am speaking to a statewide National Guard convention this Saturday in Tennessee. And so from the Guard and reservist perspective,
do you know anything to report relative to the V.A.? Because, obviously, their use of the V.A. is kind of like their service to our country. It aint what it used to be. It is a whole lot tougher.
Ms. FINN. Yes, sir.
Mr. WAMP. And more and more, I assume, have access to the
V.A. and are using the V.A. when they come home. Anything you
all would add as I prepare to speak to probably a couple thousand
of them Saturday? Great. I dont think most I.G.s are as nice as
you are. [Laughter.]
Ms. FINN. I would say that the V.A. offers people returning, the
reservists and the National Guard a lot in benefits, other than
health care. The new G.I. Bill provides payments based on time on
active duty. Other benefits include educational benefits, and rehabilitation.
We did an audit of the transition for benefits and found that
many of the reservists were not necessarily getting notices that
they were eligible for benefits. And so we recommended that VBA
put in some new controls. And I believe they have done that. So
hopefully they should be getting notification.
Mr. WAMP. Thank you.
NEW G.I. BILL
Ms. Finn, let me ask you: Is there any risk that, because of the
slowness of implementing software system and the management
issues involving contracting out versus doing work in-house, the
new G.I. Bill implementation, is there any significant risk that veterans will be denied the G.I. educational benefits they are supposed
to begin receiving this fall?
Ms. FINN. I believe V.A. will be paying benefits. I think the question is, will they be able to handle the volume of claims that will
come in between now and when they start making payments in August and will they be able to process all of those for timely payment?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00160
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
161
So I think the risk is that, if someone were to file a claim late,
they may not get payment right on time, although I cant say that
for certain. I think there will be a risk of improper or erroneous
payments, because this process will likely be largely manual at this
point.
Mr. EDWARDS. That is what I understand for the first year,
so
Ms. FINN. Yes. And we wont have the built-in edit and control
that we would put into an automated system.
Mr. EDWARDS. Well, I hope, given some of the abuses of the original G.I. Bill and the risk that posed to the credibility of what I considered one of the greatest pieces of legislation ever passed by any
Congress, I hope we can keep an eye on the check-and-balance system to be sure that there are not people qualifying illegally for G.I.
benefits. And if you have any insights on that in the months ahead,
please follow my request and contact us and let you and I and our
V.A. MILCON staff
Ms. FINN. I will add that
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Tell us about that.
Ms. FINN. I will add that to the charge of my team.
HIRING OF CLAIMS PROCESSORS
Mr. EDWARDS. Nothing could undermine our ability to fight for

improved benefits and funding for veterans more than abuse of a
major program such as the G.I. education bill. So we would welcome your input there.
Let me ask you about the new hiring for addressing the claims
backlog. We have provided enough funding in the last 14 months
to hireif you count the stimulus billas many as 7,000 new
claims processors. How would you rate the V.A.s training program
at this point for those new hires?
Ms. FINN. We took a look at the hiring practice last year. And
the one area we didnt look at specifically was the training program, because GAO had just done some work on the training programs. And I think they had some issues mainly with the administration of it.
We do know that they are deploying the new hires in a team approach, where they work in a specific team with a group of other
more experienced employees doing incoming triage, which is the incoming processing, or various things.
And I think that would probably be a reasonable way to implement that many new people. We are going to be starting up work
again, going back and looking at a second year now of the influx
of new employees and hope to get a lot more information on how
they are being used, how they are being trained, and what the end
result is.
Mr. EDWARDS. Can we look at the turnover rate, too
Ms. FINN. Yes, absolutely. Last year when we took a look at it,
the attrition and the turnover rate was relatively low, especially
compared to other employees. But that was fairly early in the hiring process.
Mr. EDWARDS. Is the V.A. keeping account of data that would
allow us to look now, a year from now, 2 years from now, to see
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00161
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
162
what kind of rate they have of decisions overturned so we could determine how effective they have been in that job?
Ms. FINN. I am not surethat is a good question. I am not sure
if they will have that by employee, but we will endeavor to find out
how they will address that.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. That would be helpful to look at.
Ms. FINN. Sure.
V.A. DATA SECURITY
Mr. EDWARDS. Let me ask you very, very quickly. I have got half
a minute. Is there any chance thatany significant chance that we
could have another problem where a V.A. computer is taken out of
the office and, maliciously or otherwise, used to compromise the
privacy of a large number of veterans?
Ms. FINN. That chance still exists, yes.
Mr. EDWARDS. How would you compare the V.A.s privacy protection security systems to corporate America, as good as, better than,
or worse than?
Ms. REGAN. I would say, since the 2006 data loss, V.A. has really
shored up their ability. If you remember, every big data loss we
have had has not been intrusion into a system; it has been employees with access losing something or whatever.
They have now put out a series of rules they didnt have before,
where you cant use your home computer, if you have a laptop, it
has to be encrypted.
So I think the risk has diminished. You are still going to have
rogue employees out there that arent going to follow the rules, but
I think the risk is diminished significantly and that V.A. would be
able to more swiftly take action because there are strict policies out
there.
Mr. EDWARDS. I would welcome any recommendations either of
you has in terms of steps the V.A. hasnt taken that they should
take. Thank you. Thank you both.
Mr. Farr.
ACCOUNTABILITY GOALS
Mr. FARR. I dont know if I have any other question, other than
for each one of you, if we had one thing that we couldthis committee could do, what would it be, in your opinion?
Ms. MELVIN. From my perspective, because we have looked
across a number of V.A.s I.T. initiatives, there is one common concern that always stays on the books with us, and that is in terms
of their overall project management, their ability to really, as I said
earlier, to establish goals, to really follow through with results-oriented measures for making sure that they are holding themselves
accountable for what they are doing.
We would like to certainly see more in the way of an emphasis
by the department on making sure that it is holding itself accountable, that it has established really defined measures for its success
and that it can report against those measures. So from our perspective
Mr. FARR. Is that a lack of skilled managers?
Ms. MELVIN. It is notno, it is not contracting, per se. It is really in theit is in the management, overall project management as-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00162
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
163
pects of what the agency does. They certainly do put out a lot of
plans. I dont want to, you know, say that they dont have documentation, they dont have plans. They do.
What we would like to see is a greater degree of discipline, more
rigor in the planning efforts that the department undertakes to
make sure that it really is setting specific goals, that it is not a
matter of saying, We are going to just increase ourwhat we can
share or we are going to increase the number of patients, but to
really set defined, concrete measures of, when we get to this level,
we feel that will, at least in the short term or in the midterm or
the long term, that we have positioned ourselves to handle some
percentage of our staff
Mr. FARR. A greater degree of discipline in creating measurable
outcomes?
Ms. MELVIN. Yes, rigor inin the processes that they are using
to really manage and monitor and hold themselves accountable for
their initiatives.
Mr. FARR. Ms. Regan?
Ms. REGAN. Can I give you two?
Mr. FARR. Yes.
Ms. REGAN. One of them is on the federal supply schedules that
I would consider, because V.A. has had these schedules for almost
40 years, just giving them to V.A. and not playing Mother May I
with GSA. We know our products. We have had better oversight
than GSA has. We know our industries.
There are clauses in the contract that maybe need to be in ours
and not theirs. That would be one.
On the internal V.A. side, as I said in my testimony, decentralization is a huge problem to having an efficient acquisition program, and that V.A. needs to take steps to centralize.
V.A. did a study last year, PricewaterhouseCoopers did a study
and came up with the model that hasnt been implemented.
Mr. FARR. So the second is what?
Ms. REGAN. Pardon me? The second was to centralize V.A. procurement. Right now, you basically have two procurement activities. You have VHA, and you have everybody else. You are not
going to have a procurement program that functions efficiently if
it is not more centralized or centralized. And that probably should
be done in steps, as opposed to doing all at once, because most of
your people are out in the field in VHA.
Ms. FINN. I would second both of those suggestions greatly. My
thought would be to hold V.A. accountable for the integrity of the
data that they use to report their performance and their outcomes.
V.A. has a lot of data, and it comes from a lot of different
sources. And as it is rolled up, I cant be certain that it is always
collected and recorded really in a consistent manner across the organization.
So that situation creates a lot of concerns in my mind, over
measuring their performance, because I am just not sure how well
we can rely on the data, whether it is the number of claims processed or the medical treatments or the number of patients seen in
the clinic or the appointments available.
Mr. FARR. That is all.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00163
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
164
Mr. EDWARDS. What an excellent question, Sam. I am glad you
asked that.
Zach, would you like to finish off any questions?
Mr. WAMP. Well, speaking of that, I am going to ask three quick
questions, one to each of you, and I hope we can get quick answers.
Ms. Regan, how many billions are contracted out under fee-forservice care? And is that an efficient way to go forward to expand
that or not?
Ms. Finn, there is a category called miscellaneous obligations.
How much is that? And is that kind of an end run around the normal process?
And, Mrs. Melvin, we talked about the complete interoperability,
but what is GAOs definition of complete interoperability?
Ms. Regan.
Ms. REGAN. By fee-for-service, I would assume you are talking
about the health care resource contracts, where we hire physicians
to come into our hospital?
Mr. WAMP. Yes. Yes.
FEE-FOR-SERVICE CARE
Ms. REGAN. There is no system in V.A. that can tell you exactly
how many dollars were spent on that, because, as I have testified,
there is no system that records all of that data as to what is spent
and being spent on.
I do know it is an increasing number, because one of my groups
does the pre-awards for those contracts. We expected when you increased physician pay, comparability pay, that that would go down,
but we havent seen that. And it is becoming even increasing for,
like, support services and things like that, so
Mr. WAMP. So you cant tell if it is efficient because you dont
know how much it is?
Ms. REGAN. Right. Nobody knows how much it is. I can probably
tell you that we are overpaying for the services, but I cant tell you
how many dollars are actually spent, because there is no place that
tells you that.
Mr. WAMP. Ms. Finn, miscellaneous obligations?
Ms. FINN. I dont know the number. I will get that for you for
the record.
We have seen at times other documents, rather than purchase
orders or your regular procurement documents, being used to
record miscellaneous obligations. And sometimes we have seen that
possibly used, yes, to record and obligate funds where it is not
going through the correct process.
INTEROPERABILITY
Mr. WAMP. Ms. Melvin, complete interoperability means what?

Ms. MELVIN. We do not have a definition of complete interoperability. However, what I would state is that it depends significantly
on the agencies involved and the priorities that they establish. In
V.A.s case, relative to the clinicians, that is what they have used
thus far in setting the priority for the drug allergy pharmacy data
that is fully computable. It really depends on what the needs are
and to be defined by those entities that are in involved with that,
in particular the health care providers.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00164
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
165
Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I now am finished.

Mr. EDWARDS. Okay, those are good questions all.
Well, I want to thank each of you for your excellent testimony.
And what this hearing does for me is it just reminds me and our
committee of the important partnership you can play with us as
you try to be more proactive in exercising our oversight responsibility.
We have all been so busy over the last few years that it has been
hard sometimes for committees to exercise the kind of oversight
that I think all of us would like to do. So we see you as critical
partners.
Thank you. I thank each of you, Ms. Finn, Ms. Regan, and Ms.
Melvin, Dr. DaighI tell you, and isnt it impressive, the years of
commitment to your jobs and what you are doing? It says a lot
about your values.
Thank you very much, all, for being here. We will stand in recess
until 1:30, at which time we will meet on family housing and troop
housing. Thank you all.
[Prepared statements follow:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00165
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00166
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
166
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00167
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
167
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00168
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
168
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00169
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
169
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00170
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
170
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00171
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
171
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00172
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
172
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00173
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
173
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00174
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
174
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00175
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
175
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00176
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
176
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00177
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
177
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00178
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
178
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00179
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
179
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00180
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
180
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00181
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
181
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00182
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
182
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00183
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
183
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00184
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
184
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00185
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
185
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00186
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
186
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00187
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
187
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00188
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
188
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00189
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
189
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00190
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
190
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00191
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
191
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00192
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
192
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00193
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
193
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00194
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
194
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00195
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
195
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00196
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
196
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00197
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
197
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00198
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
198
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00199
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
199
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00200
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
200
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00201
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
201
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00202
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
202
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00203
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
203
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00204
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
204
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00205
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
205
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00206
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
206
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00207
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
207
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00208
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
208
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00209
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
209
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00210
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
210
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00211
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
211
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00212
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
212
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00213
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
213
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00214
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
214
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00215
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
215
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00216
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
216
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00217
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
217
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00218
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
218
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00219
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
219
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00220
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
220
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00221
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
221
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00222
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
222
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00223
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
223
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00224
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
224
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00225
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
225
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00226
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
226
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00227
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
227
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00228
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
228
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00229
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
229
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00230
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
230
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00231
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
231
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00232
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
232
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00233
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
233
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00234
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
234

FAMILY AND TROOP HOUSING
WITNESSES
WAYNE ARNY, DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, INSTALLATIONS AND ENVIRONMENT
KEITH EASTIN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY, INSTALLATIONS AND ENVIRONMENT
B.J. PENN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE NAVY, INSTALLATIONS
AND ENVIRONMENT
KEVIN W. BILLINGS, ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE AIR
FORCE, INSTALLATIONS, ENVIRONMENT, AND LOGISTICS
STATEMENT
OF THE
CHAIRMAN
Mr. EDWARDS [presiding]. Thank you for all being here. I want
to call the subcommittee back to order and say good afternoon to
everyone.
I want to welcome you to todays hearing on the issue of family
and troop housing in our military. The goal of todays hearing is
to establish the current state of family and troop housing in our
military and to ascertain additional resources or decisions that
have to be made in order to ensure that every serviceman and
woman, every family, has an adequate place to live.
Several years ago the Department of Defense set a goal of having
the funds in place to eliminate all inadequate housingfamily
housingby fiscal year 2009. This goal was to be accomplished primarily through the Military Housing Privatization Initiative.
In the meantime, the Department of Defense has embarked on
an expansion of the Army and Marine Corps, and the Air Force
will begin to increase its numbers again after years of decline. This
will certainly result in additional demands for both family housing
and a greater requirement for barracks and dormitories. So our
committee thought that it would be a good time to assess how far
we have come in addressing quality of housing for both military
families and single servicemembers and identify challenges as we
move forward under a new administration.
Before I introduce our witnesses, I would like to recognize our
ranking member, Mr. Wamp, for any opening comments he would
care to make.
STATEMENT
OF THE
Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, our morning hearing was quite a bit
cooler in this room, so I dont know if it is our witnesses or the
topic, or just the afternoon sun coming through, but it is a little
warm
Mr. EDWARDS. Running up and down those stairs, voting, may be
it too.
(235)
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00235
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
236
Mr. WAMP. In any event, Mr. Secretaries, thank you for your
time. I look forward to this most important hearing, and I have no
further opening statement. Just go straight to questions.
Mr. Wayne Arny is the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for
Installations and Environment, and no stranger to our subcommittee.
Welcome back, Mr. Secretary.
He was appointed to his current post in February of 2008. He
previously served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Installations and Facilities. He is a 1964 graduate of the Naval Academy, and active duty naval aviator until 1981. How many hours?
Mr. ARNY. Three thousand.
Mr. EDWARDS. 3,000 hours of flying time. In those responsibilities he ultimately achieved the rank of commander in the Navy.
He served as a staff member of the Senate Armed Services Committee from 1981 to 1984 and was program associate director for
national security and international affairs at OMB from 1986 to
1989.
And I would note, as with so many who testify before our committee who have served our country in uniform, Secretary Arny has
two sons currently serving in the Navy. Where are they stationed
right now?
Mr. ARNY. They are both in Lemoore, California. One is coming
east and going to
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank them on our behalf.
Keith Eastin is the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Installations and Environment. Again, welcome back to our subcommittee.
He has served in his current position since August of 2005. He previously served as Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy,
and as Deputy Under Secretary and Chief Environmental Council
at the Department of the Interior.
He worked as a senior consultant to the State Department in organizing a ministry of the Iraqi government. His private sector experience includes PricewaterhouseCooper, Deloitte & Touche, and
the American Arbitration Association.
Mr. B.J. Penn, Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Installations
and Environment, is returning to the subcommittee once again,
having been appointed to his current position in March of 2005. He
previously served as director of the Industrial Base Assessments
from October 2001 to March of 2005. He is a naval aviator of over
6,500 flight hours.
So, over 9,000 hours between the two of you. That is impressive.
His private sector experience includes having worked with Loral
and Lockheed Martin.
Mr. Kevin W. Billings, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for
Installations, Environment, and Logistics.
Mr. Billings, welcome. You are no stranger to the Hill. Welcome
to our subcommittee today.
He was appointed as acting assistant secretary in 2008. He previously served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force
for Energy, Environmental Safety, and Occupational Health from
2007 to 2008. He has extensive private sector experience, including
Westinghouse, Alliance Group, and Interior Solutions. And notably,
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00236
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
237
to former chairman, now ranking member of the full Appropriations Committee in the House, he worked as a special assistant to
Representative Jerry Lewis, who has been such a champion on behalf of our military men and women.
I again want to thank all of you for being here. As you well
know, your full statements will be included in the record, and we
would like to begin by asking each of you if you could make an
opening statement of 5 minutes or less.
And Secretary Arny, we will begin with you.
STATEMENT
OF
WAYNE ARNY
Mr. ARNY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Wamp, distinguished

members of the subcommittee. I am pleased to appear before you
today with my colleagues from the other services to discuss the
housing initiatives for the department.
First I want to thank this committee and your colleagues here
in the House and in the Senate for the authorities that you provided us under the Military Housing Privatization Initiative. These
authorities have allowed us to greatly improve the quality of housing available to our military families.
We have been able to make these improvements much faster
than through the use of traditional military construction, because
we were able to leverage private capital to augment appropriated
funding. And the rental streams created in these projects ensure
sustainment and recapitalization of these houses well into the future.
We have been extremely pleased with the performance of our development partners on the 94 existing projects across the department. Besides bringing great expertise to the construction and operation of our housing, our partners are proud to be serving military families and offer many services to enhance the sense of community on our bases.
Our one underperforming partner, American Eagle, has been replaced in all six of our projectsin all six of its projectsby three
experienced and solidly performing partners. While no government
funds were put at risk in these projects, the bases involved have
not yet seen the new construction they had expected. The new partners are quickly moving to get those projects back on track.
In response to congressional direction, and consistent with the
lessons we have learned from this experience, we have added increased oversight to the privatization program. This oversight includes on-scene procedures at the base level as well as increased
program reporting to my office and to the Congress.
Because of BRAC restructuring, global re-posturing, joint basing,
and Grow the Force requirements, this is a time of great change
in DoD installations. All of these efforts have significant effects on
housing requirements at many of our bases for both families and
unaccompanied servicemembers. The military departments are
closely reviewing those requirements at all bases, and together we
believe we can support our servicemembers and their families as
we grow the force over the next 3 to 5 years with both military construction and with privatization.
Unfortunately, however, the stagnation in the housing and overall financial markets has somewhat affected our use of the privat-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00237
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
238
ization program in addressing these changes. Market forces have

led to increased costs and tightening of credit standards. While the
effect on our 94 existing projects has been minimal, finding financing for future projects presents new challenges.
The viability of military housing projects remains high in the
view of the private sector, but lending is limited across the board
due to the general lack of liquidity in the financial markets. Military departments have been meeting with the financial community
to seek new sources of capital, and we have revisited some of our
guarantee authorities in an attempt to make our projects even
more attractive.
Additionally, we are considering executing our new projects in
such a manner that we will start the private sector operation while
delaying taking down private sector debt until it is more efficiently
priced. This will allow the department to stop the deterioration of
the housing stock of our newer projects while waiting to maximize
private capital available to the projects income stream.
We also greatly appreciate your continued support of our unaccompanied personnel housing program. We are currently completing an inventory of all our unaccompanied housing to better
identify the shortfalls and ensure proper funding to provide quality
housing for our unaccompanied servicemembers. We plan to establish goals for improvement, as we did for family housing, and we
will also continue to pursue additional use of our privatization authorities to improve our barracks, and also to learn from the Navys
first two pilot projects at Norfolk and San Diego. While we have
had some limited success with unaccompanied projects for senior
enlisted in the Army, the Navy pilot authorities include an ability
to pay members partial housing allowances that make projects for
junior enlisted more financially viable, which we will work to extend to the other Services.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, I would like again to thankto expressappreciation for the strong support of military housing programs that are crucial to a decent quality of life for our service
members.
[Prepared statement of Wayne Arny follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00238
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00239
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
Insert graphic folio 401 50526A.135
239
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00240
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
240
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00241
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
241
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00242
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
242
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00243
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
243
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00244
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
244
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00245
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
245
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00246
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
246
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00247
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
247
248
Mr. EDWARDS. I thank you, Secretary Arny.
Secretary Eastin.
STATEMENT
OF
KEITH EASTIN
Mr. EASTIN. I dont want to feel left out here, but I have 192
hours in a Cessna 172. [Laughter.]
Mr. EDWARDS. Well, I have got my thousand in a 210, so between
the two of us
Mr. EASTIN. Let me try to be a little short with my opening remarks. I will give you a little overview: The Armys campaign plan
is predicated on rebalancing the Force in an era of persistent conflict. A renewed focus and investment in our housingsingle soldier and familyprograms are key elements for finding that balance.
Among the challenges we face are a high op tempo, frequent deployments, and aging barracks inventory that requires constant
management attention, repairs, and maintenance until new construction projects are completed, the impact of the financial market
turmoil on our ongoing privatization programs, and major stationing changes due to BRAC, Grow the Army, and global redeployments.
In family housing, we have come a long way with our Army
housing facilities in terms of quantity, quality, and adequacy. Inadequate family housing will be eliminated in 2016 for privatized
housing, 2010 for government-owned CONUS housing, and 2012
for overseas CONUS government-owned housing. For major Grow
the Army sites, where our housing market analysis show an insufficient in-state of available family housing, we are programming
additional government equity contributions to our existing residential communities initiatives to build additional family housing
units.
With respect to barracks, our goal is to provide safe, clean, and
functional barracks for all soldierspermanent party, trainees,
wounded warriors, and Guard and Reserve. Our overarching strategy is to buy out all inadequate permanent party barracks by 2013
by removing any barracks with common area latrines and improving our barracks complexes as a whole. The last inadequate buildings will be funded for construction and renovation in 2013 and occupied in 2015.
We are buying out our training barracks requirements by 2015,
and those will be occupied in 2017. We are instituting improved
procedures to assure that barracks are properly maintained, sustained, and renovated.
With respect to privatization of our housing, our family RCI program is comprised of 45 installations which are comprised into 35
combined projects and a planned instate of about 90,000 homes. As
of this January we have privatized 39 of 45 installations, give or
take 85,000 homes, we have built almost 18,000 homes and renovated another 13,000 homes. The last RCI projects will be awarded in 2010, and the remaining 14,000 privatized inadequate homes
will be replaced and renovated by 2016.
Our private sector partners are not immune to the global financial industry turmoil affecting the entire credit market, but I am
pleased to report that the Army has a proactive process and proce-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00248
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
249
dures in place to detect problems, and as issues arise we will work

with our partners to mitigate the impacts.
With respect to what we call warriors in transitionthose returning from either Iraq or Afghanistanwe have about 85,000
warriors in transition, and they are currently housed in interim facilities that have been modified to remove barriers to improve accessibility. Every warrior in transition is assigned a suitable room,
preferably on-post, close to the medical treatment facility.
W.T.s are assigned to the best available facilities we have at the
post. The specific location is a decision reached by the senior mission commander at those posts. The new permanent warrior transition facilities we are programming will exceed the standards required by the Americans with Disabilities Act and other federal accessibility programs.
In conclusion, the Army has put policies, procedures, leadership
focus, and additional resources into place to ensure that we continue to make steady progress towards buying out our family housing, barracks, and warriors in transition requirements, then maintaining them to standards. I await your questions. Thank you.
[Statement of Keith Eastin follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00249
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00250
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
250
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00251
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
251
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00252
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
252
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00253
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
253
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00254
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
254
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00255
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
255
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00256
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
256
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00257
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
257
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00258
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
258
259
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Secretary EASTIN.
Secretary Penn.
STATEMENT
OF
B.J. PENN
Mr. PENN. Chairman Edwards, Representative Wamp, members

of the subcommittee, it is a privilege to come before you today to
discuss the Department of the Navys housing programs. I would
like to begin by expressing our deep appreciation to the Congress
and this subcommittee for your unwavering support of housing for
our Sailors, Marines, and their families. With your support, we
have made tremendous progress in improving the quality of life,
and specifically the living conditions, for our personnel.
I will briefly discuss those improvements, as well as the remaining challenges. The privatization of family housing within the Department of the Navy has been a resounding success. To date, we
have executed 30 projects involving more than 61,000 homes for
Navy or Marine Corps families. As a result of these projects, over
41,000 homes will be constructed or replaced.
These authorities have allowed us to leverage $800 million in the
Department of the Navyto fund approximately $8 billion in investments. To put it another way, each dollar that the Navy has
contributed will yield $10 of investment in better housing for our
families.
Military housing privatization has been the cornerstone of our efforts to eliminate inadequate family housing in the department.
Where privatization is not feasible, such as the foreign locations
where the U.S. authorities do not apply, we have continued to use
traditional military construction.
At the end of 2007, we met the OSD goal of having funds, programs, and contracts in place to eliminate inadequate family housing. The Navy currently expects that all work will be completed by
2011, and the Marine Corps by 2014. The latter period is extended
because the Marine Corps plans to retain its housing in the interim
to accommodate the increased requirements due to force structure
initiatives, like Grow the Force, until sufficient additional housing
can be built. We have made similar progress in unaccompanied
housing.
This committees support of the Commandants Barracks Initiative and the resulting fiscal year 2009 appropriation of $1.2 billion
in MILCON funding for Marine Corps barracks will translate into
approximately 12,300 permanentparty spaces at eight Marine
Corps installations. The Marine Corps expects to satisfy the requirement by 2014.
We have also focused on the needs of our wounded warriors
through the construction of wounded warrior barracks at Camp
Lejeune and Camp Pendleton. These projects will provide critical
temporary housing for our healing wounded warriors.
The Navy has successfully executed two unaccompanied housing
privatization projects using the pilot authority provided by the
Congress in 2003. These projects will result in a total of over 3,100
units, including over 2,100 new two-bedroom apartments for unaccompanied Sailors stationed in the San Diego and Hampton Roads
areas. The Navy is continuing to evaluate candidate locations for
the third pilot project, including the Mayport-Jacksonville, Florida
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00259
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
260
area, as well as additional phases at San Diego and Hampton

Roads.
Our unaccompanied program still has its challenges. The Navys
Homeport Ashore Program, to provide housing ashore to junior unaccompanied sailors currently living aboard ships, remains a priority to the department. The Navy has thought to address this requirement through both MILCON and the use of pilot unaccompanied housing privatization authority.
However, there remain Sailors living onboard ships in our fleet
concentration areas. The Navy continues to evaluate bachelor housing strategies to address this remaining requirement and enhance
the quality of life for single sea-duty Sailors.
Returning to the subject of military housing privatization, there
has been a great deal of attention focused by Congress on the services oversight of housing privatization projects in the wake of difficulties experienced by some partners. We take seriously our responsibility to the Munzert Privatization Agreement to ensure that
the governments long-term interests are adequately protected.
We have instituted a portfolio management approach that collects and analyzes financial, occupancy, construction, and resident
satisfaction data to ensure that the projects remain sound and that
the partners are performing as expected. We conduct meetings with
senior representatives of our partners and, where necessary, resolve issues of mutual interest.
Where our projects have encountered difficulties, appropriate corrective actions have been taken. For example, we had concerns regarding the performance of the private partner in our Pacific
Northwest project. We worked with that partner to sell its interest
to another companywith a good record of performance with military housing privatization projects. We are satisfied with the outcome.
Additionally, we are not insulated from the difficulties affecting
the nations economy. We have seen a dramatic curtailment in the
amount of private financing available for our future military housing privatization projects and phases. This, in turn, affects plans
for constructions and renovations. We are working with the office
of the Secretary of Defense, the other services, and the lending
community on ways to mitigate such impacts and preserve our ability to leverage private capital on future phases.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement. I look forward to
answering any questions that you or members of this committee
may have.
[Prepared statement of B.J. Penn follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00260
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00261
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
261
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00262
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
262
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00263
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
263
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00264
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
264
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00265
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
265
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00266
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
266
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00267
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
267
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00268
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
268
269
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Secretary Penn.
Secretary Billings.
STATEMENT
OF
KEVIN W. BILLINGS
Mr. BILLINGS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Wamp,

distinguished members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to address the Air Force unaccompanied and family housing, both key quality of life issues for our Airmen and our families.
When Secretary Donley asked me to assume the role of Acting
Secretary of the Air Force (Installations, Environment and Logistics) six months ago, I laid out four basic principles to guide our
organization. First and foremost is compliance with the law. Second
is to be good stewards of the environment, and equally importantly,
to be good stewards of the taxpayers dollars. The fourth is to do
this all while remembering that taking care of our Airmen and
their families is what allows us to accomplish our mission.
Real quickly, though, I would also like to thank my colleagues
before the committee here, because without the guidance of Mr.
Arny and Mr. Eastin and Mr. Penn, I would have not been able to
get up to speed as quickly on these issues as I have, and I want
to publicly thank them.
With that fourth principle I want to reiterate what Chief Master
Sergeant of the Air Force McKinley told you a couple weeks ago
about our housing and dorms, and that is that the Air Force is
committed to ensuring our Airmen and their families have quality
housing in which to live and raise their families. We have almost
43,000 Airmen living in unaccompanied housing, or what we refer
to as dormitories, and over 65,000 families living in Air Force family housing.
We truly appreciate the continued efforts of this subcommittee,
the Congress, and the valuable support and leadership you have
provided to the success of our housing program. First turning to
unaccompanied housing, the Air Force continues our longstanding
commitment to provide quality dormitories. As Chief McKinley also
testified to this committee, dorms are not just a place where Airmen sleep; they are a place where we blue our newest and youngest Airmen, our future Air Force leaders.
Enlisted Airmen are the backbone of our Air Force, and we are
currently aware of the vital importance quality living conditions
contributes to morale and retention. Since fiscal year 2000, we
have demonstrated our commitment by providing quality dormitories for our Airmen by funding 95 construction projects totaling almost $1.3 billion.
We continue to replace dormitories at the end of their useful life
with our standard Air Force design, Dorms for Airmen Program.
The Dorms for Airmen design capitalizes on the wingman strategy
that keeps the dorm residents both socially and emotionally fit.
This is accomplished by providing our Airmen privacy and respect
with their own bedroom and head, yet encouraging them to interact
with their fellow Airmen through shared kitchen, laundry, and entertainment space.
The Air Force prides itself in saying that we recruit Airmen, yet
we retain families, and we understand the importance of quality
family housing to our members and their families. Our strategy for
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00269
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
270
providing quality family housing uses the Defense Department offbase first policy to determine what the local community can support and the need for on-base housing.
Where possible, we utilize the congressional authorities for privatization to meet our housing requirements. We will continue to
privatize where it makes sense. However, when privatization is not
feasible, such as at overseas bases, we rely on traditional military
construction funding. We continue to make progress in the replacement or major improvement of our housing for Air Force families.
Since last spring, the Air Force completed new construction or
major improvements on 1,161 units in the United States and 911
units overseas. Additionally, we have another 2,286 units under
construction in the United States, and 2,783 units under construction overseas.
Using privatization to accelerate our family housing improvement program, we have seen delivery of over 10,000 new or renovated homes, and are currently bringing on-line over 200 quality
homes a month. By the beginning of 2010 we will have privatized
close to 38,900 housing units at 44 bases. Further, we plan to privatize 100 percent of our family housing inventory in the
Continential United States, Hawaii, Alaska, and Guam by the end
of fiscal year 2010. Current projections show by strategically
leveraging more than $402 million in government investment, we
will have brought in almost $6.3 billion in private sector total housing development.
Finally, I would like to thank you for your support of our Airmen
in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. This important appropriation significantly supports the Air Force programs for providing quality housing for our Airmen and their families. Specifically, we thank you for providing the Air Force $80 million for family housing and military construction, $16 million for
housing operations and maintenance, and $100 million for dormitories. While this appropriation will help the Air Force improve
its housing inventory and stimulate the local job market surrounding our various Air Force bases, there are still critical requirements to fund in future appropriations.
In closing, the Air Force would like to thank the committee for
its continued strong support of the Air Force and unaccompanied
and family housing. Through your support we are improving the
quality of life for our Airmen and their families by bringing quality
dormitories on-line faster than ever before, and at significant savings to the taxpayers through privatization.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to answering your
questions.
[Prepared statement of Kevin W. Billings follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00270
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00271
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
271
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00272
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
272
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00273
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
273
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00274
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
274
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00275
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
275
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00276
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
276
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00277
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
277
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00278
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
278
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00279
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
279
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00280
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
280
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00281
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
281
282
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Secretary Billings, and let me thank
each of you for what you do every day. One of the reasons I consider it a privilege to be on this subcommittee is, I dont think
there is any shortage of lobbyists running around Capitol Hill supporting various multi-billion dollar weapons programs, but in my
18 years in the House I think maybe two or three times at the
most have I had anybody come by my office asking that we do more
to provide better housing for our troops and their families, so you
are the voice and leaders making a difference in their quality of
life, and I thank each of you for that commitment.
I was going to recognize Mr. Wamp to start out the questioning,
but do I understand that Mr. Crenshaw might have to leave after
the next round of votes, and if that is necessary, I would be happy
to
Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, if you are going to rotate back and
forth I would ask that you let him go first in the event that he has
to leave after this series of votes.
Mr. EDWARDS. You bet.
Mr. Crenshaw.
PRIVATIZED HOUSING

And thank you all. I think privatized housing, as the chairman
said, gives us all a sense of pride, and so often civilians look at
military housing and say, Gee, you know, that is not so good. And
now they look at the privatized housing with a sense of envy, saying, You know, we would like to live in those kind of houses.
I visited San Diego and saw the family housing, and I tell you
what, it is awful nice. And I havent seen the, the privatized bachelor quarters, but I think it is a great program. It leverages the
money that we have and enables us to do good things that the private sector has been doing for a while. So I thank you all for working on this program.
Two quick questions. One has to do with Navy Region Southeast.
Secretary Penn, I know you have done Bachelor Privatized Housing in San Diego, you have done it in Hampton Roads, are you still
on track to do the Southeast project, part of those at Mayport, part
of those at Kings Bay?
Mr. PENN. Yes, sir. We are looking at the options to provide fantastic homes for our troops, and we are doing an analysis, as you
know, with a private program. We had three initial locations, and
two of them fell out, and Mayport-Jax is in now, and we are doing
the analysis on Mayport-Jax, based upon the requirements, yes,
sir.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Is there anything you needdo we need to extend this program? As I understand it, it may expire at the end of
this fiscal year.
Mr. PENN. It expires in September of 2009, sir.
Mr. CRENSHAW. So it would be important for us to extend this
program
Mr. PENN. Yes, sir.
Mr. CRENSHAW. One of the things I wanted to ask you about
Mayport: When you do a housing demand study, as you know the
Navy has made a decision to homeport a nuclear carrier there, and
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00282
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
283
the carrier may come sooner, may come later, but when you do the
demand part of your housing study, do you take into consideration
the fact that there is a plan to have nuclear carrier there with
3,000 Sailors? Does that go into your study?
Mr. PENN. That may be part of our EIS, or environmental impact
statement. We look at everything: schools, traffic.
Mr. CRENSHAW. But in taking into consideration it takes a little
while to build a project, you dont want to end up with a shortage
of housing.
Mr. PENN. We do analysis on Mayport, that is correct. We do.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Got you. And on the other side, I ask the Air
Force, no program is perfect, but my colleagues in Florida, we have
been informed that Patrick Air Force Base, that project down there
hasnt gone as well as some of the other ones, and there is a new
developer, and we were told they are going to open the housing up
tonon-defense people, and possibly living on base if you are not a
military member could present problems.
Do you sense that? Is that something you are aware of? And
have you done everything you can, been as creative as you can, to
make sure that there arent enough folks in the military to kind
of fill those?
NON-MILITARY ON BASE HOUSING
Mr. BILLINGS. Yes, sir. The issue with the waterfalls, as it is

called, at Patrick Air Force Base, Florida is larger than the developer wanted. There were operations to make sure that there are
the right number of folks in the buildings, but when it falls below
95 percent we open it up first to other military families, then unaccompanied military, then to the Guard and Reserve, then after that
to contractors, and then it falls down to the local community.
But before we let anybody from the local community in, we do
background checks, we do financial checks, and we make sure the
priority is to not have them on base. A lot of the privatized housing
is off-base, and the civilians who are part of that privatized housing are in the off-base part first, as opposed to on the on-base part.
And finally, the commander has sole authority of who he lets on
his base and who he doesnt, so as you put the processes together
to makes sure that these projects are viablethat is why we have
the waterfall so that the developers can continue to do the work
they need to dowe prioritize who can be part of that waterfall.
The waterfall is in place in a number of other bases, and again,
there are processes to make sure that anybody who is part of that
is looked at very carefully.
HOUSING PRIVATIZATION STANDARDIZATION
Mr. CRENSHAW. Real quick, Mr. Chairmanalso at Eglin. The

Air Force is going to do a project there, and as I understand it they
have put it out to bid at least twice, no developers said they want
to do it, and do you coordinate with the other services on building
family housing contracts? Is there kind of a standard or standardized way to do a privatized housing project? I wonder why it hasnt
worked as well there at Eglin, which is over in northwest Florida.
Any particular reasondoes it still make sense?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00283
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
284
EGLIN AFB, FL HOUSING PRIVATIZATION
Mr. BILLINGS. Privatization will make sense at Eglin Air Force

Base, Florida. One of the issues at Eglina complicating issue at
Eglinis the bed-down of the F35. And as we beddown the weapon system we were doing a supplemental environmental analysis so
that we can move forward to beddown. The supplemental analysis
will look at, perhaps, different runways and different flight patterns. So, we have actually put the privatized housing initiative at
Eglin on hold until we have done the supplemental environmental
impact statement on the overall F35 bed-down of the integrated
training facility there.
Mr. ARNY. I would like to make one comment. The thing to remember, too, iswhich took me a while to figure outanybody
below an active duty military person that comes in on this waterfall, and the first levels are either reservists or Guard or militaryrelated, or even on-base civilians, but anybody below that first level
only gets a 1-year lease, so that if you are full a year later that
person is out and one of your active duty people come in.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Got you. Got you.
Mr. Wamp, let me ask you, in terms of the procedurewe have
a 15-minute vote going. Are you comfortable with us going till 2 or
3 minutes before this vote is over? There is one more vote after
this, so
So if staff will let us know when it is down to 3 minutes before
the votes, I would appreciate that.
Thank you, Mr. Crenshaw.
Mr. Salazar.
Mr. SALAZAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You cut it pretty short.
Mr. EDWARDS. But you get your full 5 minutes.
PINON CANYON

First of all, let me thank all of you for your service. And not to
be outdone, but you have 182 hours, I have got
Mr. EASTIN. Ninety. One hundred and ninety. Please, dont
[Laughter.]
Mr. SALAZAR. I have got over 600 on a Piper Cherokee, so
I would like to discuss two more issues with Mr. Eastin. I know,
first of all, let me just tell you that I have the greatest respect for
all of you who have served in the military and for all of you who
serve this country. But there was an article in The Pueblo Chieftain this week where The Chieftain reported that Secretary
Eastin has reached a lease agreement with Denver businessman
Craig Walker to acquire 70,000 acres off the Pinon Canyon and
would announce it in Trinidad.
It really took me off-guard. I know that you and I have had some
discussions before about maybe the auction. Last year, 2 years ago,
we passed an amendment to Mil-Con V.A. appropriations bill that
actually prohibited the Army from utilizing any funding for future
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00284
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
285
expansions of Pinon Canyon. And of course, that was only a 1-year
prohibition.
Last year it was included in the language, and I guess I would
like to ask you if you think it was the intent of Congress to completely bar the expansion with the use of these funds. I think that
you might have mentioned to others that there might be other
sources of revenue or funding for that expansion. Could you
maybe
Mr. EASTIN. This is, as you and I have discussed before and I
have discussed with the citizens of Trinidad in an interesting littlewhat do I want to sayavailability in a gym down in Trinidad
for people to make comments about what the Army was doing. We
have no intention of violating what the prohibition is, but we have
had, I believe, Senator Salazar has asked GAO to look at this, and
they have found that we are not violating the law with respect to
that.
Our reading of the lawand you cant get around having lawyers
even though you are at the Army; they are everywherewe asked
them curtly about this. We are not acquiring, which would require
military construction funding, but we are, if you will, investigating
whether this will work and finding out how to make it work.
Our opinion is that those preliminary steps to see what the citizenry thinks, to take surveys out there of basicallyland and when
the land might be available, that can be used with operation and
maintenance funds, and not military construction funding. So it is
not our intention to buy anything without coming back to the committee, and certainly discussing this with the Southeast Colorado
delegation. So I think there is some confusion in what the source
of the funds was, and what could be used with those funds and the
other available funds for other purposes.
Mr. SALAZAR. Do you think that maybe you may be cutting some
of the funding that we use for housing for troops and utilizing some
of those funds to begin the search and paying for some of the research that you are doing now to acquire these properties? Do you
think that that is not taking money away from the housing?
Mr. EASTIN. Congressman, I dont believe so. We are using operation and maintenance funds, which comes out of a different account, so it is neitherfamily housing operations, which is one account, it is not in the construction funds. It doesnt come out of any
RCR projects we have, and doesnt come out of any of the barracks
upgrade programs either, or the training barracks upgrade programs. So in our opinionand in any event, I would venture to say
that what has been expended is something quite south of $1 million on this.
Mr. SALAZAR. So you will say that there is actually no agreement
right now?
Mr. EASTIN. The Chieftain, of course, is free to write whatever
it likes, and my guess is you have seen that, but there is not agreement to do anything. We are looking at all sorts of options down
there for acquiring land; we have, in fact, looked at thatit is a
little, I believe it is between 70,000 and 80,000-acre site that is the
subject of our discussionsbut no deal has been made. I dont even
know if we can do itcertainly we couldnt do it without coming
back to see you all.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00285
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
286
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Salazar. We will have time for a
second round of questioning, for those members who can stay here.
Mr. Wamp.
INVESTMENTS
Mr. WAMP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have got a couple of

questions for each witness, and I will come back the second round
if I need to.
Secretary Arny, one of the drumbeats that all of our witnesses
will probably hear from me throughout the Mil-Con quality of life
side of this subcommittee is, I have spent a lot of time with General Casey in the last year, and there are impediments to our military families receiving support from the private sector, from the
philanthropic sector, and outside groups . . . all of the above. And
we hear more and more of this, how people want to help but the
law prohibits them to help.
Is there anything that you know of today, relative to this testimony and the housing piece, that is still an impediment to outside
groups helping our military families and I mean financially? They
want to help, and there are impediments to investments and support for families, and we are scouring the countryside trying to find
anything that is in the way of our extraordinary free-enterprise
system, even in a recession, from helping our military. Do you
know of any?
Mr. ARNY. Sir, this issue has not come up, in my knowledge, in
terms ofI was trying to think through the variouswe are getting support from the private sector, but it is all competitive, and
we bid for it. Other than people giving our troops funds, which we
dont permit, I think the law is prohibiting that, I would have to
work with you
Mr. WAMP. Yes. If anything comes up like that, call me. I want
to hear about it.
GROW THE FORCE
Secretary Eastin, on the Grow the Army sites that have inefficient availability family housing, the RCI partnerships to build additional housing, can you tell the committee where these locations
are, what the deficits are in those locations, and how long it will
take before additional housing will be constructed?
Mr. EASTIN. There are basically nine of our installations that are
involved in some sort of Grow the Army operations. I can list them
quickly or furnish them for the record, but basically we are happy
with all of our housing at each of these. Of course, we rely on the
private sector to basically furnish about half of the housing. This
is to protect the private sector developers, as development community as well as our own, so we dont see any deficits in those that
have not been taken care of or planned on.
Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I see your note.
Mr. EDWARDS. If you would like to continue, you still have time
left.
We will stand in recess until we take both votes; then we will
be through with voting for the day.
[Recess.]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00286
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
287
STIMULUS FUNDING
Mr. WAMP. All right. Down to Secretary Penn.

Sir, I was going to ask you about the Homeport Ashore Initiative
and the stimulus bill, and how the stimulus funding ties into the
progress that you are making on ramping up the Homeport Ashore
Program. Didnt you use some of the stimulus money for that?
Mr. ARNY. We are going to come out with our list here pretty
quickly, and mostwe are still not sure what exactly will tie specifically to Homeport Ashore, but we have askedwe at OSD asked
the Services to come up with fast spending program. If you recall,
almost all of thethere is a little bit of MILCON in each of the
Services, there is the hospital MILCON for TMA, so if it is tied to
the stimulus it is going to be in the sustainment in the
So it wouldnt be, I dont think, directly tied to Homeport Ashore.
It might benefit Homeport Ashore in that perhaps we are, you
know, renovating some rooms, or fixing up some heating, or replacing windows, or that kind of smaller project that we usually push
off to the back that we are able to do with the stimulus money.
Mr. WAMP. You mentioned the dorms and $100 million, but how
does the stimulus money tie into Tier 1 and Tier 2 deficiencies on
dorms on the Air Force?
Mr. BILLINGS. Sir, all of the stimulus money will be spent on Tier
1 dorms or deficient dorms. One deficient and three Tier 1 dorms
will be funded with the stimulus money.
Mr. WAMP. That is it, Mr. Chairman, for now.
INADEQUATE HOUSING
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Thank you.

Let me ask each of you a traditional question of mine. In whatever way you define adequate and inadequate housing, can you tell
me how many families in your respective service, how many families live in inadequate housing and how many single servicemen
and women are living in inadequate housing?
Unless, Secretary Arny, if you have the numbers for all the Services.
If not, we could just begin with you, Secretary Eastin, if you have
those numbers.
Mr. EASTIN. I can furnish more accurate ones to you, but, you
know, the large part, with our family housing we probably have
about a deficit of, I would say, about 9,000 or 10,000.
Mr. EDWARDS. Nine thousand or 10,000.
Mr. EASTIN. Barracks, of course, we are looking at, in the training barracks, a large number145,000 in training barracks. But
permanent party barracks, as we said, we will have those filled out
in 2015, and now the number, I think is around 30.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thirty. And would you follow up, just to fine-tune
those numbers?
Mr. EASTIN. I will get those for you.
Mr. EDWARDS. All right. I appreciate that.
There will be 19,208 permanent party barracks and 65,084 training barracks
spaces that remain inadequate after executing fiscal year 2009 military construction
and renovation projects. Additionally, there will be 681 inadequate Army-owned
Family housing units (homes and apartments) at one enduring site in Baumholder,
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00287
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
288
Germany, as well as 4,399 inadequate Family housing units that are surplus to the
Armys needs, or at sites due to close. There will also be 19,659 inadequate Army
privatized Family housing units.
Mr. PENN. The Department of Navy, sir, has approximately 5,000

families still living in inadequate housing. Maybe we will eliminate
ours by 2011
Mr. EDWARDS. How many Marine families are living in inadequate housing? You said 5,000.
Mr. PENN. That is total.
Mr. EDWARDS. Maybe that is counting Navy and Marines, then,
okay.
Mr. PENN. And if we look at the bachelor quarters, the Navy has
15,600 Sailors, and the Marine Corps has 17,400 Marines.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Secretary Billings.
Mr. BILLINGS. We have 10,835 inadequate family houses with
about 8,000 families living in those houses. Those will be eliminated by the end of fiscal year 2015. We have 106 inadequate dormitories with approximately 3,200 enlisted personnel in 61 inadequate dorms, 400 contractors in 41 inadequate dorms, mostly in
remote locations.
Mr. EDWARDS. When you say dorms, that could be a building
with 200 barracks in it?
Mr. BILLINGS. Yes, sir. I mean, most
Mr. EDWARDS. How many individual barracks
Mr. BILLINGS. Individual rooms, sir, I will take that for the
record.
The Air Force has 106 inadequate dormitories with a total of 4,500 rooms.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.

Let me ask you, with the challenges you have mentioned
BRAC, global inflation, and construction, which we didnt control
but we will all be affected by ithave any of the services changed
your goals for providing full adequate housing or barracks since
this time last year when you or your cohorts testified? Are these
the same goals that you had a year ago, or have they slipped in
any way?
Mr. EASTIN. Same with the Army, same year of buildup.
Mr. EDWARDS. Same thing?
Mr. BILLINGS. Yes, sir.
Mr. PENN. Yes, sir.
Mr. ARNY. One thing we are trying to do in the future isof all
the barracks is, we would like tospecifically, all of us have concentrated on permanent party, and we now want to raise training
barracks up to that same level to see what we need to do with that,
and then move also on to
Mr. EDWARDS. Judge Carter brought to my attention some of the
family housing down at Fort Hood that has been defined as adequate, but when he and I visited it several weeks ago I would be
hard-pressed to say with a straight face that it is adequate housing. But we will leave that for further discussion, perhaps, Judge
Carters discussion.
Judge.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00288
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
289
Mr. CARTER. I think you are reading my mind, Mr. Chairman.
FINANCIAL CHALLENGES
Before I get to the couple of questions I hadI am very interested in continuing to move through the current economic challenges, which Chet just asked a question about. I read in every one
of your comments that this new financing challenge that we have
in the private sector has created at least a hiccup in your plans.
It says here in this statement, I believe this is by the Navy, that
the Secretary of Defense and the other Services were working and
finding out ways to work with the lending community to solve this
problem. I assume that this means interim financing for construction.
What have you come up with? Because from what we hear, the
lending markets are sealed up and they are not making loans, and
it is hard for people to find loans, and that is why we are all spending so much money trying to figure out a way to solve that problem. Do you all want to comment on what you have come up with
to solve these problems?
Mr. ARNY. Well, I believe you there. One thing we have done, we
have gone to the lending community, and they all agreed that our
ratings are high. We have kept our debt service under control; the
programs are very solid. So we are faced with the same liquidity
problem as everyone. It is not like we had a bunch of sub-primes
and now we
Mr. CARTER. I understand that.
Mr. ARNY. So one of the things we are doing, and I mentioned
it kind of peripherally in my testimony, is with our newer projects.
Ordinarily we put in some military construction or some DoD
value, and the lender would bring usor the private sector partner
would bring money to the table, go out and get a major loan so that
we could do a bunch of new construction. Well, now we are postponing that new construction so we can get the private sector guy
on board to do the maintenance for us, because one of the secrets
of privatization is not just reconstruction on all these projects, it
is also the maintenance over a 50-year period.
One thing that we were never very good with, and those of us
that have been around the Service for a long time, we would use
what I call then 30-year MILCON approach. You would build something with MILCON, and then we would let it go for 30 years, and
the 30 years later we would have another MILCON project. We
never were very good at maintaining it.
So in the interim, until everybody gets some relief on the financing, we are keeping the projects goingthe new onestrying to get
those new ones, get the management on board so that we get better
management of our projects, and then as the markets open up,
then come back in with the loans.
Mr. CARTER. And I would agree, that is a good use of your time
and your money. But I think going back to the question that the
Chairman asked, doesnt that in some way throw you off the construction schedules? I think that was the gist of the Chairmans
question. I mean, if it does, we want to know.
Mr. ARNY. It does. It does throw us off, but again, even before
we had this credit crunch, other things would pop up. The beauty
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00289
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
290
of this is we do have flexibility in each of these partnerships to adjust to whatever happens.
Mr. CARTER. The housing, of course, we are talking about at Fort
Hood is Chaffee Village. Right now it is scheduled to be renovated,
which would I guess mean basically gutted and rebuilt on the inside, but you are still going to have the basic structure of a twobedroom, old house. And it is my understanding that we are quite
some years off from going in and replacing Chaffee Village.
Mr. EDWARDS. 2032, as I recall.
Mr. CARTER. 2032, I believe it was. These houses look old. They
not only are old, but they look old too. There are a whole lot of
strange things in those projects, and the Chairman and I both went
through several units. We are just curious if there is any possibility
of a mind change to speed up the replacement of those units. I realize it is not a popular thought with the Army right now, but it is
a real concern. It is the concern of the Army families that are stationed there, and it is a concern that I have and I believe the
Chairman shares with me. So I would like your comments about
that.
Mr. EASTIN. Let me discuss that a little bit. This is part of a residential communities initiative program, where theand the Army
will get together and decide what the scope of that particular RCI
project is in something called the initial development period, commonly called the IDP, where we phase inthere is some new
houses, some houses have nothing done to them, some are renovated, and it is on a time schedule that is all carefully negotiated
with both the partner and our financing source so that once that
is locked in these schedules are driven by what the financing of it
is.
Unfortunately, the Chaffee Village homes674, as I understand
ithave minor renovations to them which, quite frankly, is paint
and window seals, and things like that, but the major part of them
will come at a prearranged schedule down the road a piece. How
can you fix that? Dollars. You have to contributethe Army would
have to contribute some funding to it so that hopefully you can borrow some funding against that, and then basically double up on
how much you can do
The financing market is not affecting this right now, but if we
wanted to change one of the few parts of the mix, that is when you
would get into, I would think, a little more difficult
Mr. CARTER. Okay.
Mr. EASTIN. I dont disagree that these houses are not what we
would all like.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you. We will follow up on that.
Mr. Kennedy, and then Mr. Dicks.
Mr. KENNEDY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
BARRACKS
Welcome, all of you. Thank you for your service. I want to follow
up with the Chairmans question about how many barracks are unsuited for use.
I think that we would get ourselves in a lot of trouble if we were
to leave this question unanswered for a long period of time. I know
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00290
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
291
you are working with flexible budgets and trying to deal with timing, in terms of trying to keep O&M up and getting some of these
more critical areas addressed, but when you have got the numberslike quarter million barracks in the Army, over 100,000 in
the Air Force, you know, tens of thousands in the Navy, just off the
top of your headof barracks that are, you know, insufficient for
usage for our enlisted, it seems to me this is something that doesnt
juxtapose well when at the same time you say, it has worked very
well for family housing, and when the privatized housing has
worked very well with the family housing we have managed to
move things along quickly, a lot better than the past.
So when it comes to moving the O&M along more quickly, doing
the O&M better than the government used to do it, positioning construction so that when the money does come and the liquidity back
to the market starts coming back we are ready to move on it, that
we are in position to do that. It just seems to mewhat I would
like to know is, what is the hold-up to doing for our enlisted what
we have done for our families?
Mr. ARNY. Let me comment overall. Having worked with Mr.
Penn on the Navy side for 7 years6 yearsit is much easier to
privatize the family housing than it was to privatizethan it is to
privatize enlisted dorms. The Navy facedall three Services have
inadequatea level of inadequate. That doesnt mean they are uninhabitable; they are inadequate by our standards.
But what the Navy then faced was Homeport Ashore, when you
had all these ships in port, you jumped another 30,000, so the
Navy had to move quickly, and so reached out and tried privatization in Norfolk and San Diego. And in my humble belief, and I
think Mr. Pennit has been very successful so far. The housing
that is up and about to run in San Diego is something that is better than most of our officers are living in, and even the enlisted
housing that the partner took over, we have been doing satisfaction
surveys and it was at 70 percent, the private partner took over and
they just have a better sense for service than we doit is not our
businessand it went to 90 percent. And in Norfolk we are doing
that.
That doesnt work for all the Services. The Marine Corps requires E5 and below to live in barracks. They need the barracks
to be next to their units. They require their barracks to be built
out of concrete block. That is their standards.
The Army has, I believe it is E5 and below as well. We are trying to work through some of those. Where we cant we are going
to standard MILCON, and like I said, we are going out to survey
and start to set goals like we did in family housing to get out
Mr. KENNEDY. So are you piloting? We would like to see where
you are piloting projects around the country.
Mr. ARNY. That, which we have authority to dothe two project
at San Diego and at Newport News in the Norfolk area, and the
third project in the Mayport-Jax area.
Mr. KENNEDY. And then how about Army?
Mr. ARNY. Let me
Mr. KENNEDY. Yes.
Mr. ARNY. Let us divide up two things here. We are doing pilot
projects on privatization at five separate installations, but for E
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00291
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
292
6s and above. If you do E5s and belowthe reason RCI projects
work is there is an income stream. The income stream is the basic
allowance for housing that you would pay a family for living offpost. So instead of paying himoff-post, you would bring it inside.
Mr. KENNEDY. Right, right.
Mr. ARNY. There is no such allowance for housing for single soldiers, so it presents some difficulties.
Mr. KENNEDY. That presents a difficulty, but it also presents a
problem when these are the soldiers we are relying on to do multiple tours, and they need to be living in quality quarters irrespective of what theirthe way this program is structured for purposes
of allowance for housing, is what we are saying.
Mr. ARNY. I agree. So in areas where we can do itfirst of all,
we are fighting internally with our own personnel people who then
have to pay that BAH. So if we cant do it with privatization, where
it doesnt workremember, it needs to be up near the fence, it
needs to be isolated, there are lots of different restrictionsthen
we are focusing on permanent parties, getting rid of inadequate.
We have got the funding to do that; we now need to move to training and others.
We realize there is a gap and we are trying to get it a step at
a time.
Mr. KENNEDY. Thank you.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Dicks.
Mr. DICKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Isnt that one of the problems we face with the Army growing by what, 67,000, and the Marine Corps by 22,000? I mean, that has changed the dynamic here
of being able to have these barracks and other things in a reasonable period of time. Isnt that part of the problem?
Mr. ARNY. It is, but to be frank, and I think the Army did the
same thing, but I know, working with Mr. Penn, the Navy, as opposed to the Department of Navy, coughed up moneywhat, two
or three budgets agoto the Marine Corps so that part of Grow the
Force, Grow the Marine Corps, included many more barracks. And
the one thing that we in the I&E world were able to do is get the
Marines to buy them differently.
While the Marines wont privatize, we did get them to go out and
buy barracks in batches rather than one at a time. Now, you know,
on these joint bases, there has been a little resistanceI am looking at the Air Force hereand I have heard, you know, there has
been reticence about how this is going to be done. And it does make
sense to me thatyou know, there is a lot of things that can be
joined, but you have got to protect the integrity of the missions.
Mr. DICKS. How are you doing on that?
Mr. ARNY. We are doing superbly, thanks to Mr. Billings and his
Air Force colleagues that are here today.
Mr. DICKS. What about the ones that arent here? [Laughter.]
Mr. ARNY. It has been a remarkable effort, and thereand I
have been around the military since 1960. I was an infant at the
time. But as I try and tell folks that you havetwo or three bases
that are right next to each other, a civilian driving by looks at it
and assumes it is all Department of Defense. So it is hard to go
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00292
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
293
to them to say, No, you have two different cultures. And they look
at you like you are crazy.
But it is cultural change that we are bringing to the Services,
and we meet weekly and bi-weekly in my office with the Services
and their reps banging this stuff out. And we are making tremendous progress. But we have to grow to get over those categories.
But joint basing is bringing stuff together, but it is joint basing
only for installation management, not for mission, and that is a
message we have to deliver every week. The missions are still intact; what we are bringing into jointness is the mission support,
the installation supports for that mission.
So the mission
Mr. DICKS. So you think this is moving ahead now
Mr. ARNY. Absolutely.
Mr. DICKS [continuing]. And we dont have this resistance? Good.
I am glad to hear that.
Mr. BILLINGS. Well, sir, and when I came on board in this job,
Secretary Donley and General Schwartz made it a priority to work
with Mr. Arny, to work with us, and we have signed our MOUs,
we are very close to signing the last Phase 1 MOU, I think by the
end of this month.
Mr. ARNY. I knew we were achieving victory when the biggest
problem we had at one of the bases, who shall remain nameless,
was the number of guard dogs. [Laughter.]
Mr. DICKS. All right. Well again, I have enjoyed working with all
four of you. I will just say one thing as I walk out the door, because
I have a meeting: We still dont have base security where I think
it ought to be. Every service has a different approach to this. Secretary Arny, you and I have talked about thiswe have got to get
this under control. Because every time we put in a system at, like,
Andrews, or the Trident Submarine Base, or Fort Dix, we find that
a lot of people are getting on these bases that shouldnt be getting
on them.
Somehow we have got to get this thing standardized and know
what our protocol is. And up to this point I have been working on
thisSecretary Penn knows this; he has been in my office three or
four times trying to get this straightened out. Everybody points the
finger at everybody else. There is no uniformity across the three
Services about how to do this. So I hope this is something you can
take on.
Mr. ARNY. Will do, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Dicks.
COMMITTEE SUPPORT
We will begin the second round of questioning with Mr. Wamp,

and then with Mr. Salazar.
Mr. WAMP. Well, Sam Farr asked a good question this morning
that I am going to ask of all the witnesses. If you could jump over
on the other side of the table, tell us the one thing that we need
to take away, that we need to hear today from you all on what we
could do to help you best in this bill going forwardanything at
all that is helpful. This morning it was very helpful. You might not
have anything, but I wanted to give you that opportunity.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00293
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
294
Mr. ARNY. Good question. And I discussed with members before,
it would be nice if you all had the MILCON end to payment package too, because one of the issues that we are faced, I think we
arefrom the MILCON side, we could always use more. I mean,
there is not a program that doesnt use more. But we are in decent
shape with MILCON, and I think we have the program to look forward to the future, and we are measuring it better.
Sustainment was a problem up until a couple of years ago. We
now have established DOD standards at 90 percent sustainment
across the board where we were down at 70 to 75 percent90 percent sustainment, and we at our office are workingmy office is
working with the services to look at, now that we have done housingfamily housingwe have got a better handle on bachelor
housing, I call itunaccompanied housingnow admin space.
Eight years ago we looked at, how do we privatize admin space,
and there are all sorts of schemes floating around. None of them
work, because as Mr. Eastin said, there is no income stream.
So I think we have got a way to do that, and we are going to
work it, and I think you need to ask us, How are you doing now
in family housing and bachelor housing, but what are you doing for
admin space? How do you measure whether it is sustained properly? How do you measure if it is modernized? And I think we
have got a way to do that.
And again, I want to set basic, simpleI know you didnt like
our inadequate measure, but at least it was a measure that each
Service understood. It wasnt necessarily translatable, but they all
understood it, and we set goals to get there. And we missed them
a little bit, but at least we had goals, and we are going to try to
do that with adminall the buildings, not just admin space, but
hangars and all the stuff that falls out.
Mr. WAMP. Secretary Eastin.
Mr. EASTIN. First let me say, it is rare that I dont comment on
something up here, but you all have supported the Armys housing
and our MILCON exceptionally well, and I thank the Chairman
and the rest of you for that.
And probably outside of your control is when the funding comes.
Everything gets approved, and then we have 8 months left to go
to try to build it all instead of 12 months. I just throw that out;
Chairman Edwards has heard that comment from me for the last
3 or 4 years now, but I dont know how you fix this, but
Mr. EDWARDS. You were so persuasive last year we got the bill
passed
Mr. WAMP. But timing is often more important than the funding,
in terms of planning, and finality.
Secretary Penn.
Mr. PENN. If you just continue your support of the quality of life
issuesRep. Crenshaw mentioned the fact that we have an authority that is expiring in September. If you just continue to support
us in that area, it is working great. And thank you so much for
your support.
Mr. WAMP. Secretary Billings.
Mr. BILLINGS. Well, sir, thank you. I just, again, reiterate what
my colleagues have said: Thank you. As we move forward with
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00294
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
295
eliminating Tier 1 dorms, we have $2.2 billion programmed for
that, as the number one priority.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Wamp. I think that is a great
question to ask, both this morning and this afternoon.
Mr. Salazar.
Mr. SALAZAR. Well, I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to
follow up on Mr. Wamps question, but I think it wasI guess I
will pick on the Air Force a little bit today.
All of you have pretty much the same standards when it comes
to family housing and, you know, individual housing, but it always
seems like the Air Force seems to have nicer buildings, nicer everything. Is that true or not?
Mr. ARNY. You havent been to Lewis-McChord yet. [Laughter.]
Mr. EASTIN. I take the 5th on that.
Mr. SALAZAR. Well, I am an Army guy, so I stand up for the
Army.
Mr. PENN. And I am sure when we were flying, we always landed
on Air Force bases, everything was better. [Laughter.]
The food, everything is better at an Air Force base.
Mr. SALAZAR. I really think it is a case of what base you are on.
And I think thatI will give you the example I heard as a comment at a Marine Corps who spoke at ain Quantico where, as a
second lieutenant, he was stationed down there, and he made the
comment that he and his new wife moved into his house and they
went and bought one bedside table for their bed, not because they
couldnt afford two, but because there was no room in the bedroom
for more. And he didnt like to cook, but he didnt have to worry
about it because the kitchen was so smallthis is officer housing
that only one person could fit in at a time.
And if you could go back now, and I think you need to, to visit
some of the enlistedthat is where our concentration is, is on our
enlisted housingat the housing at Quantico and all the bases
where it is going in, you will see a standard that far exceeds anything we have had before for officers, let alone enlisted housing.
The privatization has brought in an outside perspective.
So the other thing too is, you could go anywhere in the world in
the old days, it is the same house. Well, that same house may be
perfectly adequate for one base, but inadequatewe were building
houses with big lawns in Key West where nobody could afford to
buy lawns, but we were buying them. So in San Diego, where
houses are closer together and land is more expensive, the houses
are closer together and our enlisted barracks go vertical.
In Norfolk, where there is plenty of land, our enlisted barracks
are more spread out and our family housing is more spread out, so
we have nowthe privatization has done wonders for the family
housing. We are trying to get that over to our other stuff.
Mr. BILLINGS. Sir, just quickly, I wanted to
Mr. SALAZAR. I am not picking on you.
AIR FORCE HOUSING
Mr. BILLINGS. No, I understand, but I mean, to put this in context, this is one of the things that I have learned since I have been
in the Air Force, that our bases are our weapon systems fighting
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00295
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
296
platforms and have been for the history of the Air Force. And so
that has been one of the reasons that I think the Air Force has historically put a lot of emphasis on the housing and the base, in
terms of where we have been. In my short tenure, this is one of
the things I have learned.
I do want to tell an anecdote, though. I was coming back from
meeting at U.S. Southern Command last week, and I got to fly
back with General Blum, and General Blum said, You are the installations guy, arent you? and I said, Well, yes, sir, and he
goes, You know, I am finally living on an Air Force base and I am
being treated the way I have always wanted to be treated my entire life. [Laughter.]
Mr. SALAZAR. And I just wanted to just, in response to Mr.
Eastins reference to that GAO study that was done in the Army,
that study was actually one that was just supposed to justify the
need forPinon Canyon; I dont think it had any reference to legalities or stuff like that. But I will just leave it there.
Thank you, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Judge Carter.
BARRACKS
Mr. CARTER. I have just about got all my answers, but I want
to go back just for a minute to the privatization issue. And I understand we have got issues with capital, as does the whole country
and the whole world, but going back to the Army and privatization,
we have talked about this now at least twice since I have been on
this Committee. About what the schedule is with the Army, and I
didnt hear the answer of where we are going with barracks privatization. I know you have been working on getting pilot projects
going
Mr. EASTIN. I would be happy to furnish that for the record, because I dont have the exact figures of what is per year, other than
the overall figure that we are going to have
The Army does not currently have any Unaccompanied Personnel Housing (UPH)
barracks privatization program or projects for single, junior Soldiers (Privates
through Sergeants) planned.
However, the Army does have a UPH privatization program and projects for single, senior Soldiers (Staff Sergeants and above, including officers) where there is a
lack of adequate or affordable accommodations off post. There are five projects with
the status of each indicated in the accompanying chart:
Installation
Fort
Fort
Fort
Fort
Fort
# Apts
Irwin, CA .............
Drum, NY ............
Bragg, NC ...........
Stewart, GA ........
Bliss, TX * ..........
# Bedrooms
200
192
312
334
358
200
320
504
370
410
1,396
1,804
Date privatized
1st apts open
March 2004 .................

July 2007 .....................
December 2007 ...........
January 2008 ...............
Late 2009 ....................
September 2008 ........

February 2009 ............
January 2009 .............
November 2008 ..........
Non-applicable ...........
All apts open
July 2011
May 2009
July 2010
January 2010
Non-applicable
* Project financing expected in 2009, once the capital markets settle down.
Mr. CARTER. Mr. Edwards and I both went through and saw that
we are in the process of modernizing several of our barracks at
Fort Hood, as you mention in the report. Ultimately we have got
to build some new barracks at Fort Hood that really fit the standards that the Army has set for maintaining soldiers. That is why
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00296
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
297
I need to find out when we might be going that way, because ultimately that looks like the solution.
Mr. EASTIN. I will furnish you a schedule for Fort Hood, but the
basic problem is a lot broader than Fort Hood. I think 79-or-so percent of our barracks are ancientsome even acropolis-like, if you
willwhere you just keep dumping sustainment money through
the hole in the roof, and there is just a pointyou have seen these
in old housesthat you just cant do it anymore and be effective.
You need to either tear it down or rip the floors out and start
again, and this is an expensive process.
Mr. CARTER. Yes, sir. I agree with that.
Mr. ARNY. And that is one of the reasons we look forwardat
least we are now working withwe tried to do restoration and
modernization onremember we used the old 67-year, which didnt
work, because if you had a hurricane and dumped a bunch of
money into Pensacola, which is what Mr. Penn and I saw, then all
of a sudden your restoration modernization looked great Navywide, because you are measuring with two gross sets of standards.
One thing we are looking at is towe have Q-ratings for every
facility in the Services. Now, some of them havent paid attention
to those Q-ratings, so what we are looking at is to say, Okay, how
many with Q2 and Q1 are, you know, are above what we accept,
adequate and excellent?
So we are looking at, Okay, guys. You have got the Q-ratings.
They had better be right, because we are going to start measuring
you against that. Very simple, like I said.
And each Service does it a little differently, but they all have it.
That way we canthen the Army leadership can get down and say,
Look, I have got half my barracks are Q3 and Q4, and point
to Keith and me and say, Okay, when is the program to get them
up? Well, we need money, and here is what we need, exactly, to
get up there.
Because before it was all too squishy. We are trying to get it
more finite without trying to over-control it with formulas. That is
my hope for the future, anyway.
Mr. CARTER. Thank you.
Chet.
DOLLAR AMOUNT NEEDED FOR STANDARD HOUSING
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Carter.

Let me ask you if each of you could put together some numbers
and, you know, you dont have to sharpen the pencil down to the
penny, but I would like to know in todays dollars how much money
would each of you need to bring all barracks in your respective
service up to your standards, and all on-post family housing. Is
that something that you could do over a 2-week periodjust a
broad number? Again, and I would say within a range of 10 percent10, 15 percent, either way. Dont spend thousands of hours
getting it down to the penny and dime, but could you give us a
ballpark number? Would that be possible?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00297
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00298
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
298
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00299
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
299
300
Mr. ARNY. Two weeks might be a little tough, potentially. It is
the crazy season right now with the budget, but we can get you
I think we can get youat least to show you where we have got
holes.
Mr. EDWARDS. I would like toI dont think I have ever heard
that number, and I would like to just get a number of what that
would actually be.
Mr. ARNY. Family housing for sure, permanent party barracks
are next easiest; the others might be a little squishy, but we will
definitely
Mr. EDWARDS. If our country just said, you know, By gosh, we
are just going to see that every soldier, sailor, airman, and marine
is going to live in quality housing, and what is it going to take to
do it? We are going to do it. I would just like to know what that
number is.
Mr. PENN. You said on-post. Can we go off-post as well, because
Navy doesnt
Mr. EDWARDS. Yes. I didnt want you to have to go out and evaluate every home that someone is living in on the private sector, or
on BAHfamily housing. Family housing, you bet, if it is on-post,
off-post. Dont worry about the Basic Allowance for Housing number; that would be hard to get a handle unless you did an inventory
of where everybody lived.
Secondly, the Homeowners Assistance Program: Given the same

economic problems that are creating liquidity problems for some of
our private home partnerships, it is also creating problems for our
servicemen and women when they are having to sell their home because their country asks them to be stationed in another community in another state. So many of them are having to sell their
homes at absolute fire-sale prices.
We have put $550 million in the stimulus bill to help the Homeowners Assistance Program. I am not sure, Secretary Arny, if that
is under your jurisdiction or not, but do you, or any of you, have
any thoughts about how that money will be used and how serious
of a problem is this out there?
Mr. ARNY. We are working very closely with the Army; we have
set up a working group with all the Services, but the Army is the
lead agent for that. We should be back to you within a month as
to how big the problem is and how we are going to control that,
but that is a wonderful start towardsI mean, our top priority are
the wounded warriors and the families of the fallen that have had
to move.
Mr. EDWARDS. So you could evenit applies even to widows, if
somebody has
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Lost his or her spouse in service to
country in combat, they have got to movenot only go through the
grieving process, but just get a shalacking in terms of their loss on
their home if they
Mr. EASTIN. What we are developing is guidelines on how this
will work, because I think this is a worthy program, but you can
start playing games, for lack of a better word, with how much I lost
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00300
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
301
as account of this, and that is where I dont wantI dont want to

get the foul of the same problems that we have seen around in the
financing area, where, you know, you write something down and
the somebody games it for you. So we have got to do this very carefully. It is a lot of money, and it couldnt go to a better place. We
have gotten, I would say, a couple hundred inquirieswe have a
Web site set up
Mr. ARNY. It already has a Web site and we already have forms
online.
Mr. EASTIN. A hundred hits a day.
Mr. EDWARDS. I think it is important to send a message to our
servicemen and women that when you buy a house it is not a riskless investment. They have to understand, if they want upside better than Treasury note interest rates, there is risk involved.
So I know there is a balancing act. At the same time, we are in
potentially the deepest, longest recession we have had since the
Great Depression at a time where, with BRAC and global repositioning, we are moving a lot of people around at the countrys request, and there ought to be some balance to help those.
Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, can I
Mr. CARTER. My friend brought this up to me: The way I understand the program, it is that you have to haveyou cant have
bought your house after June of 2006. Those people dont qualify
if you bought your house after June of 2006, and there is an awful
lot of folks that are moving from Hood to Carson that have homes
that were purchased after June of 2006. I dont know the answer
to that. We have been asked that question.
Do you know, Mr. Chairman, if that applies to the HAP program?
Mr. EDWARDS. The answer is yes.
Mr. CARTER. I thought so. And that is an issue, because, you
know, we are moving to fourth ID to Carson, and that is going to
be an awful lot of soldiers, and
Mr. ARNY. It was tied to when the markets started dropping, is
what I am told, but we will look at it. Again, we have got a working group together, and as you know, it was done fairly quickly,
and we may need improvements to it as it goes on.
Mr. EDWARDS. Will the highest priority be given to
Mr. ARNY. Absolutely. Wounded warriorsthat is the number
one on everybodys list.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Mr. ARNY. Also, I think our general philosophy is, we will not
make you whole, but we will reduce the amount of pain. And we
have got to figure out what that is, because I agree with you, we
dont what toand we also need to parse it down to look at, you
know, who put no money down and lost a lot, who put 20 percent
down, you know, how do youand then lost their 20 percenthow
you balance that off. It is a lot of questions in there.
Mr. Wamp.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00301
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
302
KOREA HOUSING
Mr. WAMP. Secretary Eastin, despite the fact the Reggie White
was from my district and Usher is from my district, my most
prominent constituent is a guy named General B.B. Bell, who is
back homeand Katie is very sick, by the way; When he was here
last year, and we will hear this later, the realignment on the Korean Peninsula was of interest and Camp Humphreys was a unique
kind of a situation. Can you update us on those 2,400 housing units
there?
Mr. EASTIN. Sir, I would be happy to, but I will refer this to my
deputy, Joe Calcara, who knows this issue backwards and forwards, and I am only here
Mr. CALCARA. We have reached an agreementin December
late December and early January. He is going to lay out the project
using a private finance-type approach. The project is currently in
underwriting. We expect to have a mock closing in early May, and
then have an official closing in June.
The first 1,200 units willconstruction will start immediately on
those sometime in July. That should be ready for the 2012a thousand units will be in the second tranche, and we will probably have
a second closing maybe 12 months after the first one, and that
builds out the remaining number of units, the 2,400.
Pinnacle is the master developer. It is an RCI and I think a
Navy housing partner, and they perhapsin the Air Force. It is a
well known agent. Construction will be by Samsung, which is one
of the largest Korean construction contractors. There is a huge
amount of equity in the deal, so we feel very comfortable we will
get to underwriting. We are dealing with the liquidity issues, but
at last point we had 28 investor
We also have relatively conservative underwriting elements in
the transaction, so I think the project will close. I am pretty confident of that.
Mr. WAMP. Good report. Thank you.
Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
MARKET LIQUIDITY
Mr. EDWARDS. Could I ask a follow up on the liquidity issue that

Judge Carter raised? Do we think that providing additional public
capital would help open up private investment dollars? For example, if we had enough federal dollars to go in where there is 20 percent down, 30 percent down, or whatever number you want to use,
is that how we address this, because this is a serious problem?
Mr. ARNY. Well, JoeI would like my deputy to comment on
that, because he has been working on this, if you dont mind.
Mr. EDWARDS. Sure, absolutely. Have him come to the table,
since Judge Carter is gone.
Just for the record, if you would identify yourself.
Mr. SIKES. I am Joe Sikes, the director for housing for Mr. Arny.
And the answer to that would be that all of the Services have been
talking to their individual financial people, and we think that
maybe Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac coming into this with some
guaranteed authorities might actually free it up. Putting more
money at it would effectively just do more MILCON, if you will,
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00302
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
303
and certainly that can help build some more houses, but I dont
think it really helps free up the private sector lending.
We are also looking at taking some of the guarantee authorities
we used in the beginning of the program for base closure guarantees, turning those into some sort of 1-year debt service or a guarantee to eliminate having to put aside money, which is being required right now because that doesnt exist in the market anymore.
So we are not totally sure how to get the market to move, but we
are talking to all parts of it we can, and each of the Services privatization arms are going and talking to their partners about their
specific projects to see what they need to do to get the
Mr. EDWARDS. I dont know if we could find the money, but if between now and our mark up you were to find that X number of dollars would, for whatever reason, open up Y number of dollars, eight
in 10 times the kind of leverage that you testify to, that has occurred in the past. Additional dollars would really allow us to stay
on track, in addition to other avenues that you are pursuing, please
let us know.
And again, I dont want to suggest we will be able to find the
money, but all of us would like to see this family housing program
stay on track and not have to be delayed because of something that
was absolutely not the fault of the servicemen and women who, despite the recession, continue to get deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, and as you know better than anybody, continue to make tremendous sacrifice.
GUARANTEED LOANS
Mr. BILLINGS. Mr. Chairman, one of the things that the Air Force
is doing with our guaranteed loans isthey were originally structured for payments at the end, when they were complete.
Now, as houses are completed, we are freeing up cash to continue
to allow them to move forward during this time. We have restructured these loansallowing partial payments for completed houses,
as opposed to the end. This is allowing us to free up a little cash
right now.
Mr. EDWARDS. Do you audit the return on investment for these
companies? I didnt realize when we first got into thisand I am
thrilled at the good things that have happenedwe worked 8 years
to put this plan in placebut they are very highly leveraged. They
are putting up a relatively small amount of equity and then
leveraging that greatly. Can you monitor, on an installation-by-installation basis, what kind of return on equity we are making?
Mr. SIKES. Yes, sir
Mr. EDWARDS. What is their average return on equity?
Mr. SIKES. It is going to vary greatly by project, but a lot of them
are
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Just to pick a project, since that is the one
where I looked at the housing with Mr. Carter recently, could you
get me the numbers for Axis lend-lease at Fort Hood?
Mr. SIKES. Yes, sir.
A typical housing project under the Military Housing Privatization Initiative
(MHPI) includes a one to three percent private equity investment, with the private
partner/owner earning a 12 percent return on investment. In addition, the private
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00303
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
304
sector partner/owner earns fees for construction, development and property/asset
management. MHPI project fees range from three to five percent of development
and property/asset management costs, and four to six percent of construction costs,
with up to 50 percent of the total fees being incentive based.
Fort Hood military housing was privatized in October 2001 and was the first
project negotiated under the Armys Residential Communities Initiative (RCI). The
project finances in the Fort Hood deal structure reflect market conditions at that
time, including the perceived risks of lender participation in projects under the relatively new MHPI program. The Fort Hood project features a two percent private
sector equity contribution that earned a 12 percent preferred return during the initial development phase (IDP). The Ford Hood project features a five percent total
fee (four percent base and one percent incentive) for developer and property/asset
management costs, and features a 5.1 percent total fee (3.6 percent base and 1.5
percent incentive) for construction.
Additionally, following completion of the IDP, total return on equity is capped at
25% subject to financial performance of the project. These terms were consistent
with market returns when the project closed in 2001. One of the lessons learned
from the privatization program is that private equity is the most expensive form of
capital and, as a result, requirements for private equity have been relaxed in later
projects.
Mr. EDWARDS. I would like to seeif a company is making a, you

know, a responsible return on equity, then we have no right to ask
themwe have no contractual right to ask them to do more. But
if they were making a return on equity that were to be double or
triple what investors are receiving out there in the private market,
it would make me want to find a way to sit down at a table and
talk to them about whether they should wait till 2034
Mr. ARNY. I think you will find they are all conservative, because
they also have management feestheir total income isnt coming
off their investment. They have management fees that vary based
on our satisfaction for them, too.
Mr. EDWARDS. Does their return on equity count what they are
making in management fees?
Mr. SIKES. No. They are normally not
Mr. EDWARDS. Could you include that, just to pick one example
so I can look at one that I am familiar with at Fort Hood, include
how much they are also making in management fees? I dont represent it anymore, but I know the person that does.
Mr. SIKES. Sir, we will get that for you. But one thing that Mr.
Arny was indicating was, if you remember at the beginning of the
program we were demanding 10 percent equity, and we backed off
on that because we realized if we were paying 12 percent on that
we wouldnt be getting as many houses. So one reason why it is
where it is is because they dont actually have that much equity
in it; they mostly make their money off of fees, and that causes
them to stay around, which is what our original intent was, that
they would have partners that werent trying to run out on us as
soon as they get their equity back up, but partners that would stay
for 50 years.
We will get you that data, though.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. I dont have any additional questions.
Thank you for your testimony and for your service every single
day. We will stand recessed at the call of the chair.
[Questions for the record submitted by Chairman Edwards:]
NAVY UNACCOMPANIED HOUSING

Question. I understand the Navy is working on a Bachelor Housing Master Plan
to complete the Homeport Ashore initiative and provide all sailors with adequate
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00304
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
305
housing. When will this plan be completed, and will it have an impact on the FY10
budget request?
Answer. The Bachelor Housing Master Plan is expected to be completed in September 2009 and will not have an impact on the FY10 budget request.
Question. As part of this plan, will the Navy establish a standard for room configuration and living space?
Answer. The Navy will be constructing 1 + 1E units (2 bedroom, 1 bath apartments with kitchenette and laundry) to address our Homeport Ashore deficit.
Question. How many training barracks spaces does the Navy currently have? Is
the Navy able to determine how many of these spaces are adequate?
Answer. The Navy has more than 100 facilities designated as training (dormitory)
barracks. This provides approximately 10,000 rooms with 39,000 individual spaces
in support of Navy training. Based on both the condition and configuration of facilities and their quality ratings (Q-Ratings), 40% of dormitory facilities are considered
not mission capable (Q4).
MARINE CORPS BARRACKS MODERNIZATION/GROWING
THE
FORCE
Question. The Marine Corps is on track to meet its Growing the Force target endstrength of 202,000 by the end of fiscal year 2009. Even though the Marine Corps
was provided an unprecedented amount of funding for barracks construction in
FY09, clearly the MILCON program has not moved fast enough to accommodate all
new unaccompanied marines while satisfying deficit and adequate barracks requirements for the pre-GTF force. Please explain the strategy you are using to house unaccompanied marines until the Commandants barracks initiative is completed in
2014, with specific reference to the use of relocatable facilities and existing inadequate (including gang head) barracks.
Answer. The Marine Corps is grateful for the support Congress has given us, especially your Subcommittee. Barracks are a critical facilities element in supporting
our war-fighters and the Base Enlisted Quarters (BEQ) Campaign Plan is an integral part of efforts to improve the quality of life of our enlisted Marines and Sailors
in our barracks. Because the Marine Corps has a significant and continuing barracks requirement, we have dedicated a large portion of our MILCON facility investment to barracks replacement projects. Our primary focus remains housing our junior enlisted bachelor personnel in pay grades of E1 through E5. When the Marine
Corps undertook its Barracks Initiative, we intended to reach our goal of a 2+0 room
standard by 2012 for an end strength of 180,000. With the direction to Grow the
Force to an end strength of 202,000, we have had to push that goal to 2014. It
should be noted that the Marine Corps has a permanent 2+0 waiver of the 1+1 module DoD standard.
The Marine Corps does not currently have existing excess barracks capacity at
our installations to support this personnel increase. Given the expectation that in
many locations Marines will arrive under the Grow the Force initiative before final
construction of associated barracks is realized, we are relying on a variety of means
to accommodate this growth. These means include use of relocatable barracks at
specific locations, greater reliance on Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH), and maximizing the use of existing facilities through temporarily increasing densities, slowing the demolition of older facilities, and temporarily reducing the size of units we
would normally require to be housed together under our unit integrity concept. For
example, where BEQs are underutilized, we will billet Marines by unit below the
battalion/squadron level (e.g. maintain company or platoon integrity) to maximize
utilization of the barracks. In limited instances, barracks with gang heads that have
been kept for use in surge conditions, have been utilized.
All new and replacement BEQ spaces will be constructed to the USMC 2+0 room
standard, with shared rooms (1 Marine per space) for E1E3 and private rooms
(1 Marine per 2 spaces) for E4E5. Where space is limited we are increasing authorization of BAH own-right for senior NCOs. This allows senior NCOs to live on
the local economy, and helps ease the temporary room shortage. On some bases and
stations we will maximize BEQ efficiency by billeting up to three junior Marines in
a room and two corporals in a room. As a temporary measure, we will look to billet
Marines in surge/overflow barracks during whole barracks renovations.
At locations where relocatables are part of our temporary solution, we are ensuring they are of a quality and supportability to maintain adequate habitability and
quality of life for the duration of their use, and built well enough to minimize any
maintenance tail associated with them. They are much more durable, functional,
and aesthetically pleasing than many previously used relocatable facilities. Use of
these facilities is also limited to a length of service keyed to the completion of the
MILCON project they are supportingthey will not be kept for future contingencies.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00305
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
306
Thank you again for your continued support of this program. Through the great
work of our recruiters and outstanding retention efforts in the field we will reach
our target end-strength ahead of our programmed BEQ construction plan; however,
we do have a plan that provides adequate interim solutions for housing our Marines
and will achieve the Commandants desired end state of a 2+0 assignment standard
by 2014.
WOUNDED WARRIORS BARRACKS
Question. Please describe the configuration of Marine Corps Wounded Warrior
barracks, how this differs from standard 20 unaccompanied quarters, and how the
layout serves the recovery and transition process.
Answer. All Marine Corps barracks rooms in the Wounded Warrior barracks are
configured to be fully accessible to the physically handicapped. Enhancements in the
Wounded Warrior barracks include: wheelchair accessibility ramps; larger automated opening doors; elevators; Americans with Disabilities Act compliant laundry
rooms; larger rooms; tilt mirrors; roll-in showers; low sinks and counters. Emergency call buttons will be provided to ensure a higher degree of safety for Marines
who may experience unforeseen complications or difficulties during their recuperation. The larger rooms will facilitate storage and use of wheelchairs as well as
adaptive equipment, extra prosthetic devices, and specialized athletic equipment.
Specialized dietary requirements will be facilitated by the on-site common kitchen
facility. On-site multipurpose rooms will be used for physical therapy, massage, and
interactions with health care professionals as required. Counseling rooms will be
used by a variety of transition specialists meeting with Wounded Warriors such as
Career Retention Specialists; Veterans Administration counselors; Veterans Services
Organization representatives and Physical Evaluation Board counselors. Lounges
within the barracks provide the opportunity for recovering Wounded Warriors to
provide and obtain peer support and interaction. The paved fitness trails will provide the degree of safety and trafficability required for our Marines who need a
level, hard surface to recreationally rehabilitate. These enhancements will give
Wounded Warriors greater mobility to move around and to use the facility independent of assistance, and for all our Wounded Warriors these enhancements will
greatly increase their confidence and morale. Our standard barracks do not have all
of these enhancements, although it is a requirement for all of our newly constructed
standard barracks to have a minimum of 2 rooms on the ground floor designed as
physically handicapped accessible rooms.
Finally, the Wounded Warrior barracks will be part of the Wounded Warrior campuses at Marine Corps Bases Camp Pendleton and Camp Lejeune. Centralization
of the Wounded Warrior population will facilitate communication of essential updates and ease accountability for Marines and sailors in residence. Consolidation of
our Wounded Warriors will also reduce the transportation requirement. The many
features of this robust facility are essential to support the recovery and transition
of our Wounded Warriors.
Question. What is the size and composition of a Wounded Warrior unit in the Marine Corps?
Answer. The Wounded Warrior Regiment Headquarters and its Battalions are
currently staffed as follows:
#Staff:
MIL
Regiment Staff: ............................................

Bn East Staff: ..............................................
Bn West Staff: ..............................................
Total: ....................................................
CIV
70
75
61
206
19
7
10
36
CTR
33
21
13
67
TOT
122
103
84
309
(19 of military are mobilized 27%)

(#Note: Staff number does not include Marine for Life program which is not dedicated to injured support mission.)
WWR Patients Tracked and Owned:

WWR HQ Owned: 10
LODs: 413
ADSW Medical Hold: 10
Medical Hold: 288
District Injured Support Cells: 647
BN East Owned: 362
BN East Tracked: 599
BN West Owned: 56
BN West Tracked: 873
WWR Total: 3,258
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00306
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
307
FAMILY HOUSINGGENERAL
Question. You state in your testimony that the Army will commit to a renewed
focus and investment in housing. What specifically is meant by this statement? Do
you feel that Army family housing efforts have been insufficient?
Answer. What is meant by the statement is that the Army is constantly looking
for opportunities to improve its Family housing and single Soldier housing programs. We are proud of our programs, but not so proud that we think they are perfect. We have standards and procedures that specify the conditions in which Soldiers and Families should be housed. But where we fall short, we try to learn what
went wrong, and how to fix it in the future.
The best way to understand the statement is to examine it in context with the
portion of the testimony that covered barracks programs. In the aftermath of concerns about barracks conditions last year, the Army conducted a sweeping inspection of our barracks worldwide to ascertain the extent of the maintenance and facility issues we were facing. We took immediate actions to correct deficiencies whenever they were uncovered.
We sought to learn from the situation last year by making important changes to
the way we manage our barracks. The combination of changes we have made, under
the broad mantle of the First Sergeants Barracks Initiative, exemplifies our overall approach of seeking opportunities to improve our housing programs whenever
possible.
Lastly, the Army is focused in our construction, sustainment, restoration, and
modernization programs to buy out our barracks requirements for permanent party
barracks by FY 2013 and training barracks by FY 2015.
Housing Market Analyses have identified several Grow-the-Army installations
that have shortfalls in available family housing.
Question. Which specific installations have an insufficient end-state of available
family housing, and what is the deficiency at each installation?
Answer. Based on the latest approved Housing Market Analyses (20072008), the
following installations are projected to have an insufficient supply of Family housing.
Fort Bliss, TX2,690 units
Fort Bragg, NC150 units
Fort Campbell, KY50 units
Fort Carson, CO952 units
Fort Drum, NY1,762 units
Fort Gordon, GA459 units
Fort Knox, KY246 units
Fort Lewis, WA1,272 units
Fort Polk, LA179 units
Fort Riley, KS313 units
Fort Sill, OK78 units
Fort Stewart, GA91 units
Fort Wainwright, AK230 units
USAG Oahu, HI1,056 units
White Sands Missile Range, NM793 units
Question. Please provide a detailed plan of how the deficiency at each installation
will be addressed.
Answer. The Army relies on the local community to provide most of the housing
for Army Families. All of the installation Family housing inventories with projected
deficits are privatized or scheduled for privatization through the Armys Residential
Communities Initiative (RCI). Where Housing Market Analyses project an insufficient supply of Family housing, the Army has engaged with local community leaders
to see how we can help to encourage local housing development for Soldiers. In several cases, local development alone may be insufficient to supply the housing when
needed, and therefore, the Army is programming additional funding to contribute
to the RCI project to build additional Family housing units. The list below details
the Armys strategy to meet Family housing requirements.
Fort Bliss, TXUse additional equity (FY0809) and encourage local development.
Fort Bragg, NCUse additional equity (FY08).
Fort Campbell, KYRely on local community.
Fort Carson, COUse additional equity (FY0809).
Fort Drum, NYEncourage local development.
Fort Gordon, GARely on local community.
Fort Knox, KYSeek additional equity and rely on local community.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00307
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
308
Fort Lewis, WAUse additional equity (FY08) and encourage local development.
Fort Polk, LASeek additional equity.
Fort Riley, KSRely on local community.
Fort Sill, OKSeek additional equity.
Fort Stewart, GAUse additional equity (FY09).
Fort Wainwright, AKPrivatize in FY09.
USAG Oahu, HIRely on local community.
White Sands Missile Range, NMSeek additional equity and encourage local development.
HOUSING SERVICES
You state in your testimony that the fiscal year 2010 budget will support staff
and facilities required to enhance housing assistance services for soldiers and families living off post.
Question. What level of staff and funding increases are necessary for this purpose?
Answer. Current staffing and funding levels are adequate. As Grow the Army initiatives are realized at Army garrisons, we will increase staffing as necessary. The
Army recognizes the various stationing actions, combined with the housing market
downturn, will result in many Soldiers and Families looking to receive help from
our housing service offices. The Army is focused on improving the quality of the
housing services we provide, and being responsive to the needs expressed by our
service members and Families.
Question. Please provide a specific list of new facilities that will be needed to support increased services.
Answer. No new facilities are currently required to provide services. Existing
housing offices will be utilized in their present locations. The American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act of 2009 provides funding for the upgrade of three Housing
Support Offices, and signage and flooring for another 56. We are currently reviewing requirements for all garrison housing offices for future programming of repair,
upgrade, or replacement.
FORT HUACHUCA/YUMA PROVING GROUND RCI
The Army recently indicated its intent to award a project for Fort Huachuca and
Yuma Proving Ground in which the initial development cost would be $110.2 million, with the developer securing $90.4 million from the private sector and providing
$1.8 million of its own equity. The balance of the funds, according to Army, would
come from net operating income and interest earned on the construction escrow
fund.
Question. Please explain in greater detail how this will work.
Answer. Net Operating Income will be generated through rent collections by the
RCI project in the process of providing housing to residents. This source of funds
is the money that is left after the expenses of the project have been paid. The RCI
project will receive rent from residents and will use a portion of these funds to pay
for utilities, maintenance, and other operating expenses. The money that remains
after paying project costs will be used as a source of funding for a portion of the
projects development work, including the replacement and renovation of homes.
Another source of development funds is the interest income that can be earned
from construction escrow funds. Construction escrow funds are designated for building new homes and renovating existing homes over the next few years of the project
and can be invested in an interest-bearing account. These funds earn interest income for the project while in escrow accounts and the interest earnings add to the
total funds available for project development.
Question. Has the Army taken this approach on any other RCI projects?
Answer. Every RCI project has included the Net Operating Income generated
from the particular project as part of the funding for the development of new and
renovated homes. This income from each RCI project, after covering project expenses, provides a payment to the accounts designated for that projects development. Also, each project maintains construction escrow accounts that earn interest
payments on these invested funds until they are withdrawn to construct new and
renovate existing homes. This interest income serves as another source of funds for
the development.
BARRACKS
Question. In May 2008, the Army informed Members of Congress that $10 billion
in future investment would be necessary to eliminate inadequate barracks. Adjusting for fiscal year 2009 funding levels, what is the total investment (including mili-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00308
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
309
tary construction and O&M funds) that the Army now requires to eliminate inadequate barracks?
Answer. As of fiscal year (FY) 2009 budget submission, the Army needs $8.3 billion from FY1013 to provide quality barracks that meet Army standards for Soldiers in permanent party and training barracks to keep the buyout of inadequate
barracks on track for FY 2015.
Question. Please provide a year-by-year funding and project schedule that shows
how Army will fund the buyout of inadequate permanent party barracks by FY
2013, and training barracks by FY 2015.
Answer. The fiscal year (FY) 2009 Presidents Budget Request identified funding
required each year to buyout is as follows:
Permanent Party Barracks
$725 millionFY10
$1.9 billionFY11
$1.3 billionFY12
$1.6 billionFY13
Training Barracks
$724 millionFY10
$333 millionFY11
$913.2 millionFY12
$816 millionFY13
Additional funding will be required in FY14FY15 to complete the training barracks buyout. Once the FY10 Presidents Budget Request is released, these figures
may change, and we can update you at that time.
Question. You state that any soldier found living in a substandard room has
been, and will be, relocated. For this purpose, what does substandard mean?
Answer. The term substandard is defined as housing that does not provide a decent, safe, sanitary, and habitable accommodation in good repair; housing that does
not meet minimum space and privacy standards; and housing that does not provide
separate and secure male and female sleeping and bathroom facilities.
Question. You state that we have transferred barracks ownership from deploying
units to the garrison in order to better maintain them at an acceptable standard.
We are now centrally managing our barracks. Why didnt IMCOM already centrally
own and maintain barracks? Wasnt that part of the purpose for which IMCOM
was created? What role does IMCOM play in barracks maintenance and repair?
Answer. From the outset, the Installation Management Command (IMCOM) has
owned and maintained barracks; however, the day-to-day barracks management was
shared with the occupying units. The operating tempo of the Overseas Contingency
Operations revealed that the units could no longer devote time to barracks utilization and management. To rectify this, IMCOM initiated the First Sergeants Barracks Initiative (FSBI), which provides room-by-room barracks accountability. Under
FSBI, garrisons are now responsible to identify, report, and correct barracks deficiencies.
Question. Under the First Sergeants Barracks Initiative, how does a given soldier
take concerns about living conditions to the chain of command so that an official
with the decision making and funding authority can correct the problem?
Answer. Under FSBI, the Soldier takes their concerns about living conditions to
the Garrison Commanders Housing Office. The Housing Office will then ensure the
concern is addressed in a timely, effective, and economical manner.
Question. What are the specific responsibilities of the sergeants major who have
been placed at directorates of public works?
Answer. The Directorate of Public Works (DPW) Sergeants Major (SGM) provide
the Garrison Command Sergeant Major (GCSM) with critical insight into installation support requirements. DPW SGMs have installation engineering and infrastructure management expertise as well as vast operational experience that is very
valuable to the installation. On larger installations, the DPW SGM is responsible
for monitoring facilities renovations and duties to ensure that all life, health, and
safety issues are identified and corrected.
Some of the specific duties performed by the DPW SGM are:
(1) Meet and foster positive working relationships with all of the unit command
teams and civilian partners on the installation, especially with the installation
grounds and maintenance teams and all Unaccompanied Personnel Housing (UPH)
managers. DPW SGM is a member of the Installation Planning Board and a Master
Planner with continuity of Soldier Care in mind.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00309
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
310
(2) Monitor First Sergeants Barracks Initiative (FSBI) and barracks renovation/
construction projects as well as provide input to the installation command team and
solicit feedback.
(3) Support the Barracks Manager by being the conduit between barracks residents and their chain of command.
Question. At what threshold do mold conditions in barracks present what the
Army considers an unacceptable risk to soldier health?
Answer. The presence of mold is unacceptable from a quality of life perspective,
even if it does not pose an immediate health risk.
Black mold, specifically, is toxic and may have an adverse impact on a Soldiers
health. Upon detection of what appears to be black mold by a Soldier or through
a routine inspection, the appropriate medical officials are notified to determine if
the mold is unsafe. An air quality test may be conducted if necessary. If mold is
found within the barracks, all efforts are made to remediate it within 24 hours. If
the mold cannot be remediated within 24 hours, the affected Soldier(s) are moved
out of the barracks and housed in a safe environment. Upon complete remediation
of mold, Soldiers are returned to the barracks.
Most installations have contracts with service providers that will respond within
24 hours. Otherwise, the remediation is done with in-house staff. The Installation
Management Command (IMCOM) is notified of any instances of black or toxic mold
through a Serious Incident Report. The IMCOM Command Sergeant Major is also
notified to ensure IMCOM headquarters is apprised of the situation.
Question. How many barracks have been deemed unlivable due to mold conditions?
Answer. The Army has not deemed any barracks unlivable due to mold conditions.
Upon detection of mold, appropriate actions are taken. There have been two instances in which entire sets of barracks have been vacated to remove mold; however,
the Army has not deemed these unlivable as the mold has been successfully remediated. Where mold has been a persistent and recurring problem in very humid climates, vacating a facility for an extended period can be an effective method to ensure that it has been dealt with properly.
Measures have been put into place to minimize the potential for mold growth and
regrowth in our barracks. Installation Directorates of Public Works are installing
proper vapor barriers and special HVAC systems with ultraviolet lighting that will
kill mold. Barracks are also being renovated and upgraded through the Barracks
Improvement Program to prevent the conditions in which mold grows.
Question. This Committee has received heightened interest in barracks privatization for junior enlisted in the past year. Putting aside concerns about the payment
of BAH, are there any concerns that you have about barracks privatization, speaking purely from the installation management side?
Answer. From the installation management side, some of the concerns regarding
barracks privatization for junior enlisted Soldiers include adjustments to Army culture and command, assignment policies, deployment issues and the current state of
the financial markets. The Army has approved a portion of privatized unaccompanied quarters for single Staff Sergeants (E6) and above at five Army installations where there were housing shortfalls for those grades. We will continue to monitor the Armys existing Unaccompanied Personnel Housing privatization projects as
well as the Navys pilot program.
Question. What is the Army standard for training barracks?
Answer. There are different space and privacy standards for training barracks
based upon Soldier grades and the type of training program. Basic Training and
One Station Unit Training barracks are configured for open bay living spaces with
common area latrines. Advanced Individual Training barracks are configured for
two Soldiers per living area with a shared bathroom.
GUARD
AND
RESERVE
Question. How will the Army increase housing opportunities for mobilized Guard
and Reserve soldiers?
Answer. The Army is reviewing how to best accommodate the approximate 60,000
Reserve Component Soldiers that mobilize annually. The Army is considering establishing primary mobilizations centers potentially at Camps Shelby and Atterbury,
and Forts Drum, Bragg, and McCoy; however, the Guard and Reserve have additional requirements to provide quality training facilities at many installations.
Much of that requirement will be identified in future budget submissions.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00310
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
311
WARRIOR TRANSITION
Question. Provide a list of the 36 Army Warrior Transition Units, and the size
of each unit.
Answer. The accompanying list details Warrior Transition Unit locations and
sizes. The Warrior in Transition population is a snapshot in time. Actual numbers
of Warriors in Transition is constantly in flux as patients complete their treatment
and new patients arrive. WTUs are closing at the noted locations because of decreasing patient loads, or in the case of Fort Lee, realignment with the Fort Eustis
WTU.
#
Installation
Location
1 .........................
2 .........................
3 .........................
4 .........................
5 .........................
6 .........................
7 .........................
8 .........................
9 .........................
10 .......................
11 .......................
12 .......................
13 .......................
14 .......................
15 .......................
16 .......................
17 .......................
18 .......................
19 .......................
20 .......................
21 .......................
22 .......................
23 .......................
24 .......................
25 .......................
26 .......................
27 .......................
28 .......................
29 .......................
30 .......................
31 .......................
32 .......................
33 .......................
34 .......................
35 .......................
36 .......................
Ft Richardson .............................................................
Ft Wainwright .............................................................
Ft Rucker (WTU closing) ............................................
Redstone Arsenal (WTU closing) ................................
Ft Huachuca ...............................................................
Ft Irwin .......................................................................
Balboa (Navy) ............................................................
Ft Carson ...................................................................
Walter Reed Army Medical Center .............................
Ft Stewart ..................................................................
Ft Benning .................................................................
Ft Gordon ...................................................................
Schofield Barracks .....................................................
Ft Riley .......................................................................
Ft Leavenworth (WTU closing) ...................................
Ft Campbell ...............................................................
Ft Knox .......................................................................
Ft Polk ........................................................................
Ft Meade ....................................................................
Ft Leonard Wood ........................................................
Ft Bragg .....................................................................
Ft Dix ..........................................................................
Ft Drum ......................................................................
West Point ..................................................................
Ft Sill .........................................................................
Ft Jackson ..................................................................
Ft Sam Houston .........................................................
Ft Hood .......................................................................
Ft Bliss .......................................................................
Ft Belvoir ....................................................................
Ft Eustis .....................................................................
Ft Lee (WTU closing) ..................................................
Ft Lewis ......................................................................
Schweinfurt, Wuerzburg .............................................
Heidelberg ..................................................................
Landstuhl ...................................................................
AK
AK
AL
AL
AZ
CA
CA
CO
DC
GA
GA
GA
HI
KS
KS
KY
KY
LA
MD
MO
NC
NJ
NY
NY
OK
SC
TX
TX
TX
VA
VA
VA
WA
GE
GE
GE
Warrior in
transition
population
105
85
2
11
50
48
63
534
683
354
307
445
257
270
20
512
308
180
108
151
614
102
359
102
93
90
568
734
257
68
134
49
421
143
17
138
Cadre
57
30
5
6
22
17
21
243
232
169
136
160
109
123
4
250
132
114
26
54
222
48
132
33
42
35
183
460
117
27
51
25
232
56
36
57
Total
162
115
7
17
72
65
84
777
915
523
443
605
366
393
24
762
440
294
134
205
836
150
491
135
135
125
751
1194
374
95
185
74
653
199
53
195
Question. How are the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards different than the
standards established in the Americans with Disabilities Act?
Answer. The Department of Defense (DoD) adopted new accessibility standards in
2004 (Americans with Disabilities Act and Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility
Guidelines) which requires access for persons with disabilities to federally funded
facilities. The new standards replaced the older Uniform Federal Accessibility
Standards (UFAS) and the Americans with Disabilities Act Architectural Guidelines
(ADAAG).
Due to some subtle statutory differences between the Americans with Disabilities
Act of 1990 (ADA) and the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 (ABA), the implementing guidelines for the two laws are similar but not identical. In addition, the
ADAAG had provisions for features and facilities that were not addressed in the
UFAS including provisions for van accessible parking spaces, public telephones for
the deaf (TTYs), automated teller machines, and transportation facilities. To address
these differences, Army Regulation 4201 requires Army facilities to comply with
the most stringent accessibility requirement.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00311
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
312
DoD and the Army coordinate compliance issues with the Federal Access Board.
The United States Access Board was created in 1973 and is an independent Federal
agency devoted to accessibility for people with disabilities. The Access Board is responsible for developing and maintaining accessibility guidelines for the construction and alteration of facilities covered by the ADA and ABA. The Board develops
and maintains design criteria for the built environment, transit vehicles, telecommunications equipment, and for electronic and information technology. It also
provides technical assistance and training on these requirements and on accessible
design and continues to enforce accessibility standards that cover federally funded
facilities. A guide on the Boards website (http://www.access-board.gov/) provides
additional information on compliance with the requirements of the ABA and ADA.
FSRM
FUNDING FOR BARRACKS
Question. How much FSRM funding did the Army spend on barracks in fiscal
years 2007 and 2008?
Answer. In fiscal years 2007 and 2008, the Army spent about $656 million ($140.1
million and $515.9 million, respectively) of FSRM funds on sustaining, improving
and modernizing barracks.
Question. What is the projected amount of FSRM spending on barracks in fiscal
year 2009?
Answer. During fiscal year 2009, the Army has spent, or will spend, about $785
million of FSRM funds on sustaining, improving and modernizing barracks ($647M
Active, $30M ARNG, $8M USAR). On a related note, the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) directed the Army to spend at least $153 million
for barracks over the course of the legislations timeframe (which includes FY 2009).
The Army anticipates spending significantly more on barracks FSRM than the Congressionally directed minimum during the course of executing ARRA funds.
Question. What is the projected FSRM requirement for fiscal year 2010?
Answer. For fiscal year (FY) 2010, the Armys FSRM models project an estimated
requirement of about $600 million to sustain, improve and modernize barracks. At
this time, it is premature to say what amount of FSRM funds will be programmed
against this requirement. Once the President releases the FY 2010 budget, we can
provide additional information.
GOVERNMENT-OWNED FAMILY HOUSING
Question. In a report to Congress, Army indicated that it has over 7,200 Government-owned adequate homes that need repairs or improvements costing between
$10,000 and $30,000. Although this is not explicit in the report, it appears likely
that the largest portion of these homes is overseas, particularly in Germany. Is this
correct?
Answer. Yes. As a result of privatization, the Armys largest number Governmentowned, on-post Family housing inventory are located at foreign locations. The Army
had expected the elimination of all inadequate government owned to be funded and
completed by 2011 for foreign locations. As a result of stationing decisions at
Baumholder, Germany, this installations status changed from a non-enduring location where no construction funds were programmed, to an enduring location. Funding for Family housing replacement projects will be considered in future budget requests to eliminate the remaining inadequate homes at Baumholder.
PRIVATIZING
OF
ARMY LODGING
Question. Which installations are in the awarded first group for PAL?
Answer. The first Privatization of Army Lodging (PAL) Group, Group A, include:
Fort Hood and Fort Sam Houston, Texas; Fort Riley and Fort Leavenworth, Kansas;
Fort Sill, Oklahoma; Fort Rucker and Redstone Arsenal, Alabama; Fort Polk, Louisiana; Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona; Fort Myer, Virginia; Fort McNair, District
of Columbia; and Fort Shafter and Tripler Army Medical Center, Hawaii.
Although Fort McNair and Fort Shafter were both initially included as part of
Group A, the due diligence process (conducted in close coordination with the Army)
determined that the demand at these installations is best accommodated at the
nearby locations of Fort Myer and Tripler Army Medical Center, respectively.
Question. When will the first group be completed?
Answer. The first PAL Group, Group A, is scheduled to transfer mid-2009. The
Project is working with the capital markets to finalize lending terms. Once transferred, the first phase of development will be completed within three years.
Question. What Federal government contributions are being made to the first
group project, and how much private sector capital will be provided?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00312
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
313
Answer. In 2008, the value of the contributed Army Lodging facilities and facility
content was determined to be $36 million. There is no government cash equity contribution, and the scope of the first PAL Project, Group A, is approximately $317
million. All of the $317 million will be funded through private sector capital and
financing.
Question. What is the timeline for groups two and three?
Answer. Any follow-on groups will be dependent upon OSD review and approval
following PAL Group A implementation.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00313
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00314
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2

U.S. PACIFIC COMMAND
WITNESSES
ADMIRAL TIMOTHY J. KEATING, U.S. NAVY COMMANDER, U.S. PACIFIC
COMMAND
GENERAL WALTER SKIP SHARP, COMMANDER, REPUBLIC OF
KOREAUNITED STATES COMBINED FORCES COMMAND, AND COMMANDER, UNITED STATES FORCES KOREA
STATEMENT
OF THE
CHAIRMAN
Mr. EDWARDS [presiding]. I think we will go ahead and get started. We have the staff and the ranking member here, so we can
move ahead.
Good afternoon. I would like to call the subcommittee to order.
We are here today to discuss the basing posture of the U.S. Pacific
Command and U.S. Forces Korea and the implications that ongoing
realignments and initiatives will have for military construction and
family housing.
Many experts on foreign affairs believe that the international
system is currently undergoing a great shift in relative power from
the West to the nations of the Pacific Rim. For several years now,
we in this subcommittee have been discussing the massive realignment of forces that is underway in Korea, Japan, and Guam, to
better prepare the U.S. to face its security challenges of the future.
This realignment is totally dependent upon billions of dollars in
military construction funding, which, in conjunction with the generous assistance of our Asian allies, will provide the facilities that
our forces will need to sustain the U.S. military power in the region. We will discuss this and other regional issues with our witnesses today.
Before we proceed, I would like to recognize our ranking member,
Mr. Wamp, for any comments he would care to make.
STATEMENT
OF THE
Mr. WAMP. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

To Admiral Keating and General Sharp, I would just thank you
for your service. It is extraordinary. I cant help but think that Pacific Command and U.S. Forces Korea are in excellent hands, even
though I know that B.B. Bell left big shoes to fill, especially since
he is now my most prominent constituent.
And all of our hearts and thoughts and prayers are with Katie
and the family at this time, where they arewhile they are waiting hopefully to be able to get in line and take care of her physically.
(315)
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00315
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
316
But there are many challenges. Our subcommittee finished its
work in a bipartisan, cooperative way on time last year. A lot of
other things were not finished, so we are very grateful for that
leadership, because we want to honor all of our men and women
in uniform on the MILCON side and our veterans that have served
our country so well.
We are committed to doing that again. And, frankly, all the way
from India east, we know that your commands are really critical
today because of what is happening, west of you and all the other
infrastructure improvements and the big changes in Korea, with
our capabilities with housing and moving a base.
And I talked to Admiral Keating about Guam, because it is still
the big piece of what is happening there in the region. We are interested; we are grateful; we are totally supportive in a bipartisan
way.
We welcome you back again today. It is probably going to be a
crazy 2 or 3 hours here because AIG messes us up. So that is all
I will say. I know we are going to have votes back and forth, but
just bear with us. We will get through the questions this afternoon.
We are grateful for your service and every single man, woman
in uniform that you represent, we want you to know and we want
them to know through you that we are grateful for their service.
And I yield back.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you. And well said, Zach.
Our witnesses dont need an introduction, but they deserve one.
Admiral Timothy J. Keating assumed Pacific Command on March
23rd of 2007. And, Admiral, we are honored that you are here with
us.
Admiral KEATING. Thank you, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. He has 38 years of service to our nation, after
graduating from the Naval Academy in 1971. He is a naval aviator
with over 5,000 flight hours. And the bio also said 1,200 arrested
landings. In case any civilians didnt know what that part meant,
I was going to leave that out. But I assume those are carrier landings?
Admiral KEATING. They are, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. He was commander of the Northern Command and NORAD from 2004 to 2007. And thank you for that service, as a native of Dayton, Ohio.
General Walter Skip Sharp, General, we are honored to have
you here again. And thank you for your service, as well.
He is commander of U.S. Forces Korea and Combined Forces
Command and United Nations Command since June of 2008. He
was born, interestingly, while his father was serving in the Korean
War, another example of the legacy of military families. It always
humbles me how many militaryor military leaders are first, second, third generation of service to our country in uniform and how
many of the children of our top military officials have sons and
daughters serving.
General Sharp spent 35 years in service after graduating from
West Point in 1974. He has had a variety of command posts, including commanding troops in Desert Storm, Haiti, and Bosnia. He
has also served on four Joint Staff assignments. He has three chil-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00316
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
317
dren, one of whom is married to an Army major stationed in Germany.
Are they still in Germany
General SHARP. Yes, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Right now? He is a native of Morgantown, West Virginia.
Again, as Mr. Wamp said, we are very honored that you are here
and, most importantly, for your lifelong service and leadership to
our country and to our military.
We would like to recognize you each for opening statements. We
will put any longer, formal statement into the record, but we would
like to recognize you now.
Admiral.
STATEMENT
OF
ADMIRAL TIMOTHY J. KEATING
Admiral KEATING. Great. Thank you, Chairman, Representative

Wamp, Mr. Farr, Mr. Dicks, good to see you all. Thanks for this
opportunity. I have the rare privilege ofhow do you do, sirrepresenting the 325,000 soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, and Department of Defense civilians who work for us all in the United
States Pacific Command.
You mentioned a point, Chairman. To elaborate, Skip has kin
that are in service. My dad was in the Navy in World War II in
the Pacific, so it is a great privilege to follow in his footsteps. And
our son and son-in-law are both F18 pilots in the United States
Navy.
Mr. EDWARDS. Wow. That is a great legacy. Thank you for that.
Admiral KEATING. The beat goes on.
If I could take a second of the committees time to kind of go over
the strategyof the Pacific Command and tee it up in kind of a
numerical fashion, we are privileged to represent folks who occupy
about 50 percent of the service of the Earth, half the worlds population, 36 countries in our AOR.
Five of our Asia Pacific nations are allied to us through formal
treaties. Skip lives in one of them. We have the most populous nation, the largest Muslim population, and the largest democracy in
our area of responsibility. We have about two-thirds of the U.S.
two-way trade that is conducted in our AOR.
Interestingly, 15 of the 20 largest ports in the world by volume
are in our AOR. Nine of those are in China. Shanghai is now the
biggest port in the world by volume.
We are pleased with the general state of affairs, and we will be
happy to entertain all questions about those affairs in our region.
And we are optimistic about continued progress.
We are very proud of our legacy and the leadership role that we
have been able to assume in the region. And we are committed to
guaranteeing continued success.
We want to ensure our capacity and capability both enable us to
succeed in our primary mission of defending our homeland and the
interests of our nation and our allies.
To do all that, we employed a partnership readiness presence
strategy. We think it is a blueprint for enhancing our relationships,
and this is a very critical notion for us. It is not just the United
States Pacific Command. It is all of the agencies of the federal gov-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00317
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
318
ernment, the countries with whom we deal, their militaries, their
governmental agencies, and increasingly the private sector that
help us form this cooperation and collaboration partnership that we
think is working very well.
We have been to 27 or 28 of those 36 countries in the 2 years
we have been in command. And a theme that is unmistakable, it
is expressed in varying degrees, but those countries view us, the
United States, not just Pacific Command or U.S. Forces Korea, as
the indispensable partner.
Now, some of them advertise it a little more vocally than others.
Some trumpet it; some keep it very quiet. But it is an unmistakable theme, and we are looking to capitalize on that.
Now, for all of that, level of stability and somewhat gradually increasing prosperity for all of those in our country and the increase
of democracy throughout our regionIndia, for example, has elections coming up, as does Malaysia, Japan likely to, all of these democracies in action, there are challenges in our area of responsibility.
Foremost among them, we are dedicated to curtailing and extinguishing the spread of violent extremism throughout all of the Asia
Pacific region. Events in Mumbai and ongoing events in the southern Philippines, in particular, reinforce to us the importance of our
mission, progress being made in those countries and in those areas
that we think is significant and bodes well for success in the future.
A second area of concernand Skip lives with this on a daily
basistechnology proliferation, the possibility of chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons, worse case of all, to include space and missile systems, and that, of course, includes North Korea. And we
would be happy to field your questions on developments in North
Korea, Skip being the guy who handles that as an expert on a daily
basis.
Finally, a few words about the Peoples Republic of China. We
made real headway, we thought, in the first half of 2008. Then we
had events, including denial of the port visit by naval ships, and
Taiwanand Chinas suspension of mil-to-mil discussions following
the announcement of the next round of Taiwan arms sales. So we
have not had any significant military-to-military dialogue with the
Peoples Republic of China in over 6 months.
So the relationship is clearly not where we would like it to be.
We are also concerned significantly with the Peoples Liberation
Army Navy and other agencies activity in the South China Sea, as
demonstrated by their efforts to get the USNS Impeccable to leave
its location in an international operating zone, well clear of Chinese national waters, of a couple of weeks ago.
We have resumed our operations there, as it happens. We are escorting as we speak the next vessel that is conducting that oceanographic research for us, U.S. armed combatant. It is out of sight
of our ship now, but we will continue to provide response, if necessary, should the Chinese give us further reason to look very carefully at their behavior in a maritime domain.
All that said, I remain cautiously optimistic about the future of
our relationship with China. It is of significant importance to us.
We think there is little merit in operating in two separate spheres,
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00318
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
319
so we are looking to bring the mil-to-mil relationship back on a

more collaborative and cooperative basis, hopefully in the near
term.
So thanks for giving us the privilege of giving you a little bit of
the United States Pacific Command perspective. We are always
anxious to have members and staffers come out and visit us to see
the young men and women who are doing the real essential work
for our nations success in what we think is an increasingly Asia
Pacific-oriented world.
Thank you, Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Admiral Timothy J. Keating follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00319
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00320
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
Insert offset folio 711 here 50526B.001
320
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00321
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
321
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00322
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
322
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00323
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
323
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00324
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
324
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00325
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
325
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00326
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
326
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00327
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
327
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00328
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
328
329
Mr. EDWARDS. Admiral Keating, thank you very much.
General Sharp.
STATEMENT
OF
GENERAL WALTER L. SHARP
General SHARP. Chairman Edwards, Representative Wamp, and

distinguished members of this panel, it is indeed an honor for me
to be here today. And it is a real privilege for me to represent the
soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines, DOD civilians, and all the
families that serve in the Republic of Korea today.
On behalf of all those outstanding men and women, I really want
to express our thanks to this subcommittee for all that you have
shown to support our operations and our quality of life in Korea.
Your support allows us to promote peace and stability on the Korean peninsula and improve security in Northeast Asia andwhich
is, I think, very important, given the national security interests
that we have in the Republic of Korea and in all of Northeast Asia.
The United States does have a significant national security interest in Northeast Asia. The Republic of Korea plays a vital role in
the region that accounts for 22 percent of all the U.S. trade in
goods. It is a first-class economic power, our seventh-largest trading partner, and one of the most technologically and scientifically
advanced countries in the world.
It has been a partner with us around the world, and it has proven to be, I believe, the strongest alliance that we have, an alliance
that is forged in blood and is maintained by enduring commitments
and friendship of the Korean and American people.
The Republic of Korea armed forces have fought alongside Americans in Vietnam. They participated in Operation Desert Storm.
They deployed forces to Iraq and Afghanistan. The Republic of
Korea is currently participating in six U.N. peacekeeping missions
around the world today. They recently deployed a 4,500ton destroyer and anti-submarine helicopter off the waters of Somalia to
fight piracy operations.
I also want to thank you all, the members of Congress, for passing the legislation that elevated the Republic of Korea foreign military sales status to a level that is on par with the countries of
NATO, as well as other nations with longstanding U.S. allies.
Currently, the Republic of Korea has over 560 FMS cases that
are open, for a total value of over $12 billion. And this legislation
will go a long way to enhancing the alliances combined warfighting
capability.
And when I came into command, I established three priorities.
The first is to be prepared to fight and win, and I can report to
this committee that our alliance, the ROK-U.S. alliance, and all the
servicemembers of that alliance are strong and we are ready to
fight and win against any contingency on the peninsula today, all
the way from instability up to major combat.
And my second priority was to strengthen the alliance, strengthen this strong U.S.-ROK alliance. We are adapting to what we need
in the future for an alliance.
So on the 17th of April, 2012, the Republic of Korea, this professional military force in Korea, will take command of the war fight,
where today CFC, mywearing my hat as the Combined Forces
Command commander, we command the war fight. After 17 April,
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00329
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
330
2012, they will do it, and the U.S. will be in a supporting, to supported role after 2012.
That does not lessen our requirement there; it just changes it.
And I do believe that the force level that we have in Korea right
now and the commitment we have in Korea forces-wise and capability-wise is about right for the foreseeable future.
We have 28,500 servicemembers in Korea right now. And I believe that to be about the right number. We need to make sure that
we continue to evolve the alliance so that, capability-wise, both the
U.S. and Koreaalliance is possible as we move to the future.
The Korean military will be ready for this change in 2012. We
are already starting to practice it now in our exercise program and
all that we are doing to prepare for it. And I am confident that we
will be able to accomplish that task.
My third priority was to continue to improve the quality of life
for all of our servicemembers, DOD civilians, and their family. My
real goal is to make Korea the assignment of choice anywhere in
the world. Recently, the Department of Defense authorized us to
move to 3-year tours for our accompanied servicemembers. We will
do that over time, as infrastructure becomes available for those
forces, so we dont bring families to Korea before the infrastructure
is there to support it.
We have just over 2,000 command-sponsored families now in
Korea. Our goal and the services goal, by this time next year, we
will at least double that. I have the services to be able to accomplish that.
And then, as we move to Camp Humphreys and as we continue
to build down with that first-class installation post down there, we
will be able to continue to bring more families to eventually get to
the point where all servicemembers who are married can come accompanied and come for 3 years.
The 3-year tour is tremendously important for me and for the
command. It greatly increases my capability. And instead of having
to train a new servicemember every year, I now have them for 3
years. It reduces the stress on our military around the world. Why
have an unaccompanied tour anywhere in the world if you dont
have to? And you dont have to in Korea.
And then, lastly, it really shows the U.S. commitment to not only
the Republic of Korea, but Northeast Asia, which I believe is critically important for this important part of the world to keep the stabilization that we have there now and in the future.
As we move south, as you know, there are two parts of the program. The first is the Yongsan relocation program, which moves
U.S. forces that are currently stationed in Seoul to U.S. Army Garrison Humphries, which is about 40 miles south of Seoul.
The second part is the land partnership plan, which provides for
the relocation of the 2nd Infantry Division. That is up north near
the demilitarized zone, and moving them also down to the Camp
Humphries area. This will significantly improve the quality of life
for all of our servicemembers and their families as they move, really, into world-class training and living facilities.
The great majority of the cost for the Yongsan relocation plan are
paid through the Republic of Korea. I do thank the committee for
the $125 million to MILCON that is already appropriated to start
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00330
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
331
the family housing project down there. That is extremely important, and I ask for the continued support.
Land partnership costs are shared between the Republic of Korea
and the United States. The new special measures agreement,
which is the burden-sharing agreement that was just agreed to by
both governments and both legislaturesor by the national assembly of the Republic of Korea, it is a 5-year host nation cost-sharing
agreement that was concluded between our two nations.
This provides burden-sharing money for Korean labor, logistics
cost-sharing, and a portion of the costs associated with the realignment of our forces. The vast majority of burden-sharing money goes
directly back into the Korean economy, while reducing the U.S.
Forces Koreas appropriated MILCON requirement, thus benefiting
both nations.
Appropriated MILCON funding, resources obtained from host nation construction funding, construction activity provided by in-kind
basis of the Republic of Korea, and investment from the commercial sector and public-private ventures are the key components to
our overall funding strategy for this transformation.
I ask for your continued support for future appropriated
MILCON funding requests that will provide facilities essential to
the success of the relocation of U.S. forces in Korea.
While we continue to commit funding toward our ongoing relocation effortson the Yongsan relocation and the land partnership
program, we must also not lose sight of the urgent need to maintain our existing and our enduring infrastructure in facilities that
support operations today and in the future in Korea.
And I ask for your continued support for resources to recapitalize
our enduring facilities that we willthat we have now and will
continue to need in the future.
I thank you for the support of this subcommittee that you have
provided for our servicemembers, DOD civilians, and family members serving in Korea. And I hope for your continued support when
the fiscal year 2010 budget is established in the Future Years Defense Program is formulated.
I look forward to working with you for our alliance transformation efforts and providing our men and women the very best
working, living, and training environment possible in the Republic
of Korea. And I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of General Walter L. Sharp follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00331
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00332
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
332
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00333
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
333
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00334
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
334
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00335
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
335
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00336
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
336
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00337
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
337
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00338
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
338
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00339
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
339
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00340
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
340
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00341
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
341
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00342
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
342
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00343
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
343
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00344
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
344
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00345
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
345
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00346
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
346
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00347
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
347
348
MOVING TROOPS FROM OKINAWA TO GUAM
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you. Thank you, General Sharp. Thank you
both for your testimony.
Members, since we may be having votes today and today is the
last day of votes for the week, why dont we stick pretty closely to
the 5-minute rule for the first round, to give everybody a chance
to have at least one round of questions?
And I will just begin, Admiral Keating, by asking you, are we
still on track for the 2014 move of our troops from Okinawa to
Guam? And if so, are there any potential roadblocks that might
push that deadline back?
Admiral KEATING. Chairman, we are on track. The Secretary of
State just reaffirmed our national commitment, along with Japans
commitment, to the Defense Policy Review Initiative, a subset of
which is the agreed implementation plan. That is the movement of
8,000 Marines and several thousand dependents from Okinawa to
Guam.
The fiscal year 2010as Skip mentioned, the budget that comes
over, I dont know what monies are in this years budget for the
movement to Guam. It will beit is an expensive proposition for
both the United States and Japan. Our countries are equally committed.
There will be challenges and road bumps, Chairman, as you say,
including perhaps the construction of the Futenma replacement facility on the northeast coast of Okinawa. It is a sophisticated engineering project. There is water there right now. They are going to
have to, you know, landfill and runway.
The infrastructure in Guam will need some attention. So it will
be, by all accounts, a very challenging undertaking. Our countries
are both committed to it. And Guam, of course, remains just a strategic lynchpin for us, the United States Pacific Command all
throughout the Asia Pacific region.
Mr. EDWARDS. Great. Thank you very much for that. And let us
know if there are roadblocks that deal with military construction
projects
Admiral KEATING. All right, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. That we need to look at.
U.S. FORCES KOREA TOUR NORMALIZATION
General Sharp, I am so thrilled to hear about your long-term

plans for Korea and accompanied tours there. This subcommittee
has expressed on a bipartisan basis year after year, going back to
Leon LaPorte and General Bell, the concern that you come off a
tour of duty in Iraq or Afghanistan, you go back to your installation CONUS, and then you are deployed to Korea, and perhaps
away90 percent of married soldiers are away for another year
from their families.
What percent of the soldiers now that are married have their
families accompanying them? Are we still in the 10 percent range?
General SHARP. Sir, we currently havewe believe, of the
28,500, about half of those are married. So if you take ballpark
numbers, 14,000 are married. We have just over 2,000 commandsponsored families that are there right now, so 2,000 of 14,000.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00348
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
349
I do need to also point out that we have another 1,900 families

or so that are not command-sponsored, families that said, I am not
going to spend another year away from my servicemember. I am
going to come and live on the economy in Korea.
General Bell did exactly the right thing. We are paying a housing
allowance for them to live off-post. They get TRICARE Standard
instead of TRICARE Prime. So there are some differences and
there are some out-of-pocket expenses that those non-commandsponsored families have to do.
This new ruling that really went into effect in early December,
but all the regulations were finally changed about 3 weeks ago, will
allow me to take the great majority of those 1,900 families and
offer to them, do you want to stay another year and become command-sponsored and get all of the benefits? I think a large number
of them will take us up on that as we go forward.
Mr. EDWARDS. The fact that there are 1,900 who would go not
command-sponsored shows the needs and wants of families to be
together. And the thought that any single family has to take money
out of their own pocket in order to be together while they are serving our country concerns us all.
And Ione other question. I am going to take one more minute
within my timeframe. Do you have a game plan? We had a military
construction budget over the next 5 years that shows us, 2 years
from now, we will be atinstead of 13 percent today, we will be
at 20 percent. Do we have any kind of a timeline on that?
General SHARP. Sir, the timeline that I have takes me out to
about the 2015, 2016 time period. And that construction does not
get me all the way to the endpoint of all families.
During that period between now and 2015, 2016, allows me to
complete the building of Camp Humphries, which, when that is
complete, will be, I believe, the best base anywhere in the world.
It is a base that is being designed from the ground up. It is
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Fort Lewis. [Laughter.]
Mr. FARR. He is probably right. [Laughter.]
General SHARP. It is a cost-sharing between us and the Republic
of Korea. The family housing inthat is going to be put there is
an Army initiative of a Humphries housing opportunity program,
which are being paid for by private investors that are there.
As we progress past that point, we will have to continue to work
withI will work with my department and this committee in order
to be able to establish what MILCON needs, because the more
MILCON, obviously, we get, the quicker we can get to the end
state we all want.
Mr. EDWARDS. If you would send us the timeline you presently
have and what percentage accompanied families you could have
with that timeline, then we could look at whether over time we
could speed that up.
General SHARP. Will do. Yes, sir.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00349
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00350
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
Insert graphic folio 748 50526B.026
350
351
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you. General.
Mr. Wamp.
NORTH KOREA AND OCEANIC COOPERATION
Mr. WAMP. Admiral Keating, having been in the last year to

Japan and Shanghai and Singapore and down in Oceania, you
talked about the Asia Pacific Command and how important it is.
Can you generally give us an idea where you see the most troubled
waters, no pun intended?
I mean, I would think that Oceania, Oceania is pretty stable and
pretty peaceful. You get over into Indonesia. You still think some
radicalization takes place there? You talked about Mumbai, which
was a littlenot a littlea serious, serious flare-up that the Indian
government has handled, I think, pretty well, given the delicacies
of Pakistan to the west, et cetera.
And then you come back into the Pacific Rim, headed north to
Korea, and we all know, you know, the tensions still there. And I
am just interested in where you see the real challenges in terms
of our capability.
And I know we are on the MILCON side, but we have to have
a pretty good understanding of where the investments need to be
made and why.
Admiral KEATING. Yes, sir. Right this minutethe area of greatest concern to us is, of course, Skips. Activities of Kim Jong-il and
his military leaders are of significant concern to us.
There is the positioning of missile launch equipment around the
Taepo dong. There are significant efforts underway, of course, at
the State Department. We are in support of and coordinating with
State on those efforts.
Activities that China demonstrates in the South China Sea are
of concern. Balance that, veryquite interesting to us, they have
three ships that are in the Gulf of Aden, Central Command area
of responsibility, but they are doing a pretty good job, to their credit, of executing their mission to decrease piracy in theoff the
coast of Somalia and Yemen.
So North Korea on a day-to-day basis probably our most significant military concern. The development of a reasonable relationship with China on a mil-to-mil basis, as would reflect their incorporation of increased transparency and better stated intentions on
a mil-to-mil basis, and across the entire spectrum of global economics and strategy, those two areas would be of foremost concern to
us.
You mentioned Oceania. Our great partners, Australia and, importantly, New Zealand, while we have a difference in policy with
New Zealand, they are helping us keep a verya weather eye on
all of the southern reaches of the Asia Pacific waters, and their efforts have been significant in, for example, Fiji, a coup there, but
they have forces that are still there in Fiji.
Timor-Leste, Australia has helped Timor-Leste introduce democracy to that nation. And the enforcing of fishery concerns for those
small nations who depend for their livelihood on being able to continue to harvest the waters of the world, and our Coast Guard does
a great job of helping us there, too.
So there are areas that I would pay pretty close attention to.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00351
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
352
Mr. WAMP. Well, in this series of questions, I am going to take
that to General Sharp and say, you mentioned about kind of the
pullback of some of your forces from the demilitarized zone above
Seoul, which we talk still about this threat, and then Camp Humphries being well below Seoul.
And I know, from last years testimony, how important it was for
the Republic of Korea to free up that space so they can grow their
city and you can go south. But if we go south and the trouble is
still north, explain to us, in terms of the capabilitiesI know that
is not a badnot a fun post north of there, but you still maintain
a presence, in terms of a deterrent, I assume.
Tell us, who will still be up there and why certain troops are able
to mobilize south of Seoul?
General SHARP. Sir, the great, great majority of the ground forces
that would stop a North Korean attack are Republic of Korea
forces. The Republic of Korea army and, really, the entire forces,
but especially their army are first-class. And they have the responsibilities and the ability to be able to stop that ground attack.
What we bring in the early parts of the war are primarily air
and naval air assets, to be able to take down the long-range artillery. So moving what we have in 2nd Infantry Division out of
Camp Casey and Camp Hovey north of Seoul does not degrade my
warfighting capability.
In fact, in a sense, it increases it, because instead of being scattered at dozens of camps all across, you know, the northern part
north of Seoul, I am now consolidated to allow 2nd Infantry Division to do what they really need to do during the first days of the
war, which are help NEO, to get our family members out of there,
and that consolidation helps with that, also, in the moving south,
but, more importantly, to bring additional forces into Korea. They
have a responsibility to do that, too.
The deterrent value is, we are still in Korea. And the deterrent
value, I believe, increases with the more families that we bring to
Korea, because it demonstrates the commitment that the United
States has to the defense of the Republic of Korea.
Mr. WAMP. Is that 28,000 number pretty constant, sir?
General SHARP. Sir, it is now. It has not been over time. We
were, 10 years ago, at about 37,500. Secretary Rumsfeld in 2003
had a goal of bringing it down to 25,000. Last April, President
Bush at the time and President Lee, on President Lees first visit,
his first visit off the peninsula, which was to the United States,
came and they had agreed to keep the force level at about what it
is right now, which is 28,500.
Again, I believe that is about the right level for now and for the
foreseeable future.
Mr. WAMP. And how many in Japan, Admiral Keating?
Admiral KEATING. About 50,000.
Mr. WAMP. Fifty thousand?
Admiral KEATING. Yes, sir.
Mr. WAMP. Okay.
Mr. Chairman.
General SHARP. Sir, I would also point out, on Japan, they also
you know, I have seven bases that are United Nations Command
bases in Japan, which are tremendously important for the war
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00352
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
353
fight, because they help flow through our forces and bring ammunition and fuel from them. So it really is a good teaming in order to
be prepared to go to war.
Mr. EDWARDS. Great. Thank you, Mr. Wamp.
Mr. Farr.
NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL DIVERSITY
Mr. FARR. Admiral Keating, General Sharp, thank you for your
service and thank you for being here in our MILCON committee.
I have three questions, and I am not going to be able to come
back for a second round, so I am going to try to get them all out
now.
I represent the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey. And I
know PACOM has a lot of interaction with it. One of the things I
am hearing about is the dramatic reduction in both the number
and diversity of international students due to flat funding of the
IMET funding, which no longer will cover the travel and living expenses adequately for some of these foreign officers.
In your respective commands, is there anything you can do to
help increase the budget for IMET? Because I know IMET is important to you.
Admiral KEATING. They are huge to us at Pacific Command, and
I am sure to Skip, as well. We ran the numbers. There are about
185 foreign military students in our military instituteeducational
institutions in the United States. There are 75 young men and
women in our service academies.
Our view is, is this is a relatively small investment that can
yield a substantial and long-term dividend. I was unaware that
there had been restrictions imposed on Dan Oliver and the Postgraduate School.
Mr. FARR. They flat-funded it, so the increased cost of travel and
living expenses are not included.
Admiral KEATING. Enthusiastically endorse a consideration by
I think it is a Department of the Navy program probably, but
broad support on that one, sir.
Mr. FARR. Anything you can do to help, I would really appreciate
that.
Mr. EDWARDS. We will take it under consideration. [Laughter.]
Mr. FARR. The Naval Postgraduate School is widely recognized
for its expertise in its security sector reform programs, such as the
Center for MilitaryCivil Military Relations and the Center for
Stabilization and Reconstruction Studies. These programs address
the critical educational needs in building stabilization and reconstruction capability, both home and abroad in places like Nepal, Sri
Lanka.
I wonder if you had any plans to increase the PACOM utilization
of these programscivil military and CSRS.
Admiral KEATING. You bet. And thank you for the question.
We have Lieutenant General John Goodman, recently retired
Marine three-star, who was heading our Center of Excellence for
the United States Pacific Command. And one of the areas that he
in which John is going to concentrate is the increasingly multilateral, multinational approach to training folks to prepare for conflict
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00353
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
354
and the consequence management attendant to conflict and natural
disaster.
And so those areas that you cite, kind of the phase four part of
our operations, are of significant importance to us and to Skip. And
in our former lives, we have seen manifestation of the need for
more work in that area. So we
Mr. FARR. Well, I am very excited to hear that. We have had previous commands come in here and tell us how much need there is
to build that capacity. And, obviously, you have endorsed that, as
well.
Mr. FARR. I appreciate that.
NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL AND COOPERATION WITH OTHER
COUNTRIES ON SEARCH AND RESCUE
I am aware that PACOM and the Naval Postgraduate Schools

Center for Asymmetric Warfare had been working with the Vietnamese government on increasing their capacity to do search and
rescue. And I wondered if that program could also be extended to
Cambodia, Indonesia, and Malaysia?
It is a no-brainer that the more capacity capabilities we can provide to our allies, the less cost it is going to be for us.
Admiral KEATING. You bet. You are exactly right, Congressman.
We would, again, enthusiastically endorse an expansion of that
training opportunity. We will take that one. I was unaware that
I dont think we are excluding those countries.
The Vietnamese Government is very restrictive when it comes to military-to-military engagements. Our engagement with Vietnam has concentrated mostly in the
medical and engineering arenas. The Naval Post Graduate Schools Center for
Asymmetric Warfare involvement with the Vietnamese government serves as a way
to engage with Vietnam in a non-threatening way, which benefits both the United
States and Vietnam. Increasing capacity to conduct Search and Rescue just happens
to be a priority for the Vietnam Government. As far as expanding this capability
to Cambodia, Indonesia, and Malaysia, it is something that we are not excluding
from these countries, however within our bilateral engagements, search and rescue
is not a priority for these countries; therefore they are not looking to benefit from
the Center for Asymmetric Warfare.
Search-and-rescue exercises are fairly fundamental. They are not

rudimentary, but they are simple. They are not very complex, and
they dont involve elaborate command-and-control.
We are able to conduct those with China through their offices in
Hong Kong. Now, it is technicalcomplicated relationship.
We have also proposed doing them with China. We do them with
Russia on a fairly regular basis. So search-and-rescue exercises are
an important step in a developing exercise program with these
countries, and we would be delighted to do them with the countries
that you mentioned.
I dont have any further questions. I appreciate your enthusiasm
and your service.
Admiral KEATING. Thank you, sir.
General SHARP. Thank you, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Crenshaw.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00354
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
355
And welcome back, Admiral Keating.
General, nice to see you.
NUCLEAR POWERED AIRCRAFT IN JAPAN
Let me start by asking Admiral Keating about the process in

Japan, when it went from a conventional carrier to a nuclear carrier. As you may know, I represent Naval Station Mayport, which
is in northeast Florida. And the Navy, as you know, has just made
a decision to make Mayport capable of homeporting a nuclear carrier.
And so, as we work with you and your predecessor to go through
that in Japan, things worked pretty well. And just a couple of questions.
One, do you recalljust a ballpark numberhow much it cost to
go through all of that in Japan? And I know Japan paid part of
the cost. But do you recall what some of those numbers are?
Admiral KEATING. Congressman, I dont. We will get that for you.
It is a number that someone will have readily available. I just dont
have it off the top of my head.
The total facilities cost to support a nuclear powered aircraft at Yokosuka was approximately $314 million in U.S. dollars. This cost was shared between the U.S.
Navy ($176 million) and by the Government of Japan ($138 million). The cost breakdown follows.
The U.S. Navy cost included; berth 12 upgrades to support nuclear aircraft carrier
(US MILCON P998) at $67 million (4160 volt AC shore power, high quality water
production facility, and maintenance support facilities), co-generation power plant
(Navy Energy Savings Performance Contract) at $95 million, various facilities repairs (Operations and Maintenance, Navy funds) at $7 million, and various support
equipment (Other Procurement, Navy) at $7 million.
The Government of Japan cost (Host Nation Funded Construction) included; berth
12 upgrades for aircraft carrier at $108 million and bay dredging at $30 million.
[CORRECTED PACOM ANSWER]
There is no controlled industrial facility (CIF) in Japan. CIFs are radiological

work facilities that exist only within the United States to support shore based radiological work associated with nuclear powered warships. Work involving radioactivity
from the propulsion plant is never accomplished ashore in Japan.
You are right. It is not an insignificant sum of money. I would

guessand we will confirmit is in the hundreds of millions of
dollars. There are nuclear safety certifications. There are water
depth concerns. There are electrical loading and certain laboratory
facilities that arent normally attendant to conventional ship stationing, but I will get you as accurate a figure as I can.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Because we are waiting. We are hoping that
actually, I just had a meeting with Admiral Alexander, who is head
of the Navy Region Southeast and they are sharpening their pencils and tell us how much it is going to cost to do Mayport.
And we are expecting it to be in the MILCON budget that the
president submits. So I was just curious. We can kind of compare
that.
And one of the other things, sir, is do you knowwhen you forward deployed an aircraft carrier, I know one of the big items that
will be at Mayportand I visited in San Diego, they built what
they call a controlled industrial facility, which is thereally works
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00355
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
356
on the nuclear propulsion, very specific to nuclear carriersdid
they build one of those? Is there one of those in Japan?
Admiral KEATING. Yes, sir. That is a going inI mean, that is
a dealmaker for our friends in the Navy. If those facilities arent
there, and nuclear safeguard assurances cant be provided, then we
dont either send a nuclearwe dont permanently station a nuclear carrier in a place that doesnt have them.
Mr. CRENSHAW. I got you. And I assumed that. If you haveI
think one of the justifications for going to Mayport was the only
controlled industrial facility on the East Coast is in Norfolk. And
it would provide a backup, now on the west coast you have three,
so that is helpful.
But if you could give us an idea
Admiral KEATING. Yes, sir, we will.
Mr. CRENSHAW. General Sharp, just real quickly. Before my time
expires, I want to welcome you.
And, by the way, on a personal note, my intelligence tells me you
just became a grandfather for the second time.
General SHARP. That is good intel.
Mr. CRENSHAW. I need a little help, because my daughter is
going to have her second child in the next month or so, so we will
compare notes. And I know it was great the first time; I am sure
it is even better on the second time. So thank you for your service.
KOREA
To hear all the good things happening, I first visited South Korea
right around about 2002, and the living conditions werent so great,
the relationship wasnt so great. And things have really turned
around.
But one of the things I rememberit was about 2002, and they
were just getting ready to kind of put in place the Good Neighbor
Program, because there had been some incidents with the civilians
and our folks. And I know that was going to just try to build a better alliance.
And maybe if you could just briefly tell us, number one, what
were the tenets of that? How is it working? And are there things
that you see we could do better? And then, three, is there anything
we ought to do as a subcommittee to help you in that?
General SHARP. Sir, thank you. The good neighbor program is
very much alive and thriving right now, and we are continuing to
try to improve it even more.
You know, if you look at the different polls that they have run
in Korea in different places, over 65 percent of the people of South
Korea want the U.S. military there. And that number has been
fairly consistent for the last couple years.
The new administration for the Republic of Korea, headed by
President Lee, who became the president a little over a year ago
from now, is very supportive of not only the relationship between
the Republic of Korea and the United States, but U.S. forces in
Korea specifically.
And he personally has visited our command post. He personally
has taken part in some of our exercises over there. I had an office
call with him last week, because he knew I was coming to talk to
this committee, so that relationship between the people of the Re-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00356
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
357
public of Korea and the government of the Republic of Korea and
U.S. Forces Korea couldnt be better than it is right now.
We are working very hard on the good neighbor program, because I believe that our personal and professional relationships
with the Korean people really do get at the strength of the alliance
now and into the future.
So some examples of what we do. We work very hard to be able
to bringget Korean children linked up with Korean veterans that
come to visit Korea and spend a day with them together that go
up to the DMZ, take the DMZ tour, eat lunch together, to be able
to have those veterans tell these young Korean children how they
fought in a war and what it was like back in the 1950s.
We, through many, many of our different camps, teach English
to the Korean people. There is a great desire of the Korean people
to learn English. So we have English-speaking camps.
The Koreans, in exchange, are just unbelievably warm to all of
our servicemembers over there and really do go out of the way, not
only to welcome them when they first get there, but to continue
that strong friendship and relationship throughout the entire time
that they are there.
It is a cornerstone of my command priorities, because it really affects all three of them, prepare to fight and win, strengthen the alliance, and improving the quality of life for our servicemembers.
So I say, it is something that we continue to push forward.
Where the committee could help is to continue to support, continue
to support us to be able to enable to bring more families and
servicemembers to Korea and to be able to truly have the facilities
we need for 3-year accompanied tours over there, because, again,
I think that strengthens the alliance and strengthens this bond
and a friendship that we have between Koreans and Americans
there.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Thank you.
Mr. Dicks.
Mr. FARR. The Defense Language Institute told me that the most
difficult language for westerners to learn in the entire world is Korean. The longest training program they have is for Korean.
General SHARP. Is that right? I know it is difficult. I did not realize it was the toughest.
Mr. EDWARDS. Some of us are still struggling with English.
[Laughter.]
I will get there.
Mr. Dicks.
GUAM
Mr. DICKS. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

And, Admiral and General, good to have you here.
I have been contemplating a trip out to Guam. And Admiral
French, who used to be in our area up in Puget Sound, is now out
there.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00357
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
358
Mr. DICKS. And I talked to Congresswoman Bordallos office just
to get a sense of what problems they have. And there are a couple
things here.
And I dont know if this has any effect on the military or not,
but one was that they are going to have to close the Ordot Dump
and open up a new dump and recycling center. Apparently, this
cost $45.9 million to close it and $113.8 million to create the new
center. And so that was one issue.
And then wastewater treatment, they are under a court order
they have to replaceI think it iswait a minute here. The landfill is facing a U.S. district order to close and be replaced in 700
days. And the site has been on the national priority list for action
under the Superfund program for 26 years.
Guam must also comply with a new EPA decree to provide secondary treatment at its northern wastewater facilities. And apparently this costs $300 million.
And then the port of Guam, they are trying to improve the capacity there. And although some funding can be kind of sent to DOT
via MARAD and the Department of Defense, if the port is designated a strategic port, the GAO and DOD have identified the
port, if left at its current state, to be a major chokepoint for delivery of materials and supplies on Guam during the construction
phase of the military build-up.
Are you aware of these issues?
Mr. DICKS. And can we help Guam somehow with this? I dont
think they are very prosperous, are they?
Admiral KEATING. No, sir.
Mr. DICKS. I mean, in terms of having the money to deal with
these kind of problems.
Admiral KEATING. They are not. They dont have significant
huge cash reserves, I mean, not to diminish the impact of the challenge. One, Bill French is doing a magnificent job.
Mr. DICKS. Yes, he is terrific.
Admiral KEATING. He is doing a magnificent job. Two, CongressmanChairman Skelton just led a delegation through, and they
visited Guam, and Bill talked to them. Congresswoman Bordallo
was part of that delegation.
Mr. DICKS. Right.
Admiral KEATING. The challenges are not insignificant on Guam.
A great piece in our favor is, we are talking about United States
property here.
Mr. DICKS. Right.
Admiral KEATING. And this is the strategic import to us at Pacific Command. There is the flag of the United States of America
flying over that very important piece of land and surrounding
water and air.
The economic challenges are significant. There is the wastewater.
There will be needs for more schools. We talked about this with the
chairman, the four or five more schools that are in our testimony.
The challenges are not insignificant. Guam will need fiscal assistance, and we are aware of those challenges, sir.
Mr. DICKS. Is there a plan to deal with it yet?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00358
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
359
Admiral KEATING. Yes and no. There is a naval office headed
now Acting Secretary Buddy Penn was in charge of it. Major General David Bice leads the Guam program office. They are developing timelines and flow charts to begin addressing those challenges that you described, sir.
As to the funding support for those, that is a matter of concern
throughout the FITA.
Mr. DICKS. Yes, because I know that one of these, it is like 700
days, and then they will be facing a fine of a million dollars a week
or something.
Admiral KEATING. Yes, sir. I am not familiar with those details,
but the Guam program office isthey have representatives in
Guam and representatives in the Pentagon every day, working
with State and across the interagency, to address these environmental and infrastructure challenges.
Mr. DICKS. The Guam program office?
Mr. DICKS. GPO?
Admiral KEATING. Joint Guam Program Office. Yes, Buddy Penn,
Secretary Penn was in charge, and his action officer is Major General David Bice, Marine Corps, retired.
Mr. DICKS. Okay. Thank you.
Mr. EDWARDS. Membersexcuse me?
Mr. FARR. Do you have the largest geographical command in the
world?
General SHARP. Half the world.
Mr. FARR. Incredible.
Admiral KEATING. Fiftysomeabout half-plus, a little bit.
Mr. EDWARDS. Members, this first vote is a 15-minute vote. I will
ask staff to let us know when there are 3 minutes to go. There is
a second vote that is a 5-minute vote.
Lets begin the second round of questioning.
Mr. Wamp.
IMPACT OF THE VALUE OF U.S. DOLLAR
Mr. WAMP. Well, a couple things bubbled up through our hearings last year that dont seem to be quite as pressing this year, and
that is the price of gasoline and the value of the U.S. dollar around
the world. Can you tell us how that impacts you this year, going
into your 2010 request, and how you calculated for these issues?
And maybe both of you, what are the weak spots economically
within your areas? I know Japans economy has really struggled for
a long period of time. But how has it impacted your budget?
Admiral KEATING. Yes, sir. The stability of the dollar is, of
course, of significant importance all throughout the area of responsibility. The economic impact of the current crisis is slightly smaller to markedly smaller the impact in many of the countries in our
region because of historically conservative policies by its citizens
and governments throughout the Asia Pacific region.
In many Eastern and Southeast Asian countries, they just save
money and dont invest in significant numbers in their stock markets. We were in Hong Kong 3 weeks ago. There was a line outside
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00359
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
360
one of the banks for folks who were going in and trying to withdraw all their money, and there were certain bank concerns about
this run onit was one bank, andbut it is an example of the relatively conservative fiscal policies of families and governments over
there.
The price of gasoline is significantly different than when we were
here last time. Those decreases in costs have certainly been realized by the Department of Defense, and it is not exactlythey are
not giving us theit was 4 bucks a gallon a while ago. It is down
to a buck and a half. We dont enjoy any of the dividends there.
But the important point is, our readiness has not decreased, in
spite of fluctuations on the global oil market prices. And the young
men and women who are doing the flying, the steaming, and the
driving are doing it to the same extent today that they were a year
ago.
General SHARP. And in Koreathem beingKorea being mainly
an export country, the global economy greatly affects them. And
the value of the won has declined. It is gotten worse for the Republic of Korea.
But I must say that, despite the world economy and despite the
issues that Korea is having with their exports, because of what
they learned in the mid-1990s during the IMF crisis, they have a
huge amount of reserves. And their banking structure is in pretty
good shape.
I think it is also notable that, even in the middle of all this, a
month-and-a-half ago, 2 months ago when we were negotiating the
burden-sharing agreement of how much Korea would pay to the
United States on a yearly basis, not only did they agree to about
the right amount, which was 760 billion won, so about $741 million, a year they agreed to that, and they agreed to that amount,
plus CPI, plus inflation for 5 years.
So that really shows their commitment, I think, to the United
States and their commitment to keeping our forces there, that even
in this tough economic time, they are willing to commit that money
for a 5-year period.
Mr. WAMP. And there is no hint there with the Republic of
Korea. Is there no hint from Japan economically on their commitment to Guam?
Admiral KEATING. There is no hint, sir.
Mr. WAMP. Completely committed.
Admiral, one last question. You gave us the four broad areas in
your 2010 request, defense policy review, Republic of Korea transformation, grow the forces, sustainment. What is the percentage in
your 2010 request of each of those four major areas?
Admiral KEATING. I dont have the breakdown.
Mr. WAMP. Okay.
Admiral KEATING. We will be happy to get your staff that answer
very quickly, sir.
The percentage breakout of funds in the four broad program areas is as follows;
Defense Policy Review Initiative at 11 percent, Korea Transformation at 2 percent,
Grow the Force at 40 percent and Sustainment at 47 percent.

VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00360
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
361
Mr. Farr.
RESOURCES TO THE SOUTH PACIFIC
Mr. FARR. I am just so impressed of the amount of the world that

you command. It seems like a lot of the attention is in Korea.
As I have flown around that region, as massive as it is, and
spent some time in Indonesia, and the problems it has, and Thailand and so on, are we committing enough resources and positioning ourselves well enough in the South Pacific to meet the challenges ahead?
Admiral KEATING. The short answer is, yes, sir.
To elaborate just a little bit, the three pieces of our strategy that
I mentioned are partnership, readiness and presence. J.O.s on the
staffjunior officers on the staff have this bumper-sticker-type saying that they say, Virtual presence equals actual absence.
That is to say, all the video teleconferences and, you know, you
can hook up and communicate in a way that was unprecedented
when Skip and I were younger, but you still have to go out there
and put boots on the ground, and jets in the air, and ships on the
water, and tanks running through the mud. Nothing replaces
American presence in these countries.
Indonesia, a classic case. They want to do a lot more with us
than we can support because we are stretched a little bit thin.
Singapore providedthey are building a brand-new command
and control and intelligence center. And we would have asked, but
before we even asked, they volunteered to give us a corner of it for
U.S.-only information and the Singapore and in the Changi intel
center.
India
Mr. FARR. Just trying to get you to move there.
Admiral KEATING. They wouldnt mind it. Senator Inouye would
feel different about it.
India, we have about a dozen full-scale field exercises with those
folks every year. So to your point, presence is one of the three cornerstones of our strategy. We dont just concentrate on Skip and
United States Forces Korea. He has a major exercise that is winding down right now.
We want to get out and about to the best of our ability. The
young men and women who join, they like to join the services and
see the world. It is part of why they decide to support and defend
the Constitution.
We would like to be in more places than we can be. We are in
sufficient places right now. And we are going to continue to work
this program very aggressively, all throughout our area of responsibility.
Mr. FARR. Thank you.
ACCOMPANIED TOURS TO KOREA
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay, let me start in.

General Sharp, let me go back to the accompanied tours in
Korea. You said by 2016 you want to be at what point?
General SHARP. I said by this time next year, I want to double.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
General SHARP. I want to be a little over 4,000.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00361
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
362
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
General SHARP. I think by 2015 or 2016, as we build out Camp
Humphries, we can probably realistically add about another 2,000,
so up to somewhere between 5,500 and 6,000.
Mr. EDWARDS. So we wouldeven as far out under the present
glide path, as far out as 2015 or 2016, we would still have more
than half of the troops assigned at Korea that are married unaccompanied?
General SHARP. That is correct. Now, there are some things we
are doing to try to speed that up. The main drivers are housing,
schools, and medical facilities.
And the housingthe way we are working the housing right now
is that the program which you are well aware of that the Army has
initiated, the Humphries housing opportunity program, which is
currently focused on Camp Humphries, which will, by 2011 or
2012, build 2,400 apartments down there, it is a project that a consortium of companies is going to build on Camp Humphries firstclass apartments that meet our standards for security, and comfort,
and living space, and all the things that we have, at their dime,
and then we will use our housing allowance to rent it back from
them, and they will continue to manage it.
Everything to make that project real has taken place, except for
the final contract, which we are confident we will sign that contract
in April or May of this year.
When that works, I will then be able to take that same concept
and to be able to start negotiations at Daegu and at Osan. If we
are able to get folks under contract to be able to build more houses
in those locations using the same concept, that number of 5,500 or
6,000 by 2015, 2016 could expand, depending upon how much we
are able to get that to expand.
So the 5,500, 6,000 by 2016 is, I believe, a conservative estimate.
It is if we are not able to expand housing any more than what we
currently have on the books.
Mr. EDWARDS. I am sorry. Go ahead.
SCHOOLS
General SHARP. The other issue that is, in a sense, the more difficult issue is schools. The schools issue is we have planned and in
the budget, between our budget and what the Koreans are paying
for the move south out of Yongsan and all, enough schools to be
able to handle the 5,500 or so that I talked about by 2015 or 2016.
But if we arewhen we expand from that 5,500 to the 14,000,
we are going to need another 20 ora little over 20 schools beyond
that in order to be able to go the maximum that we all want to
be able to get.
There are obviously several ways to build those schools, and we
are working very closely with DoDDS on this. In fact, Dr. Shirley
Miles, the head of DoDDS, she left Korea today. She has been out
twice already to Korea to try to work with us on how we are going
to get there.
Mr. EDWARDS. What is the approximate cost of one school?
General SHARP. Sir, I dont have that. I will have to get back
with you. I dont think I have that in my notes. But we will get
that back to you very quickly.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00362
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
363
High School and Middle Schools each cost approximately $61 million and Elementary Schools cost approximately $43 million each.
We are working several initiatives along those lines, though.

There may be a way to do a public-private venture on schools similar to what we are doing for the housing opportunity program in
exchange of tuition, if you will, that we are able to pay back some
building of some schools.
We are looking at some possibilities as to, can we team with the
Republic of Korea government to do some building of schools in exchange for some students attending some of our schools. Again,
these are all at the very, very formative.
I met with the minister of education of Korea about 3 weeks ago.
And we have formulated a team, between us, the DoDDS school
system, and the Ministry of Education in Korea to look at all of
these issues.
Could we move quicker if we had additional MILCON to build
schools? Of course we could. And we are working that with the department right now.
Mr. EDWARDS. I am not going to ask you to stay much longer
after the vote, but I would like to come down. It might just be staff
and me afterwards, but I would like to follow up on this. Is there
any way could get just a rough number?
General SHARP. Yes, sir, I can.
Mr. EDWARDS. I mean, $5 million, $10 million?
General SHARP. Sir, I can get that within 10 minutes. In fact, I
probably have it in one of myget that very quickly. Yes, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. If you would excuse us for a few moments, we are
going to go up and vote. I might actually go up and vote and come
right back. And then I would go up and vote the second time, and
that might give us a couple minutes.
General SHARP. Sir, I will have the answer before you get back.
[Recess.]
Mr. EDWARDS. I will not call us back to order, because there is
only one member here. And while I think we could do a lot of good
by unanimous consent, I think
[Laughter.]
I can think of a lot of things that we could do for the Pacific
Command. But let me justif we could continue
General SHARP. I do have the numbers you were asking for, sir.
To finish out, we have right now 10 schools that are programmed,
paid for by a combination of the Republic of Korea burden-sharing
money, the Republic of Korea government, and by us.
We need 20 more schools to be able to completely flesh out the
fullof those 20 schools, eight are high schools or middle schools.
Each one of those costs, in our projection, $61 million, and then the
12 additional are elementary schools, which have an average cost
of $43 million each.
Mr. EDWARDS. I didnt realize how expensive schools were to
build.
General SHARP. So the total cost of all 20 schools is right at $1
billion.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00363
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
364
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. And I would never suggest that we can get
a dollar more than what would be budgeted, but we always want
to look for options, should we be able to do that.
You were saying earlier that housing wasyou think you can address that one way or another creatively, public-private, and various ways, schoolsif you could medical facilities as schools
General SHARP. Yes, sir. And we havefrom DoDDS. As I said,
Dr. Miles, Chairman Miles, the head of DoDDS, has been out to
visit us twice. And she is committed to, if we can figure out how
to build a school, she can get the teachers there.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
General SHARP. And we are doing some interim things that I
think will also be very beneficial. She is starting up a virtual high
school, where Korea will beginthe hub for all of Northeast Asia,
Japan, Guam, Okinawa, where not this coming school year, but the
year after that you will be able to get a fully accredited high school
diploma going to this virtual school.
It is notclasses. It is truly a virtual school where you get on
and, you know, you have kids in Korea and kids in Okinawa and
kids in Hawaii, you know, and around the world, really, interfacing
with a real teacher on, you know, back and forth, doing real classes, which will really help us as we move forward and be able to
bring more kids.
So she has been very proactive. You know, if I could just say, any
support that you can continue to give to Dr. Miles and DoDDS
would really be appropriated. I mean, budget cuts hurt us all, but
just because of her little bit of margin she has, as her and I were
talking about this earlier this week before I came out, it would, you
know, hurt us, which would hurt her, which, you know, just cascades across what we are trying to do in a lot of different venues.
So I am a great supporter of DoDDS. I grew up in a DoDDS environment. And my kids did. And I think they really do a very good
job.
ACCOMPANIED TOURS TO KOREA
Mr. EDWARDS. I would just like to do anything possibleand we

are going to be looking at some tough budget years aheadbut
anything possible to allow more accompanied families to go to
Korea more quickly than the planned schedule.
How will you handle this during the interim until you do get to
the final goal of having, you know, every family that wants to bring
their loved ones over can? Will those whose families wish to stay
home, will they have an option of serving for less than 3 years?
General SHARP. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. The current and the rule that
will stay in place is really doing a familya married servicemember will really have three different choices or has to date three different choices. He can come one year unaccompanied. He can come
two years accompanied and not get any additional cash benefits. Or
he can say, okay, I am willing to come, and I want to come for
three years, and I want to bring my family.
In that third option, the servicesmainly Army and Air Force
have agreed to pay him what we are paying now for his assignment
incentive pay, which is $300 a month extra, to sign up for that 3year period.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00364
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
365
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
General SHARP. The middle option of 2 years unaccompanied will
eventually go away and will eventually end up being just like
Japan or just like Germany, where it isyou have the choice between 1 year unaccompanied and 3 years accompanied.
And there will be, you can tell just by the numbers, a large number that really will end up not getting a choice, because when we
get to the place where we are at capacity for housing and schools
and medical, then I will have to say, I cant bring any additional,
so it is when one of those families leave, another family can come
in.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right. Okay. Okay.
Are we now at 28,000 for our ultimate
General SHARP. Twenty-eight thousand five hundred.
Mr. EDWARDS. Twenty-eight thousand five hundred?
Mr. EDWARDS. Not going to go down to the 25,000?
General SHARP. Both Secretary Gates and Minister Lee, President Lee, and in the past President Bush personally, and Secretary
Clinton, when she was over there, reconfirmed 28,500 for the foreseeable future. And, again, I think that is about the right number.
As you know, we are getting ready to start a Quadrennial Defense Review over in the department. That will look, I think, at
really the entire Pacific and the world, as far as force posture goes,
whether we need to beso the composition of that 28,500 may
change some over time, but I think that is the right commitment
of forces.
Mr. EDWARDS. When would be a QDR be completed?
General SHARP. Sir, it is due back to you all with a budget next
year. So
Admiral KEATING. That is February of next year.
Mr. EDWARDS. So it would be in time for the 2011cycle.
Mr. EDWARDS. So if we getdo we know where those other 3,500
soldiers or troops were scheduled to be located, in CONUS or in
Europe? Somewhere there would be a hole of 3,500 forces. Is there
a specific site that was impacted by that decision?
General SHARP. No, sir. It really was in the process ofyou
know, Secretary Rumsfeld said cut a third, and then Secretary
Gates reversed that, so the Army was in the process ofyou know,
it is a complex thing, with the Army building up forces, increasing
the number of forces, and then this move. There was no set place.
There wasnt really going to be, you know, kind of a cross-cutting
section of not just Army, but Air Force were also greatly involved
in that.
GUAM BUILDUP
Admiral Keating, could I ask you if your staff could put together
for us the total budget numbers for our part of the Guam buildup, in terms of military construction, if you count housing, medical
care
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00365
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
366
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Everything, just so we have a sense
of
Admiral KEATING. To be clear, we are happy to do that, Chairman. What we will do is we will go to the Joint Guam Program
Office. They have oversight. We dont; they do.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Admiral KEATING. But we will get with them. And between the
two of usand, really, that is the Department of Navy, to get technical with you, but between the two of us, we will ensure that the
answer we give you is supportable by us and it reflects their analysis.
Currently, the extent of U.S. Governments funding planned for Guam build-up
will be provided with the release of the Fiscal Year 10 Presidents Budget. After the
budget is released, we will provide you with the numbers for the cost.
Mr. EDWARDS. And in the continental United States over the last
year, construction cost increases have leveled out some because the
economy has slowed down. When you startI am not a construction manager, but when you put that much construction in such a
small area, do we have any sense that inflation isnt going to double the cost of those construction projects? Do you think we have
a pretty good handle on it?
If you came back here 2 years from today, do you think we would
be able to stick with whatever numbers that you would stand behind today as that projected cost?
Admiral KEATING. I am not sure, Chairman. I dont have any
more experience in that than perhaps you do.
The likelihood of a new home in Guam being the same square
foot as the likelihood of a home in Chevy Chasewell, Chevy
Chase is not such a good examplea similar home anywhere in the
states I think is not high. It would likely be more expensive.
To offset that, labor costs are lower. And there is dramatic interest all throughout the South Pacific in the Defense Policy Review
Initiative, with respect to construction in Guam.
So there areand this is going to be an issue. There are labor
laws against non-U.S. citizens providing certain construction help.
And we get advised by other members of Congress that dont think
foror words to this respect, we are not going to let non-U.S. citizens build U.S. housing on U.S. territory. The law is complicated.
There are initiatives underway to change the law.
Long answer to a short question. I think that housing will be not
inexpensive to construct. It will be high-quality. It is the same that
Skip says for his base in Korea. We are hopingthe Marines are
hoping that this becomesnot Humphriesthat Guam becomes
the number one. So we have an interesting challenge unfolding
here, you know, living with the stars.
I think it will be not asit will not be an insignificant factor, the
cost of housing.
Mr. EDWARDS. If you canif it is appropriate and you choose to
do so, to use your position and the opportunity to do some
jawboning to let those involved in the construction decisions know
that it would be a real problem for Congress if we have construction costs, just projected, low ball, and then go through the roof.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00366
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
367
We went through that with BRAC, one year went from $19 billion to $31 billion. It is hard to believe that we would have that
much unprojected increase in MILCON costs in a 12month period.
I want to thank you both for coming and for your leadership.
Oh, Mr. Bishop. You came in quietly. My gosh, we now have two
members. We have unanimous consent. Do we want to change the
world?
Mr. BISHOP. Well, sir, I just came to support the chairman and
to support PACOM.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you for that. Do you have any questions?
Mr. BISHOP. No, sir, I dont. My staff has been following the
hearing and we have read the testimony.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Mr. BISHOP. And we are quite pleased.
Mr. EDWARDS. Great. They have said they would like Korea and
Guam to be almost as good as Fort Benning, Georgia. [Laughter.]
But, you know, staff will follow up with a number of very specific, detailed questions, but I think some of that is more appropriate to handle between your staff and our staff. But the overview
you have given us, the major priorities are what we really wanted
to hear today. And we heard them. And thank you both for your
lifetime of service and for your families lifetime of services.
Admiral KEATING. Thanks, Chairman.
Mr. EDWARDS. We will stand adjourned.
[CLERKS NOTE.Questions for the Record Submitted by Chairman Edwards to Admiral Keating.]
Question. Regarding the relocation of Marine Corps personnel from Okinawa to
Guam, is there anything new or substantively different in the February 2009 U.S.Japan agreement as compared to the 2006 Road Map?
Answer. No. The Guam International Agreement, signed 17 February 2009 by
Secretary Clinton and Foreign Minister Nakasone legally secures the actions by
both Japan and the U.S. including multi-year funding, to ensure the relocation of
the U.S. Marines in Okinawa to Guam as promised in the Roadmap.
Question. To date, how much funding has the Government of Japan made available for the Okinawa-to-Guam realignment?
Answer. In Japans Fiscal Year 2009 budget (which was recently approved 27
March), Japan requested over $1 billion for realignment costs, including $392 million for Guam ($336 million to be deposited in the U.S. Treasury account for 2009)
and $323 million for the Futenma Replacement Facility.
Question. What is the total estimated Federal government cost for the Okinawato-Guam realignment, including costs borne by agencies other than the Department
of Defense?
Answer. Under the Roadmap agreement, the cost estimate for facilities and infrastructure necessary to support the realignment of Marine Corps forces from Okinawa to Guam was $10.27 billion. Of this figure, the Government of Japan is responsible for up to $6.09 billion of the costs. The U.S. Government is responsible
for the remaining $4.18 billion and any additional costs.
In addition to costs associated with infrastructure and facilities, the Government
of Guam will need increased federal funding and support to prepare for the secondary economic and physical impact of military realignment. In 2008 the Government of Guam estimated these costs to be $238M for Fiscal Years 2010. The Department of Defense is working closely with the Department of the Interior and key
interagency partners to review the cost estimate provided by the Government of
Guam and develop a coordinated, collaborative approach that establishes agency accountability for improvements to Guams civilian infrastructure and social service
needs. Federal agencies are currently determining how they may support the Government of Guams needs through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, as
well as other grant and loan programs.
Question. What is the total military construction and family housing cost for all
initiatives on Guam other than those associated with the Marine Corps relocation,
such as the Air Force Strike/ISR Task Force, Navy forward porting, and Army ADA?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00367
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
368
Answer. The total military construction (MILCON) proposed in the Fiscal Year
(FY) 2010 to 2015 Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) for Guam, excluding the
Marine Corps Relocation (DPRI), is being developed by the Department of Defense
and the Office of Management and Budget.
Question. According to the September 2008 report from the Navy, transient carrier berthing in Guam will not begin until 2019. What are the key milestones in
this process, and what is the total infrastructure cost associated with this initiative?
Answer. Current project cost is $390 million. Key project milestones:
Guam transient CVN berthing engineering/planning study: Completed Jul
2008
Environmental Impact Statement
Notice of Intent published in Federal Register Mar 2007
Record of Decision Mar 2010 (tentative)
Construction (assuming FY11 MILCON authorization)
Funding profile: assume 8 funding increments of approximately $50
million year, FY11FY18.
Construction start Mar 2011
Construction completion Sep 2018 *
Wharf testing/certification/ready for use Aug 2019
* Construction completion can be achieved as early as 2015 if funding increments are increased to approximately $80 million per year. Navy projection is
that by 2014 increased ordnance loading operations and increased transient carrier visits will exceed maximum capacity of Guam Kilo Wharf where both missions are supported currently.
Question. Will the Department of Defense be responsible for funding the $1 billion
road project on Guam? Will this be implemented through the DAR program?
Answer. Through construction capacity studies, assessment of socioeconomic impacts, and the development of the Environmental Impact Statement, it has been determined that Guams road network requires improvement to handle the expected
flow of materials from the port to work sites, as well as to handle the projected 25%
increase in population after service members, dependents, and other civilians relocate to the island. The Armys Surface Deployment and Distribution Command
(SDDC) administers the Defense Access Road (DAR) program, which is established
under U.S. Code Title 23 Section 210 to maintain and construct roads that are important to national defense.
The Joint Guam Program Office (JGPO) is working with SDDC and the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) to evaluate a number of road projects on Guam
to support the relocation of Marines. Five roadway, bridge, and intersection improvement projects have already been certified and analysis continues for additional
project certification. It is too early to determine what the total cost of road projects
on Guam will be.
Question. How was the number of 8,000 Marines to be relocated arrived ati.e.,
was it based on an analysis of specific units to be relocated, or was it driven by
other factors?
Answer. The relocation of 8,000 Marines was based on analysis of specific units
to be relocated to meet the following requirements:
The number of 10,000 remaining Marines on Okinawa is based on the PACOM
requirement to maintain a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (approx 10,000 Marines)
forward deployed for Operation Plan (OPLAN) and contingency requirements.
The approximately 8,000 Marines being relocated to Guam reflects associated III
Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF), 3rd Marine Division, 1st Marine Air Wing,
Combat Logistics Regiment and base support personnel.
The realignment of Marine forces permanently stationed in Okinawa, Guam, and
Hawaii strikes a balance that maintains a credible deterrence against our most
dangerous scenarios, and also creates new opportunities for persistent engagement
with regional partnersour most likely scenarios.
Question. Have you finalized the set of units to be relocated to Guam, and if so,
are there any significant differences from the set identified by the Secretary of the
Navy in the September 2008 report?
Answer. The forces identified for relocation remain the same as identified in the
May 2006 U.S.-Japan Realignment Roadmap and reiterated in the Secretary of the
Navy report of September 2008.
Question. An estimated 5,000 to 25,000 workers will be needed on Guam for the
buildup, depending on the amount of work-in-place at any given time. The current
resident population of Guam is approximately 175,000. What is your strategy for securing the number of workers needed, and how will these workers be housed?
Answer. The estimate for the total number of workers required during the period
of peak constructionforeign, domestic and localis approximately 10,00015,000.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00368
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
369
This figure is based upon a $2.5 billion level of construction during the peak period.
Given that construction will ramp up from the start to the peak, fewer workers are
expected in the earlier part of the construction program.
Guams current workforce cannot account for this surge. Shortfalls that cannot be
addressed by workers from the U.S. mainland, Hawaii, or the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands will most likely be filled by H2B visa foreign construction
workers. Use of H2B visa foreign construction workers is currently occurring on
Guam and has traditionally been used during major periods of major construction
activity on Guam, such as the building of resort hotels in the late 1980s and early
1990s.
The construction industry will secure the workers who will first work with the Department of Labor to determine the capacity of the local market. The Guam Department of Labor is prepared to certify that there is an insufficient supply of labor in
the Guam region. The construction industry will then petition the U.S. Citizenship
and Immigration Services to authorize the number of guest workers they need for
their construction projects. With this authorization, the construction industry will
work with various embassies and labor suppliers to acquire the skilled labor they
need. The construction contractors are required to manage the housing, logistics,
transportation and medical care of their workers.
To minimize negative impacts on Guam, a workforce housing and logistics strategy has been established with the following tenets: ensure fair and equitable treatment of all workers; pursue options that support transient workforce and can transition into positive long-term benefits for Guam; recognize that Guam and Federal
agencies have the sole enforcement authority; and achieve positive public support
that is critical for an enduring base and relationship. Based upon these tenets, contractors will be evaluated on their ability to manage safety, medical, housing, transportation and security for their workforce, as well as the ability for these workforce
logistics solutions to positively impact the Guam community.
Question. Have you analyzed the impact of the buildup on Guam on the regional
market for construction material and labor? If so, do you have a strategy to mitigate
supply bottlenecks and price inflation?
Answer. Department of Defense is still analyzing the issue of supply and price inflation for materials and labor associated with the Guam military build-up. There
was some concern that price inflation for materials and labor would adversely affect
program implementation. However, with the recent economic downturn these concerns may be somewhat mitigated. Much depends upon the turnaround of the economy in the next few years.
The acquisition strategy for the Guam military build-up envisions the establishment of building criteria and standards to enable offsite methodologies that will reduce the requirement for imported work force and on island building materials. The
acquisition strategy also contemplates attracting firms that understand and have
experience in operating in logistically challenged areas
Relative to strategies for mitigating supply bottlenecks, we recognize that the Port
of Guam is a potential bottleneck. However, the recent initiative by the Port Authority of Guam to obtain new cranes with greater capacity should alleviate some of the
pressures at the port. Additionally, the Maritime Administration (MARAD) was recently designated the lead federal agency for the Port of Guam Improvement Enterprise Program pursuant to Public Law 110417, Section 3512. As the lead Federal
agency, MARAD will manage the expenditure of Federal and non-federal, and private funds made available for the project, provide necessary oversight for port improvements, ensure National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance, and
provide project management through a prime contractor. This effort lead by MARAD
should further increase efficiencies and throughput at the port. In addition, Defense
Access Road projects will be considered in the build-up to improve trafficability and
relieve chokepoints along the haul road.
Question. Last year you estimated that a $500 million investment would be needed for training facilities and ranges in Guam and the Northern Marianas. Has Marine Forces Pacific completed the training concept study, and if so, what is the current cost estimate? Is this figure included in the estimated $4 billion U.S. share for
the relocation?
Answer. The Marine Force Pacific Training Concept Plan was finalized in April
2008. This study presented an unconstrained concept for locating training facilities
and ranges on Guam, Tinian, and Pagan. The cost for all range construction and
required enablers was estimated to be approximately $1.8 billion. Only a small portion of this cost requirement is included in the estimated $4 billion of the U.S. share
for the relocation. The original cost sharing agreement between the United States
Government and Government of Japan included approximately $360 million for land
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00369
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
370
acquisition in support of ranges on Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, Andersen South training, and Naval Magazine consolidation.
Question. When will the Environmental Impact Statement for the training ranges
be completed?
Answer. The target date for completion of the Guam Military Buildup Environmental Impact Statement, which covers all aspects of the Marine Corps realignment
(administrative facilities, housing, training, which includes maneuver, military operation in unbar terrain, and live fire, quality of life facilities, etc.) the construction
of a transient aircraft carrier pier, the establishment of an Army Ballistic Missile
Defense Task Force on Guam, and various infrastructure improvements, is January
2010. The Record of Decision will be signed shortly thereafter.
Question. The February 2009 agreement is clear that the relocation of marines
from Okinawa to Guam is contingent upon the Government of Japan moving forward with the Futenma Replacement Facility. The agreement specifically states
that the GOJ must make tangible progress on the FRF. What would you consider
tangible progress, and have you seen any to date?
Answer. Tangible Progress is any event or milestone within the Defense Policy
Review Initiative which can be visibly seen as being completed along the timeline
recommended in the 2006 agreement. To date, Japan has:
passed the Law to Promote the Realignment for U.S. Forces in Japan
which pledged $16.8 billion ($10.7 billion for Japan and Okinawa and $6.09 billion for Guam) for the total cost of realignment of U.S. Forces in Japan: includes the Futenma Replacement Facility (FRF) ($3.6 billion), Okinawa consolidation ($4.2 billion), Iwakuni ($1.4 billion), U.S. Army Transformation ($0.268
billion), Aviation Training Relocation ($0.290 billion), and Economic measures
for local communities ($0.848 billion)
initiated the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the FRF (as of
February 2009 in its second phase)
provided security against protest activity that interfered with the EIA
established and employed consultative mechanisms with local officials
enacted and implemented a new system of economic incentives for local
communities
funded and commenced on-land construction projects on Camp Schwab
requested $323 million for FRF construction for the Fiscal Year 2009
budget
reached agreement on the International Agreement on Guam Financing
with, the United States, which confirms the political agreements of the 2006 Realignment Roadmap and clearly establishes the linkages between FRF completion and Guam relocation.
[CLERKS NOTE.Questions for the record submitted by Chairman Edwards to General Sharp.]
STATUS
OF
REALIGNMENT
Question. Please provide an update on the status of land acquisitions necessary

to implement both the Land Partnership Plan and the Yongsan Relocation Plan.
Answer. All land required to implement both the Land Partnership Plan and
Yongsan Relocation Plan has been acquired by the ROK Government. Portions of
the land at USAG Humphreys, Osan AB, and Camp Mujuk have been granted to
USFK under the SOFA. USFK is currently working to secure the grants for the remaining land.
Question. Please provide an update on the status of all USFK installations that
have been closed or will be closed under the Land Partnership Plan and Yongsan
Relocation Plan.
Answer. Currently 37 installations have been closed under LPP and YRP. Of
those, 35 have been returned to the ROK Government. The remaining 2 are currently being surveyed using the recently approved Joint Environmental Assessment
Procedures and should be returned within the next 68 months. No further installations will be returned until the facilities required to relocate the units are constructed at enduring installations and the units have relocated.
HUMPHREYS HOUSING OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM

Question. Please describe the structure of the Humphreys Housing Opportunity
Program. Will any families be assigned to this housing? Will families have enough
adequate alternative options to make a meaningful choice? Who will control the land
that HHOP housing sits on? What leverage does USFK have to ensure that the developers will meet their commitments?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00370
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
371
Answer:
HHOP is private sector development and long term property management of
2400 units of Army Family Housing (AFH) at USAG Humphreys.
Army selected Humphreys Family Communities LLC (HFC). Equity members
of HFC are Pinnacle AMS Development Company LLC (property/asset management)
and Samsung C & T Corporation (construction contractor).
Families will not be assigned to the housing; they will be referred to HFC at
in-processing. Rental of the housing is at the election of the family and will be done
through a standard landlord-military tenant leasing arrangement.
The 2008 Housing Market Analysis (HMA) for USAG Humphreys determined
the community could provide for 40% of housing needs. In addition to the community and HHOP, there will be over 600 Army owned family housing units.
Under the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) the United Forces Korea will be
granted exclusive use of the land on which the apartments will be constructed. The
Army will issue a use permit to HFC.
The United States Army will enter into a Use Agreement with HFC. The agreement requires that HFC operates and manages the housing at industry standards
of care and maintenance.
Question. How do you determine what constitutes an adequate family housing
unit in Korea for the purpose of complying with DOD policy?
Answer. The Air Force, Army and Navy use Housing Requirement Market Analyses (HRMA), Housing Community Profiles (HCP), Housing Market Analyses
(HMA) and Housing Market Surveys to determine adequate family housing units
in Korea for the purpose of complying with DOD policy. This is the same process
used by the Services worldwide.
COMMAND-SPONSORED FAMILIES
Question. Please explain in detail how you will be able to accommodate a growth
in command-sponsored families from 2,135 to 4,320 using your current infrastructure.
Answer. In general, infrastructure is available due to the drawdown of over ten
thousand military from the peninsula since 2004. The main cause to limit ourselves
to 4,320 families is the capacity of our schools. We have a very limited ability to
convert available structures to schools, which drove us to the upper limit of 4,320
families in the immediate future. Other services and functions (such as medical and
child care) require additional staff and/or equipment, but not additional infrastructure.
FORCE LEVELS
IN
KOREA
Question. The Global Defense Posture Review called for reducing the force level
in Korea from 37,500 to 25,000. Was this reduction based on any analysis of the
specific units to be relocated?
Answer. The guidance was to reduce the force level by one-third, or 12,500, which
was not based on an analysis of warfighting capability. After the reduction was directed, an analysis of the missions and tasks associated with USFK was conducted
to determine which units should be relocated. We then linked specific units to the
tasks and rank ordered them in priority. Those units no longer contributing or least
contributing to the Korea mission set were identified for the drawdown.
Question. What would have been the impact on USFK if the reduction to 25,000
had been carried through?
Answer. Continuation of the force reduction to 25,000 would have reduced the
overall warfighting capability of USFK. The reduction would have taken away the
opportunity to review the force level and force mix relative to recent and new strategic decisions, particularly concerning the changing mission set and future requirements for U.S. military forces in Korea. Additionally, the realignment of ground
component missions requires a force level of approximately 28,500 to enable USFK
to execute its assigned missions and tasks and provides a better overall capability.
Question. How has the decision to retain the force level in Korea at 28,500 required any adjustments in your milcon and family housing programs? Are there any
installations that were projected for closure that will now be kept open as a result
of this decision?
Answer. The current force structure does not require changes to installation closures or MILCON and family housing programs.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00371
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00372
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009.

EUROPEAN COMMAND
WITNESS
GENERAL BANTZ J. CRADDOCK, USA, COMMANDER, UNITED STATES
EUROPEAN COMMAND
STATEMENT
OF THE
CHAIRMAN
Mr. EDWARDS [presiding]. The subcommittee will come to order.

General Craddock, welcome back to our subcommittee. It is great
to have you here, and thank you for not only being here today but
for your lifetime of very distinguished service to our country.
Today we will discuss the current basing posture of the U.S. European Command. In 2004, the Department of Defense initiated a
sweeping change in the U.S. military overseas presence that called
for reducing force levels in Europe by roughly 48,000 troops. This
included the relocation of two division headquarters and two brigade combat teams from Germany to the United States.
In 2007, the Secretary of Defense decided to temporarily station
two BCTs in Germany until the 20122013 timeframe.
As we discussed with todays witnesses in last years EUCOM
hearing, this decision raised the possibility that we would not draw
down our forces in Europe to the extent that the Defense Department had originally planned.
The purpose of this hearing is to gain additional insights on
where the ultimate decision on this issue stands and to discuss
other significant issues relating to European Command basing and
construction.
Before I proceed, I would like to turn to Mr. Wamp, our ranking
member, for any comments that he would care to make.
STATEMENT
OF THE
Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, just to welcome back what I consider

to be one of the greatest living Americans and a man who is headed for a little bit of R&R after a brilliant career and distinguished
service. And it is an honor to be in his presence and look forward
to his testimony this morning.
Thank you.
Mr. EDWARDS. Well said and ditto.
Thank you, Mr. Wamp.
Let me introduce someone who doesnt need an introduction, but
he deserves one. General John Craddock is the commander of U.S.
European Command and the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe. This is his second appearance before the subcommittee. He
has been the European commander since December of 2006.
(373)
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00373
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
374
Prior to that, he served as commander of SOUTHCOM from 2004
to 2006. And am I correct? Nearly 38 years of service to our country in uniform. Thank you for all of those years of service.
His previous assignments include Commander 1st Infantry Division, commander of U.S. Forces during the initial operations in
Kosovo, Joint Staff. And with pride, I would like to point out, Assistant Chief of Staff for 3 Corps at Fort Hood, Battalion Commander with the 24th Infantry during Desert Storm. And he is a
graduate of West Virginia University.
General Craddock, without objection, your full testimony will be
submitted for the record, but I would like to recognize you now for
any opening comments you would care to make, and then we will
proceed with questions and discussion.
STATEMENT
OF
GENERAL BANTZ J. CRADDOCK
General CRADDOCK. Thank you, Chairman Edwards.

And I appreciate that, Congressman Wamp.
It is, indeed, an honor to appear here before you. I always look
forward to this opportunity because I think this forum, this committee is very important. So thank you for that.
I am here representing the approximately 84,000 servicemembers
and family members and civilians of U.S. European Command. It
is a longstanding command. We have, as you know, in the last 2
years, changed our command. We have taken Africa and cut it out
from our responsibility. We went from 92 countries to now I have
51 countries I am responsible for.
We have changed the geopolitical environment somewhat in August of 2008 with the Russian encroachment into Georgia. I would
tell you that that has changed the political dynamics in Europe because the assumption we made in NATO and in our bilateral relations, the United States and these nations, was that for the last 17
or so years, the assumption was not to worry, nations, there will
be no violation, no attack, no encroachment of your sovereignty.
That changed on the 7th of August, and now we have a different
situation in Europe where we have many nations who have anxieties over the Russian Federation and what their strategy is and
where they are going to be headed. And that is particularly noticeable in the nations that border Russia.
Then we have a different perspective, which is nothing has
changed. We still have the same Russia. So those tensions exist.
Energy is another complicating factor because the Russian production, distribution, pushing into Western Europe, many of these
nations depend primarily on Russian gas and much of Russian oil.
So there are new dynamics at work. This affects the U.S. European
command because it impacts on our ability, then, to understand the
dynamics and be able to respond.
I have with me today my command sergeant major, Mark Farley.
Sergeant Major Farley is tasked to visit all of our forces at all
these installations. He probably is the most expert in the command
in terms of where people are, the quality of life they have at the
locations, the facilities they use. So he ishe is my wing man here,
my battle buddy. And I will tell you, I depend on him a lot.
He is going to retire, also, here shortly. So we made an agreement when we go, we go together. But he ishe is the guy here
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00374
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
375
that probably, if we have some issues, I will turn to him to help

out.
But thank for the opportunity. I look forward to your questions.
And thank you, Chairman, and the committee.
[The prepared statement of Bantz J. Craddock follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00375
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00376
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
376
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00377
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
377
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00378
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
378
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00379
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
379
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00380
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
380
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00381
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
381
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00382
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
382
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00383
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
383
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00384
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
384
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00385
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
385
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00386
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
386
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00387
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
387
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00388
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
388
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00389
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
389
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00390
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
390
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00391
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
391
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00392
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
392
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00393
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
393
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00394
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
394
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00395
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
395
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00396
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
396
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00397
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
397
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00398
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
398
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00399
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
399
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00400
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
400
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00401
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
401
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00402
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
402
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00403
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
403
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00404
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
404
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00405
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
405
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00406
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
406
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00407
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
407
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00408
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
408
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00409
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
409
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00410
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
410
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00411
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
411
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00412
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
412
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00413
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
413
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00414
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
414
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00415
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
415
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00416
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
416
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00417
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
417
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00418
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
418
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00419
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
419
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00420
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
420
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00421
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
421
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00422
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
422
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00423
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
423
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00424
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
424
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00425
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
425
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00426
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
426
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00427
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
427
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00428
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
428
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00429
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
429
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00430
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
430
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00431
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
431
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00432
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
432
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00433
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
433
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00434
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
434
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00435
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
435
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00436
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
436
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00437
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
437
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00438
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
438
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00439
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
439
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00440
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
440
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00441
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
441
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00442
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
442
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00443
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
443
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00444
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
444
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00445
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
445
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00446
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
446
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00447
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
447
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00448
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
448
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00449
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
449
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00450
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
450
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00451
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
451
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00452
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
452
453
Mr. EDWARDS. General Craddock, thank you.
And Sergeant Major Farley, let me speak for the committee in
saying we are deeply grateful to you and to your family for your
service and sacrifices for our country. One of the greatest privileges
in my life was to represent Fort Hood in the Congress for 14 years.
Thank you for being here today.
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION IMPLICATIONS IN GERMANY
General Craddock, let me apologize to you that we have Budget

Committee markup all day. I would like to see us fund the Defense
Department this year. So I better high tail it over to the Budget
Committee after my opening questions. But you have key members
and key staff here who will be shaping this budget. We are very
grateful, and it is important that you are here and we thank you
for that.
Let me ask you about the timing of the decision that the Department of Defense has to make in regard to the two brigade combat
teams and you areobviously, the decision itself and the timing of
that decision has military construction implications both in Germany and here in the United States.
Could you tell me where you think we are on the timing of that
decision? And, also, if you could give us any insights into what
would be the military construction implications in Germany should
we keep them there. Do we have a bottom line on additional monies that might be invested, whether it is for living quarters or for
barracks or for other facilities that we might havefrankly, I know
once we have made initial decisions to draw down troops, we tend
to cut corners on maintenance of our facilities.
Any insights you can give us on those points, I would be very
grateful.
General CRADDOCK. Thank you, Chairman.
You are absolutely right. There is going to be, obviously, service
considerations here because of the cost of the maintenance and care
of the facility. I have talked at length with General Carter Ham,
who is the commander of U.S. Army Europe. He understands that
we must have, from the Army, a timing construct here so we understand when decisions have to be made so that contracts wont
be let, brick and mortar wont be started to be put together in the
States if the decision is made not to bring the two brigades back.
He tells meand we are trying to work this, and it is difficult
because everyone wants to keep information close hold. But he tells
me that the Army will need a decision on the two brigades by
about October of this year. That is, in order to do the work they
will have to do if they come back to start to prepare for them, the
12 and 13, or to stop those efforts and focus on other areas.
Now, I have taken that information and I went to the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, Michele Flournoy, because the policy
shop is the driver in regards to the decision on force posture. And
I told her that the Army timeline says October. And she told me
that the plan is, the OSD plan in the joint staff, is to put this decision into the Quadrennial Defense Review, the QDR, that is starting to formulate now.
She believesand I talked to the chairman on Mondayhe believes that they will have in the QDR, they will be far enough long
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00453
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
454
with their global force posture decisions, not only Europe but the
PacificGuam and Okinawathat they will have their decision by
late September on force posture for Europe.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
General CRADDOCK. So that sounds encouraging, and we are
going to push on that to make sure that it doesnt get pushed aside.
But that synchs up, synchronizes up pretty good.
So I think, Chairman, that is the timeline we are looking at. I
have told the secretary and the chairman I will come in to him
with my proposal.
The compelling arguments that need to be madeexcuse me
Mr. EDWARDS. It is that time of year. I am fighting allergies, so
I understand.
General CRADDOCK. The rationale or the arguments that need to
be made to show why we need to keep the two brigadesand we
will also show the tasks that will not be donethe missions, the
exercisesif we dont have those two brigades.
So we are working on that. We will bring in May to the joint
staffin the tankthe ops desk, we will start with them. So that
will kick that process off. That will inform the QDR.
Mr. EDWARDS. All right.
General CRADDOCK. So that is what I am looking at.
Now, if we retain, the decision is to keep the two brigades or
there may be a decision to delay the decision. Maybe delay bringing
them back until 2014 or 2015. They will make the final decision
laterI heard that.
If we keep that, there will be a Mil Con hearing for recapitalization in the installations that now are considered non-enduring that
would have to stay enduring to accommodate the two brigades. Essentially, we are talking, probably, two facilities. It would be troop
barracks and family housing. They are, quite frankly, in pretty
good shape now.
So it is not as if we have to go ahead and tear down and stand
up. But there will be, for those two brigades in the out years, some
recapitalization costs. I dont have an amount, but I think it is only
two installations.
The plan would be that those two brigades would fill in as much
as they could to the main operating bases established now
GrafenwoehrBaumholder. But Schweinfurt then may take and
have to be backfilled by logistics and support troops for the retention of two brigades. So I dont think we are talking about a large
standup of new main operating bases, maybe one, maybe two at
the outset.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you. And, again, thanks for being here.
Mr. Wamp.
I wanted to say one word to Sergeant Major Farley before I ask
a question. And that is my good friend, Fred Thompson, got really
famous playing himself in a movie. And once you retire, Sergeant
Major, if there is ever a movie where they need an authentic-looking sergeant major, you should just step into that role. There would
be life after the service, for sure. You look just like a sergeant
major ought to look.
So thank you for your service as well.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00454
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
455
Major FARLEY. Thank you, sir.
QUALITY OF LIFE
Mr. WAMP. General, I think you just came off of a quality-of-life

conference, and I was just going to ask you of the statusthat is
our main thrust here is quality of life. Give us an update on the
overall quality of life throughout the European Command and then
kind of the second piece of the question which is a part of quality
of life.
You have made a big deal out of the schools throughout the European command, and I want you to update the committee on
where you are with the schools as you prepare to leave and what
the needs are still with the schools from your perspective.
General CRADDOCK. Thank you, Congressman.
The quality-of-life conference, I thought, was a good one. We had
a good representation of delegates. We brought in teams, a good
sampling of teams. And I was very impressed with the out-brief
when the team group got up and gave their issues. Dynamic, articulate, poised, quite impressive.
The major priorities and issues for quality of life are, one, counseling for families and service members post- and pre-deployment.
Because of this extended duration, we have got troops and units
now startingpreparing for their third 12some of them 15month. Now we are back to 12-month rotations. We have had Air
Force, 3-, 4-month rotations continuous.
This is a key need. And the fact is the problem is overseas, we
cant get the servicing contracted off post. We have got to have the
counselors, you know, embedded in our organizations, the mental
health organizations and medical organizations to do that. So that
is priority number one.
Second is the child, youth, and teen facilities. We have got to
make sure that because of this extended rotation, deployment,
when service members are going, that there are adequate facilities
to keep the kids engaged, active, productively engaged, particularly
the teenagers. So that is another one that is beenwe had a lot
of focus on.
Access to medical care and dental care. I think what has been
done and the help we have gotten is to reduce out-of-pocket costs
for dental care so that that dental insurance plan is better, is helpful.
TRICARE for the off-post requirements is coming along. It is better than it was. We have more physicians, local national physicians, whether it be in Germany or Italy or the UK, that are in the
program. So that is helpful. And we have got some better counseling and better knowledge of how that works.
It is not yet as easy or as good as here in the States, and that
is the goal. My goal is to make life in Europe for our forces commensurate with what we have here in the States. And with the
dental and medical, we are getting close, but it is not quite enough.
Our medical facilitiesI was at Landstuhl 2 weeks agovery
impressive to see our staff, physicians, nursing all rotate with the
global force into Iraq and Afghanistan. So we have got a continual
turn. And what we have to do then is contract local national, German and Italian doctors to go in. So we have a lot of turbulence.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00455
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
456
Mr. WAMP. Right.
Before you go on to schools, let me just ask then what is the percentage of the troops under your command in European Command
that have their families with them?
General CRADDOCK. Hmm. Sergeant Major.
Major FARLEY. About 60 percent, sir.
Mr. WAMP. Sixty percent. And is that increasing? We had the Korean Command in here last week, and we are really trying to improve command sponsorship. Ratchet up where families can be
with the troops because of these extended stays, multiple deployments and rotations, et cetera.
Is that increasing in European Command or decreasing?
General CRADDOCK. I think, at the senior noncommissioned officer, it is decreasing I think. The number that bring their family is
down because they get to Europe, a few months later, theyso
rather than bring the family
Mr. WAMP. And then leave them
General CRADDOCK. I think at the junior ranks, we are probably
holding about steady in the number that bring their families.
Mr. WAMP. Okay.
General CRADDOCK. Because as opposed to the past, we can get
more of them on to post housing and things like that. But senior
NCOs, I think, many of them are coming
Mr. WAMP. Schools.
General CRADDOCK. Schools. This is a major concern of mine.
DODEA and then the Department of Defense schools in Europe,
DODS Europe, has done, over the several years that I have
watched as my kids went to school there on and off, has done a
good job in terms of curriculum establishment, in terms of quality
of the teachers and, also, I think the administration. So I am pretty
much impressed with that.
The challenge we have got now is facilities. For several years we
have tracked this back. We have 43 percent of the schools in
DODEA worldwide that are located in Europe. We have about 44
percent of the students of all the DODEA who are located in DODS
Europe.
For several years now, we have been getting 15 percent of the
DODS Mil Con allotment, and we have fallen farther and farther
behind in being able to maintain facilities and being able to replace
facilities. We are Band-Aiding over the years and patching up the
facilities.
There was a requirement in the Appropriation Act to report
backDODEA had to report back the status of the facilities. They
have four categoriesQ1 through 4, four being the lowest. Seventytwo percent of our facilities are Category 3 or 4. Category 3, major
repair required. Category 4, replacement required.
I think overall, DODEA came out 70 percent. So we are a bit
worse than the average overall. So the challenge we have had over
the past couple years is to getI dont mean to do this in a pejorative way, but we had to get DODEAs attention that we had
we need a better fair share of the Mil Con appropriation. We need
a better allocation.
And I think we have done that to the extent that we now have,
from them, a commitment that we will get a greater share. The
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00456
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
457
challenge is being able to sustain the appropriation for Mil Con. I
am hearing it may be cut and that there are some fences for the
Mil Con in Europe and CONUS because it is grow the Army so,
therefore, it cant be touched.
We have got a few projects that we want to do, and I know I am
constrained a bit by OMB and I am not supposed to talk about
monies and things like that. My concern is this. It is a readiness
issue.
We must have schools facilities, fiscal plans, commensurate with
what they find here in the States. Will it be like Northern Virginia? Maybe not. Will it be like Georgia? Tennessee? Texas? Yes,
it has got to be like that. Right now, it is not.
I live in SHAPE in Mons, Belgium. I go over to the SHAPE
International School. I have walked through it several times, and
it is a huge campus that, over the years, has been patched with
temporary buildings here and there all over the place and then tied
together in a physical plant that isit is customized. There is
every time something breaks, it is a unique fix because it is not
like anywhere else. It has been all pieced together. It is the same
throughout all of EUCOM.
Old hospitals turned into schools. Facilities that were never intended to be a school, we moved in, we made it work. But these
need more care and maintenance or they have got to be replaced.
So that is the challenge.
The readiness piece of this is when Mom or Dad gets orders for
Europe and they then find out where they are going. They call
ahead. What do they do? The first thing they ask about is quarters.
Where am I going to live? The second thing is schools for the kids.
And if what they get is good school system, bad facilities, there
is no lunchroom, the gyms are far away, they are decrepit. Then
they will leave the family at home because they are set in some
place in CONUS in the United States that is acceptable to them.
And then Dad or Mom becomes a geographical bachelor or
bachelorette and a 2-year tour, not a three. And we have got a
greater turn.
This effects readiness because they are not as focused on the job
forward because they have got the family back here. It is a split
perspective, and it is much more difficult. We are going to have
that. We are going toI worry that we will turn EUCOM assignments into aeither a burden or a hardship tour because we cant
provide the schooling. Schooling is critical.
And my headquarters, EUCOM, we have got senior noncommissioned officers who have kids in school, high school kids a lot of
them, and officersand they willthey will opt out if they dont
think the kids can get an education, if they dont have an adequate
place to liveand we are doing pretty good thereor if the facilities arent acceptable in terms of medical care and things like that.
That is the problem with the schooling. It is a readiness issue
over time.
Mr. WAMP. That is it for this round, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. FARR [presiding]. Thank you very much, Mr. Wamp.
And thank you, General.
Chet had to go to a Budget Committee meeting and asked if I
would chair the committee.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00457
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
458
I will ask some questions and then I will go to Mr. Crenshaw.
INTERNATIONAL MILITARY EDUCATION IN TRAINING
I was very interested, General, in reading your statement about

your efforts in building the partner capacity, the BPCs promise to
be a stronger and more flexible response to the broad spectrum of
threats in your jurisdiction.
In reading that this morning and then just a moment ago, I
spoke to the international IMET, the Military Officersgraduate
school in Monterey that I represent. Thirty-nine of them, a lot from
Singapore, but a good number in Korea, but a lot of them from
your part of the world.
And what I was interested in is that we have seen a cut in the
funding of IMET which has not allowed these officers to come to
this country because their host countries pay for it. And it is more
expensive now. So they have been cutting in host countries, but we
have been matching, you know, it works on a formula basis depending on the host country. If we help Germany or France or England at all in sending their officersor Australia, it is full scale.
But the othersthe other countries, they were telling me that it
is a real difficult problem.
And it seems to me, as I read throughout your testimony, this
whole concept that we are going to really try to build a lot more
capability in soft power and education and peace and things like
that.
What is your feeling about what is happening at IMET? If we
lose those officers, isnt that part of building your partner capacity
that they come here and get this kind of training?
General CRADDOCK. Absolutely, sir. It is critical. IMET is probably, dollar for dollar, the best program we have for building partner nation capability and capacity. And, indeed, over the years, we
have seen a trend now where the dollars available go down.
Every year, we work closely with the nations to determine their
needs, to request school slots. When a family from the Ukraine, a
family from Georgia, a family from Azerbaijan comes to a year-long
school, the officer, the noncommissioned officer brings his family
and they live in the States, we gain from that, they gain from that,
they go back, they never forget that. And it is veryit is valuable.
It is critical.
This is a Title 22 program along with the foreign military financing. And the State Department essentially funds the program,
turns it over, then, to geographical combatant commands to implement. So we work closely with State. But they fund it.
We haveI think, we have got to push harder to sustain the
funds for IMET. I am absolutely convinced that, in terms of opening up and engaging, that is the first place that we have got to go.
But the process is cumbersome.
What will happen is I have, in all these countries, offices of defense cooperation. They are in the embassy. They work with the
host nation military to decide what schools, what slots with needed.
We then pull that together at EUCOM. We put a package together
and a recommendation. It goes back to the office of secretary of defense policy. They look at it. They massage it or cut it or change
it. They send it over to State Department.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00458
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
459
State gets it. They add their spins on it or whatever. It goes
through OMB and comes over here. And oftentimes, then, when
State gets it back, this is just a fact of life, that money is withheld
as a cash flow enabler.
So for fiscal year 2009, this fiscal year in IMET, we getmoney
up front, so we buy school slots. And then if we dont get a predictable stream of money, normally what happens thenthis isI did
this in SOUTHCOM, and this is the third year in EUCOM. About
July or August, we get the big dump on IMET monies based upon
whatever it is State did not need to reallocate for something else.
And then we apply it for school seats the last quarter of the fiscal
year, but we have to get it spent by the first quarter of the next
fiscal year.
And the challenge is these are services that have these classes,
these schools. The services want to get those school slots, seats,
filled up early in the year. If they dont, they sometimes they cancel
that school or that course for July or August or September.
So we become at risk if we cant get somebody in. We have the
money, but we dont have the seats because the class is cancelled.
Or we have to get it in the first quarter of the next year and try
to fill up. So it is not ait is not a consistent approach over the
year. It is feast or famine.
Mr. FARR. I am very interested in seeing what we can do to, perhaps, make that a better decision making process. And, in fact, I
asked Chet if he would stay here because they just whacked a billion dollars out of State Department, and there is no doubt that it
is going to hit this program which you just said is the best partner
solution there is.
And our strategy for achieving stability around the world is to
develop these partnerships and building partnership capacity.
I think it is important that you communicate those thoughts,
also, to Secretary Clinton.
General CRADDOCK. Okay. I will.
Mr. FARR. And we will try to do something on this end.
I have some other questions, but I think I will let Mr. Crenshaw
go right now.
BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSEEUROPEAN SITE

Thank you, General Craddock, for your service and wish you
well.
When you were here last year, we had a pretty candid discussion
about the missile defense in Poland and in the Czech Republic. And
I had just come back and met with the Poles and they were, at the
time, they werethey had a lot of demands likeit seemed like
they hired some guy to negotiate for them picking up all the points.
The Czech Republic things were kind of moving along pretty
good, and then after Russia invaded Georgia, as I recall, Poland
kind of, may be, had changed their perspective or whatever.
So I know that they have signed agreements with the president,
but I understandI guess back in December both those countries,
though decided, well, let us wait and see what the new administration is going to say about all this before we kind of ratify those.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00459
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
460
And I justI guess I wanted to ask you, from your perspective,
has anything changed, in your view, in terms of thatthose two
sites in terms of missile defense, number one?
Number two, there was an article in Reuters, I think, that talked
about the Polish government was a little concerned that maybe if
we didnt follow through, they had a lot on the line, they, you
know, had made a lot of commitments and what kind of impact
would that have over the area that you command?
And then, finally, where are we in terms of the military construction that we appropriated the money in 2009? Not all the money.
But just those three questions.
In general, anything changed? What would happen if we didnt
follow through? And what is left in terms of dollars?
General CRADDOCK. Thank you, sir.
There has been changes, and there is concern, I think, both in
Poland and the Czech Republic over how we are going to proceed.
As you said, the Poles have approved the placement of the interceptors. The EUCOM will do the technical agreements to do that,
the land-use agreements and the arrangements. But we cannot do
that until a Status of Forces Agreement is signed with the Poles.
So we are waiting for that. So we have got to get through that
process.
State Department will work that, and once that is agreed to,
then when we are given that, we will proceed for the land-use
agreements and the technical arrangement that start digging the
brick and mortar.
A little bit different, Czech Republic. The lower house did not
vote on the approval. They have withdrawn it because their law
says, after so long, it has to vote, and they were afraid they would
not get a favorable vote, so it has been withdrawn.
Yesterday, the government got an unfavorable confidence vote, so
the prime ministerthe president will have to form a new government. They may wait until after the end of the rotating EU presidency to do that at the end of June. But it looks like, right now,
that government, which was in favor of installation of the radar,
is going to dissolve, probably, by the end of the June. And we are
concerned that the next government may not hold that radar in the
same favorable light.
So we have got some political changes here that are, obviously,
impacted on what we are going to do.
I have talked to the military leaders of both of those nations. I
have talked to the defense ministers. They all tell me that, indeed,
they have spent some political capital with their constituents, their
people, in order to generate approval for the radar. The incursion
into Georgia convinced the Poles very quickly, as you said. So they
were very favorable to that and that was no issue.
It is still on the margins, I think, in the Czech Republic. Some
polls I read say that 70 percent are against the radar. Others I
read 48. So I dont know where it is, but I know it is an issue with
their population.
I think the longer the United States waits to decide how they
want to proceed, the greater risk we have in the peoples of those
nations then thinking that it is a good thing for them. And I think
that, as I saw the foreign minister of Poland talk about the lack
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00460
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
461
of confidence, and he is worried that the United States may change
its position. I think that will, again, influence other nations in how
they view our consistent relationship. So, unfortunately, it will play
in.
Now, the requirementthe need for a radar, I think, NATO is
the 3rd of December, the foreign ministers affirmed that the third
site was needed and would provide significant protection from ballistic missile attacks. So there is no question there so far of the
threat.
It is a matter of, now, I think, a decision by the United States
on how they will proceed, how they will proceed with regards to the
Russian consideration of the third site. And I think those are going
to be some difficult political decisions that will lead to difficult discussions at the highest levels of the U.S., the Russian Federation,
and I think, Poland and the Czech Republic.
So we, right now, essentially, we are in a hold status. We are
waiting for a political decision onmy requirement is to protect
U.S. forces and U.S. families and interests in Europe from ballistic
missile attack. If we do that by putting in a third site to intercept,
fine. If we do that through political means, diplomatic means, economic means to minimize or reduce the threat, that is okay, too.
But that has yet to occur.
Mr. CRENSHAW. In terms of the appropriation, is there anything
needed yet? We appropriated some money last year, but I guess
is that kind of on hold as well?
General CRADDOCK. That is on hold until we get the go-ahead to
make the technical agreement, and then the monies will be used
to breakstart shoveling earth and do the brick and mortar. I
think it is an incremental appropriation. I think it is okay. It is
just a matter of have we got the trigger to get started.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Gotcha.
General CRADDOCK. Yes.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I have got another question, but
I will wait until the next round as well.
Mr. FARR. Okay.
Mr. Carter.
ECONOMIC DOWNTURN

General, the dollar is fluctuating pretty severely, and there is a
global downturn that we are seeing which, of course, that is frontpage news over here. I was reading an article last night about the
economic crisis in Europe.
It seems at least that in some countries, Spain and Ireland being
the two examples I was given in that article, they are teetering on
the edge. Is that having an effect on the military construction
projects that you might have or that you might anticipate? And are
we going to need to formulate something consider the possibility of
a severely fluctuating dollar when we start trying to spend money
in Europe?
A difficult question. What we have seen is a favorable exchange
rate with the dollar against the Euro here over the last few
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00461
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
462
months. But in the last 2 weeks, the dollar has lost $0.10 against
the Euro which is pretty significant in a very short period of time.
I dont think that is going to impact too much. I think, actually,
because of the economic downturn, that we may be able to leverage
that into great opportunities with the Mil Con we do have because,
as there is less demand for the construction business, local contractors, whatever, then we may be able to get their business at a better rate for us because they want business.
Mr. CARTER. Right.
General CRADDOCK. As opposed to they have got too much business and they, you know, we have to either outbid or wait. So I
dont think that will be unfavorable.
What I do think, though
Mr. CARTER [continuing]. Bid for American companies or European companies?
General CRADDOCK. If there is an American company that can do
it, fine, but the problem there is the Status of Forces Agreement.
And number the Status of Forces Agreement that we have, for example, in Germany, you are going to have to go to a German company before American if the German can do the same work. It is
not even a bidding process because the taxes then on the American
company are pretty high, and that makes a difference.
But this downturn, I think, is going to impact any cost shares
or anything that the nations would have right now. We are going
to have to fight harder.
Let me give you an example. The SHAPE International School
has got 17 nations as a part of it. It has been there ever since 1968,
and we have worked over the years. We are having a very difficult
time with them to pay their fair share. And they are saying, because of the downturn, they are not going to touch it.
They have 17 percent of the students, they paid 3 percent of the
cost. The other nations are paying a fair share. But with the downturn, discretionary monies, they are going to look hard at all these
cost shares to see if they can reduce it. That is where the danger
lies.
Mr. CARTER. The overall economic situation in Europe, at least
in the article I was reading, is that the Eastern Bloc in the last
election just barely turned out to vote, there was around 17 and 12
percent voter turnout in some of the eastern nations in the EU.
And even the founding nations were below 50 percent, in fact, they
were below 40 percent.
The imposed currency is starting to be a burden on some of the
countries, do you have any comment about that?
General CRADDOCK. Well, no, I agree with that. Now, the Euro,
the European Union, has got a lot of regulatory requirements, and
it is a bit of a burden. You know, there is requirements for contributions to different types of funds in the EU. And those are
must-pays much like very view as our budget, civilian pay is a
must-pay. Those are must-pays.
So that then, as you have got to do that and your revenue generation is less, it reduces the discretionary funding. NATO asked
its members to contribute 2 percent of their gross domestic product
to the security sector, to defense. That isthey want 2 percent for
ministries of defense.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00462
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
463
Right now, there are three countries out of 26 that contribute 2
percent. And the trend is down for everyone. And I think within
a month, it will be two countries, the UK and the U.S. We had six
countries doing it 6 months ago. Now, we are down to three. It is
going to go to two. That is where we are trending.
And in Europe, when times are tough, revenues are down, the
first place they go to grab discretionary funding is in the security
sector. I think we are going to continue to see that.
Mr. CARTER. Thank you.
NATO CONTRIBUTIONS
Mr. FARR. Thank you, Mr. Carter.

General, both Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and joint chief
of staff chairman, Admiral Mullen have called for a whole-of-government response to stabilization and reconstruction issues in Afghanistan. And I am wondering do you know what NATO countries
will contribute to this kind of buildup of the civilian surge?
General CRADDOCK. Well, the effort is ongoing right now. It is
it is going to be pushed hard, I think, by the Secretary of State.
She has been given the task to engage with the NATO nations.
As you know, the United States has increased its force commitment by 30,000. When they are all there by the end of July, it will
be 30,000 since the 1st of January. Commensurate with that, at the
same time, we have to increase the civilian representation.
What do I mean by that? We need Department of Agriculture or
like type agriculture experts from Europeenergy, transportation,
commercethat can integrate into not only the central government
in Kabul and mentor thesethis nascent civil service, if you will,
but also move out into the provincialthe provinces, the capitals
and the provinces and the districts and mentor and partner with
the government personnel there. And that has not happened.
Mr. FARR. So the State Department has a new coordinator for
stabilization and reconstruction, Admiral Herbstexcuse me, Ambassador Herbst.
General CRADDOCK. Right.
Mr. FARR. Is he going to be coordinating the NATO country civilians as well or just trying to grab our folks?
General CRADDOCK. I think he will be working the U.S. side. And
right now, the U.S. side is the predominant side in terms of numbers. However, in the north, the Germans have started to push in
quite a few civilians. And, right now, their provincial reconstruction teams are co-led by a civilian, the foreign ministry, and by a
military officer.
We are seeing a little more of that in the West, but we have got
to do two things. One is
Mr. FARR. Do these teams train together at all like you would
train
General CRADDOCK. They come together. They get trained up,
and then they deploy down. We want ours to stay a year. Theirs
stay 6 months. They have a continual turn, also.
Every one of the PRTs, not only ours but those run by other nations, has a U.S. State Department representative and a USAID
representative. So we get integrated into them there.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00463
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
464
Mr. FARR. And they have a language and cultural training to be
able to work on the grounds?
General CRADDOCK. It iswe need to grow it. But what we have
is a good core capability around which we need to put more agriculture experts, energy experts, medical experts so that we can continue to build capabilities.
Mr. FARR. What I am curious about is this interaction between
Department of Defense, NATO, and these civilian crisis corps folks
that arethat arethe stabilization group, how that will be integrated in command and how it will be integrated in operations because, obviously, you cant be two different entities in the same
country on different missions.
General CRADDOCK. In the U.S., where the rubber meets the road
is a provincial reconstruction team. There is 26 in Afghanistan.
The U.S. has 12. And in that team that is led by U.S. military officers, but embedded in the team are State Department representatives, USAID representatives, Department of Agriculturewe are
starting to get themland grant colleges are sending agriculture
experts from the school over on 6-, 7-, 8-month rotations.
Mr. FARR. Is this primarilycountry?
General CRADDOCK. Yes. I just talked last month to the Department of Agriculture expert in Regional Command East, U.S. leading, and he has got several teams of 30 or 40 from schools, land
ag colleges, agricultural schools, who are over there working with
farmers. And he said it is amazing because it is very basic.
Give me an example. He said, well, we found out that a lot of
these farmers overwater. There is a lack of water, but when they
get it, they overwater the crops. So we worked with them to show
them how to do this better, and crop yields then go up two and
threefold.
So the land is fertile. There is water under the ground. Some rivers in the east particularly. And it is a matter then of just giving
them the basic fundamentals of pulling it all together, and the crop
yields go up.
Mr. FARR [continuing]. Poppy fields?
General CRADDOCK. Different problem. But it is mostthat is
mostly in the south right now. Ninety percent of the poppies are
coming out of the south, and that is where the focusis going to
be next.
STABILIZATION CORPS
Mr. FARR. I am very keenly interested in emphasis on soft power.

I think it is the right thing to do, and I think America can do it
well. I was a Peace Corps volunteer and came back with that experience of language and cultural knowledge and really working with
the peasants that, you know, just didnt understand sort of basic
things.
So I am interested in how you, as a career military officer, feel
about this. It really seems to me that if we are really going to do
stabilization and we are going to work ourselves out, we have got
to have that civilian transfer.
General CRADDOCK. I agree. Absolutely agree.
Mr. FARR. What are the things that we need to add that we are
not doing?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00464
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
465
General CRADDOCK. I think that we have got to have, whether
it is USAID or whether it is the stabilization and reconstruction directorate in State Departmentmaybe that is where it startswe
have got to have an energized, growingit has got to be bigger
stabilization corps. And they have got toright now, the military
is doing it in most places, but we have got to get that transitioned
into a civilian entity and just let the military be there for security
as required.
I dont know how you motivate that, how you get, you know, incentives for folks to join, but that has to occur.
Mr. FARR. The concept here was to draw upon the trained experience of USAID, State Department, and then have a reserve corps
made up of state and local folks who you can call upon and you
would have this cache of incredible career talent and, hopefully, career talents that also know something about the country that you
could pull together and train and they could come in there as you
said, a stabilization corps.
General CRADDOCK. I am all for it.
Mr. FARR. I guess we just havent met the size and skill level
that is needed.
General CRADDOCK. I think it is still fragmented. I think departments, Agriculture, Energy, Commerce, Health and Human Services all generate their own participation, but it is not brought together here under a stabilization corps where each department
agency puts their people in and 40 of them are pulled out and they
are trained together and culturally assimilated to go into a province in Afghanistan, and 45 go into some other country andI
think, now, it is individual stovepipes going in.
And then they come together on the ground, and it is better than
nothing, but it is still not good enough.
Mr. FARR. What was the ingredient that made the military come
together in a coordinated way?
General CRADDOCK. We follow a prescribed routine. It is in our
it is the way we are drilled. It is our ethos.
And Regional Command East in Afghanistan, the military put together a program in Nangarhar Province, and they called it
Nangarhar, Inc.INCincorporated. And I took 30 members
from the Council on Foreign Relations to Afghanistan. We went
there.
And the military briefed these industrialists, entrepreneurs,
businessmen and women here is what we are doing. And everyone
I heard said why are you doing this. This is not a military task.
This is a civilian task. You are into development, reconstruction,
job creation. You are bringing in industrial capability, technology,
why are you doing this? And the answer is no one else was there,
but they were doing it very well.
That is what we havethat is the stabilization corps we are
talking about. Thosethose functions, those skills, those tasks
have to be handed off to a stabilization corps, a stabilization battalion, whatever and then they have to sustain that over time because we are taking the militaryand our strategy is shape, clear
out the insurgents, holdkeep it securedand then build. We are
using our forces to shape, clear, hold, and then build, and we dont
have enough to do it.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00465
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
466
So as soon as the next problem spot comes up, we are trying to
hold and build, we have to move our forces over to clear the insurgents out of this problem spot. And this is
Mr. FARR. Well, I was involved in carrying the legislation to create that stabilization corps in the State Department, and it is only
about 2 years old. Congress has cut their request in funding. We
havent funded it enough. But I think it is important for the Department of Defense to talk about that as much as possible and
plead with all of us appropriators that you need that other arm,
that other strength in order to secure and stabilize an area.
And I think that voice, coming from the military, may be even
more respected on the Hill than coming from the State Department.
General CRADDOCK. I agree with Secretary Gates. I think it
means that we, the Department of Defense, push monies over to do
this. It is in our best interest to do it.
Ambassador Carlos Pascual was the first director, and I was in
SOUTHCOM. We worked together closely. I thinkand I amthis
is my judgmenthe got so frustrated with the ability to get
resourced and to get authorities to move ahead that he left. And
I think when that happened, that whole program lost a lot of
ground and a lot of momentum.
Mr. FARR. Well, the Congress can take the blame. They asked for
$150 million, and we gave them $10 million.
General CRADDOCK. Okay.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. Carrying the thought a little bit further, this civilian
approach, I have said here many times, that our commanders
around the world are maybe our best State Department representativesand they are more effective than State Department a whole
lot of timesbut dont you think that that is the best way for General Kip Ward to succeed in AFRICOM is with that approach?
I talked to a top official last month from Kenya who actually had
gone from concern about AFRICOM to a much better attitude towards AFRICOM. Not threatening, more stabilization support and
economic development things that they saw real positive instead of
a threat to the continent which I think was the first reaction.
And just in a big picture, you have divested those countries, but
during the transition, dont you think that that is very much a part
of the success formula for AFRICOM is that approach?
General CRADDOCK. Oh, I absolutely do. I think that, in most scenarios today, particularly in Africa, I think, in Eurasia to a great
extent, softS-O-F-Tpower is what will prevail.
In Afghanistan, I have said repeatedly, this is not going to be
won by military means. The military will set the conditions, the security so that development, which is job creation, the delivery of infrastructure, social services and welfare to the people can occur.
When that happens, then they will decide they do not want insurgents around because they dont bring that to them. And the people
will push the insurgents out.
Same thing in Africa. Different problems in Africa. It is endemic.
It is poverty. It isbut it is not a conventional military threat. So
we have got towe, the militaryhave to enable the civilian approach. And that is the challenge we have got.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00466
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
467
Until we do that, we have got to have civilians behind us.
Mr. WAMP. We are seeing the push-pull here to a certain extent
is if the military is involved, a lot of people in Washington dont
look at it as foreign aid or assistance to countries. They dont think
it is as efficient. This is just a reality that still has to be dealt with
because I do think as you transition more over to State Department, you dont get, frankly the efficiency.
And I know that there were gross inefficiencies with Iraq in staging and procurement on the other side of the world in a war-fighting capacity. But I also believe that you have seen the military be
very responsive with the resources in this kind of a theater as opposed to, frankly, some State Department.
So we have gotI understand where you are going, but we have
got some selling to do.
Back to Afghanistan, unless you want to interject.
AFGHANISTAN
Mr. FARR. The problem isthe military has been very straightforward about this and the Department of Defense, Secretary of
Defense has been very straightforward that they need this capacity
built up. And they were the first to support this legislation.
And, in fact, that is how we got it through the Senate. It was
calls from the Department of Defense that got it through, not the
State Department. But we havent been listening to it or funding
it. And I think the concept there is that they trained. I mean, if
you are going to be governor of a state, you are going to have a
lot of people who are really good at their job and professional. Why
cant we call them up as we do National Guard to have these civilian skills and, perhaps, the linguistic knowledge? You know, maybe
they are Afghans.
I think it is just a missing component. As far as cost, I mean,
if we really put a nice spin on it, I think you could get senior people to almost volunteer to do this. Who wouldnt want to have an
experience like this?
Mr. WAMP. Back to Afghanistan and your role as the supreme
commander and NATO increasing their presence there. Word from
the Pentagon is that in the supplemental, when it comes, there will
be a little thin slice for Mil Con directed to Afghanistan. Where
would that be spent? Do you know?
General CRADDOCK. I have a NATO hat in Afghanistan. I do not
have a U.S. hat. But because of this uplift in forces, as I understand, there have to be some additional tarmacs laid because of the
increase in numbers of helicopters, so they have got to do some
more work on the airfields. There will have to be more facilities to
house the troops, whether they areprobably C-huts or things like
that. Headquarters will have to be built. Regional Command South
is going to be up a little bit. So I think that is the Mil Con investment.
From a NATO perspective, we are basically in airfields. NATO
will take care of common funding for common-use areas. But, for
example, the Germans in the north in Mazari Sharif have built
that into an incredible facility. I mean, there is morethere is
more cement up there than anywhere else in one place in that
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00467
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
468
country. It is huge. But that is nationally funded, no NATO money
there.
That is going to happen. The U.S. is going to have to fund some
of these increases when they put these forces in places where there
are no facilities now. There is no infrastructure anywhere in Afghanistan.
So any time you put a force in there, one of these got to put the
infrastructure in. You have got to put in housing. You have got to
put in dining facilities. You have got to harden them because of the
threat from rockets and mortars. And that is where the cost lies.
Mr. FARR. Is there water?
General CRADDOCK. There is water in most places of the countrys surface. Southwest, no. But undernot too deepthere is
water. Some of it is high metal content, but the fact is that before
the Soviets destroyed it, that was a very complex irrigation system,
and it wasit was good. The country was green. When the Soviets
left, they just completely destroyed the irrigation system.
The challenge we have got with Department of Agriculture and
some of the European nations is to help rebuild the irrigation system in the south and the north. The east has got, because of the
Hindu Kush, a lot of mounts and runoff from snow and streams.
So there is plenty of water there. Good micro, hydroelectric capability. Put a little turbine in one of these streams as wide as this
table, fast moving, and you can generate enough to put one light
bulb in 50 houses. That is a pretty good deal.
So there is water. It is a matter of getting to it, getting it in, out,
and distributed in irrigation has got to be rebuilt. Totally destroyed.
Mr. WAMP. So Admiral Stavridis, Ph.D., real smart guy, real
neat guy, but he is going from dealing with Hugo Chavez to taking
EUCOM. What do you say to him? [Laughter.]
General CRADDOCK. Hang on. Well, I did the same thing. But the
differenceI went from SOUTHCOM to EUCOM and NATO. The
difference is I had already spent 14 years on and off in Europe on
assignments. I had been in a NATO command. So I understood a
lot of how that works.
So Jim is going to have tomilitarily, not a problem. You can
transfer skills from one combatant command to the next. Okay? So
that is okay.
The challenge will be the political and military side in NATO.
And that is completely different and unique. There are different
rule sets, different acronyms, different processes. When youin
NATO, when you were invited to something, that means you will
be there. It isyou have got to break the code. And that is going
to be the challenge.
So what I am telling you is listen to some of the folks who have
been around a while very carefully because, in NATO, generally
speaking, what you hear is different from what they mean. It is incredibly political.
Mr. WAMP. Wow.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Bishop, under the rules of the committee, I am
told that priority, because of the way people came in, is that Mr.
Crenshaw and Mr. Carter go.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00468
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
469
Mr. CRENSHAW. Thank you. While we are talking about Afghanistan, let me ask you a couple of questions. You know, kind of big
picture, kind of what is going on there. But what you just mentioned and, you know, kind of the political nature.
When I was there, one of the big problems, it seemed like, I
think you said we have got 62,000 people there. Half of those are
ours. Right? Forty-two different nations have people there. We
have got another 14,000 that are kind of part of Enduring Freedom, and we are getting ready to send another 17,000 there.
And part of the problem is getting everybody to work together.
As I understand it, some countries dont go into some areas of Afghanistan. There are these so-called caveats where, you know, we
watched the film of kind of the way people engage the enemy, and
they were watching from high-tech spy planes. Now, here they are,
the bad guys are here, but there are too many people nearby so we
cant do anything until they go somewhere else.
I meanand I guess I am wondering NATO is getting ready to
have an anniversary. You are going to have a NATOdo you all
talk about that? Aboutit seems to me that, with all the high-tech
equipment you have got, you know, interoperability kind of questions of how you train people, how you work together, the different
rules that different countries have.
Give us a picture of the overall situation in Afghanistan. And
then what do you think are the things that we ought to be doing
legislatively or the things that you are trying to do at these NATO
summits to kind of work together?
But could you kind of comment on a couple of those issues?
General CRADDOCK. I will give you an overall Afghanistan. I just
took the North Atlantic Council plus non-NATO troop-contributing
nations in 2 weeks agowell, last week, actually. That was 42
reps from all 42, ambassadors from 42 countries.
So we got them out and about to see the country and talked to
President Karzai, talked to the ministers, talked to Speaker of the
House Kenuti and others. So I will tell you the general consensus
was they came back seeing a far better picture than what they expected.
So, now, it is not rosy, but it is not as bad as you read. Three
lines of operation in NATO: security, governance, and development.
My assessment is in security, except for the south, we are making
progress. In the south, we are stalemated, and we need more
troops, and that is what the U.S. is going to provide.
The south is a coherent insurgency. It is Pashtun. They are all
working under orders from Quettathe Quetta Sura. The Pashtun
insurgent leaders have very tight control in the south. It is a coherent insurgency.
The east is a syndicate of insurgents. You have got Taliban. You
have got HIG, Hakani, Al Qaeda, IJU, you name it. There are a
whole bunch of bad guys, and sometimes they work together and
sometimes they dont. So they are syndicated to the extent it is to
their advantage. When they feel like it is not, then they blow each
other up and try to do something else. Different kind of insurgency.
The key is Pakistan for them. If the safe haven in Pakistan is
not eliminated, we will never end the fighting in Afghanistan. Fact.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00469
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
470
Insurgents, when they are under pressure, go back across the border into sanctuary, and then they pick and choose when to return.
But except for the south, security is on the uptick. We turned
over Kabul, the capital, for leave for security to the Afghans. The
incident rate today, they are doing a pretty good job. Will they ever
completely eliminate the suicide bomber that makes the headlines?
No, we cant do that anywhere in the world. But the number of incidents are down. They are doing okay.
Governance, I think, is the long pole in the tent. It is the problem. If the people in Afghanistan dont believe government is a
positive factor in their life, they will never support the government
either central, provincial or district. And, right now, the corruption
is so bad that the people are right on the margins. They dont know
whether to walk off and take the Taliban, even though they are
harsh, they are not corrupt, they dontpeople and shake them
down, or they think maybe there is a chance the government is
going to help them.
If we dont see a reduction in corruption, if we dont see the deliveryfair deliveryof infrastructure and services, I am worried
that even though we could be perfect in securing the place, the people will still never back their government.
Development is starting to get better. It is now a more coherent
approach. It is integrated the Afghan national development strategy, which was a long time coming. It is integrating from bottom
to top, and we are seeing projects linked up and down. So I am getting a better feel there.
The World Bank Solidarity Program, which is administered down
at the local level, does not go through Kabul or any provincial capital, is probably the most effective development program there. It
is very good.
Now, we have got to take those types of successes and link them
up and then across. So that is the overall picture. Not moving as
fast as we want to. We still have to continue to push.
NATO
And what is the problem with NATO? In order to get buy-in in

the beginning, I think what happened was that every nation that
wanted to have a little hitch in going, a caveatwell, we will go
but we wantokay, fine. Come on.
And individually, it wasnt a problem. But then when you have
got 42 nations and they generate, right now, 17 caveats18 nations out of 42 are caveat free. The rest have got 70 caveats. They
wont do this. They wont go there. Then the commanders on the
ground, every time they have put together an operation, have to
consider that and have to adjust. And it gets to be three-dimensional chess because you think you have got itno, I cant use
these guys becauseso it is very difficult. It takes enormous planning efforts.
And now, the next factor, a good factor, is we have got to work
with the Afghan National Army. They are getting more capable.
They are participating in 90 percent of the ops. They lead 50 percent. That is a good thing. So we want that.
But we have got nations that are caveated. Theyif they are
if they are providing mentoring teams for an infantry battalion of
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00470
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
471
Afghans in the north, and we have got a problem in the south. So
we want to move that brigade of Afghan soldiers to the south, but
that team in the north that belongs to a country says, oh, no, I
cant go south. So the OMLTs mentoring team, they stay north.
The U.S. has to pick upput a team together to go south. These
are the things that cause incredible inflexibility that the commanders down there have to deal with.
So we have got toit is too late. We have built our house. We
are going to live with it now. But when we do this again and we
build an O-plan, an operations plan and NATO says go do it, then
we cannot let nations opt in the way they want to. You are either
all in or you are all out.
And if you are not all in and we dont have enough to do it, then
militarily, we go back and say we cant do it. You told us to do this.
Here is what we need. You only gave us this. This is all we can
do. We didnt do that.
It is the worst abomination of a militarymilitary effort. We
justit is too hard. It is too many restraints. Headquarters structure, all the caveats and the constraints, some of these national
elements that come in dont report under ISAF, NATO. They stay
nationally command and controlled. So it iswe have got to have
a 21st century structure here, and this is a Cold War structure.
Mr. CRENSHAW. You bring that up, like, at these meetings and
it justthey can change.
General CRADDOCK. I meet with the chiefs of defense every 3 or
4 months. I tell them this. I needyou know, at the last summit,
the heads of state said we are going to fill up your requirements
with troops, we are going to eliminate caveats. The next meeting
after that, I took a big, old jar in and I labeled it. This is the fillup-the troops. And I laid it out there. Who is going to put something in it? And nobody did a thing.
So you can name them, you can shame them, but it doesnt work.
You just continually beat on them. The chiefs of defensethe military guysalways tell me I can get more. I can provide more. I can
do this. Will you do it? I will try. They go back, they cant get political approval.
Mr. CRENSHAW [continuing]. Withhold military aidconditionality?
General CRADDOCK. Most of the ones that have the capability,
have the capacity and havent contributed dont get aid from us.
Smaller nations, the newer nations, the new members of NATO are
paying a billthey are punching above their weight, but they are
not real capable, so we have got to help them out. We have got to
train them. Sometimes, we embed U.S. guys with them to help
them out. They are willing, but they dont have a lot to bring.
It is the big nations that we dont give any aid to, they are the
ones that could do it but dont.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Carter and then Mr. Bishop.
AFGHANISTAN
Mr. CARTER. Well, this line of questioning we have been going

into is very frustrating. I was over with the 4th Infantry Division
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00471
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
472
early on, and some of the commanders were complaining about the
same issues that you are complaining about in Iraq.
One general, and I wont mention his name, got frustrated. He
said I spend more time taking care of these people than I do getting anything out of them. And I have got fighting soldiers that are
having to take care of these people because they are limited in
what they are willing to do. And he said as far as I am concerned,
they might as well go on home. But I guess he was a little bit frustrated.
But another thing that Sam brought up, and this is only in Iraq
you are talking about provincial teams were a good issue. I mean,
they really did work. But the frustration that the military was having at that point in timethis was prior to the surge was it was
taking a lot of soldiers to move a few people from the State Department out there because they just didnt want to go.
And he said, finally, you just said it is easier for us to just do
it ourselves than try to push these guys out of their little secure
place inside Baghdad. They didnt want to go outside of there. They
didnt feel like they were getting paid to get shot at and so they
didnt want to go out there.
And so the Army took over, basically, all those issues that were
supposed to be dealt with. Is that same type of thing occurring in
Afghanistan?
General CRADDOCK. To a certain extent, yes, but I dont think it
is as bad as what you described because we have been there a little
longer. When we pushed out the insurgents, the Taliban, in late
2002, they were beat up pretty bad. We didnt realize it, but they
were out there refitting, rearming, regenerating over the next 3-1/
2 years. So, by 2006, they were back.
We had folks out and about, State Department folks and other
civilian teams. So we had them out there. Now, theyou know,
and we had security for them, we just had to, probably, put a little
more security in certain places. But I dont think it was having to
get them out there. They were already out there. The question is
are theyis it good enough.
The problem wasnt the U.S. Now, the problem is international
organizations, nongovernmentals. Right now, UNAMA, the mission
in Afghanistan only has their people in offices in 17 to 34 provinces. And the reason they will tell you is security.
Well, the real reason is manpower. There is plenty of security
where they are, but they dont have enough people to get out there.
So they continually have a tension of resources versus security.
But, no, we do have to provide security. We are asked to escort
world food trucks. We are asked to do a lot of that. But, you know,
there is athere is a bit of a tension. Any time a lot of these
nongovernmentals, these international organizations see a uniform,
you know, they push back. They dont want the military around because they think we endanger them if they are near us.
But what we are seeing now is a reverse. They are asking us to
come around and help them out because they realize we can provide a level of security now. ISAF does that. U.S. forces do that.
If it means we can get them out and they can start doing what
they are chartered to do, it is probably worth our time to do it.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00472
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
473
Mr. CARTER. At the Naval Postgraduate School where they are
doing this training with everybody, military and international and
nongovernmental organizations, the feedback I am getting is the
NGOs are much more comfortable being with the military because
they are out in the fields. What they are not comfortable with is
watching USAID and the State Department hide in the embassy
compounds.
And because of the way they were founded they dont want to be
seen as partnering with the military. But as far as ground work
is concerned, they find themselves, because you say so many of the
soldiers are doing this workfixing water systems.
I think it is a whole new paradigm that America needs to build
on, NATO needs to build on that we have never trained civilian
forces to go in and do stabilization in failed states and how maybe
you ought to go in ahead of time just so they dont fail. But in postconflict, how do you get them in and how do you restart the system? You need forces trained together and civilians dont train together. They are all independent. They come in. They rush in. They
are single purpose. One, will build houses. Somebody else will do
teaching. They are not under a single command structure, and that
is why I think we should match military organizational skills to civilian parts.
I think it is challenging and exciting and a great opportunity, but
Congress has got to get behind you.
General CRADDOCK. We dont have to push out the USAID or
U.S. State Department. I will say they are out there. Wethe challenge is keeping them out there and more of them because, too
often, we have an AID rep out in the PRT in some remote province,
and it is time to leave and they leave, and it is 2 months before
we get a replacement.
So we have got to have a continual, persistent presence, otherwise the local people lose faith in the fact that we are serious about
this.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Bishop.
Welcome, General Craddock.
COMMAND STRUCTURE AT EUCOM
I have been interested in the conversation regarding the three

Ds: defense, diplomacy, and development which is very much a
part of the newest command: which is Africa Command. One of the
specific things in the Africa Command structure is that there is a
deputy commander for civil and military affairs who is an ambassador.
And do you believe that in what you are doing in Afghanistan,
that that would be helpful? Does your command structure at
EUCOM include a civil military affairs deputy to the commander
as does AFRICOM?
No. The command structure of European Command does not
have a civilian deputy. I wasI worked with General Ward in the
beginning in the creation of that structure. And we looked at what
ailed Africa. We looked at the needs of Africa. We looked at the
challenges and the threats in Africa. And it was apparent that
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00473
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
474
there are probably more nonmilitary challenges than military and
it would take soft power to address it.
And that was a discreet decision, uniquely, to have a civilian
deputy out of the State Department, Ambassador Yates. I think
and what I am doing now, quite frankly, in EUCOM is we are beginningI have started a review the command structure, a review
towards our reorganization.
When I left SOUTHCOM, I did that. I handed that off to Admiral
Stavridis.
Mr. BISHOP. SOUTHCOM sort of has that structure, also.
General CRADDOCK. Right. Exactly.
So we are heading that way, but I will, quite frankly, tell you
that we had the first year to be able to split out AFRICOM. A challenge because that changed European Command. That was a significant event.
So we spent the first year doing that. We spent the second year,
now, regrouping and understanding what that meant and getting
ourselves reorganized. Now, it doesnt sound like much, but the fact
thata couple of facts.
I have got two hats. I am not the only combatant commander
with two hats, but I am the only one with two different headquarters that are 500 miles apart. That created a significant difference. And along with that was, in years past, the deputy commander of EUCOM was a four-star, General Ward.
When we split out AFRICOM, my deputy commander became a
three-star. And while, as competent and capable and good as he is,
four beats three. And three cant get in doors that four gets into.
And when he wants to meet with chiefs of defense as a three-star,
it is harder.
When we have conferencesand we do that routinely, we bring
in the chiefs of defense of the nations once a quarter. If I am not
there, then it is hard to get them there. So we spend the next year
sorting ourselves out.
Now, I have stated let us get ourselves arranged for the 21st century because we are going to be in the process of reorganizing ourselves. Is it going to be like SOUTHCOM? Not exactly. Is it going
to be like AFRICOM? Not exactly. But it will be what we need to
face the challenges in our region.
AFGHANISTAN
Mr. BISHOP. In terms of your long-term military base needs for

Afghanistan, do you see in EUCOM the need for any long-term
military basing and access for the efforts in Afghanistan that this
committee would have to fund?
General CRADDOCK. Not discreetly towards Afghanistan. I think
that, in conjunction with Transportation Command, TRANSCOM,
they have in-route infrastructure requirements in our region. So,
you know, Moron in Spain, Rota is in Spain, we have got to make
sure that what we have meets the needs but it is not more than
we need. We cant warm base things in two locations if we can fix
it to be adequate for all the throughput we need in one location.
So I dont think there is anything unique to Afghanistan. As you
know, TRANSCOM is working on a northern distribution network
so that, instead of having to go through Pakistan, we can come in
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00474
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
475
through Russia and Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.
That is working pretty well. NATO is doing the same thing.
So I dont have anything different than what TRANSCOMwe
support TRANSCOMs efforts. We justwe are in a debate with
TRANSCOM. Let us make sure you dont have more than you need
there, TRANSCOM.
DOD EDUCATION NEEDS IN EUROPE
Mr. BISHOP. Okay. Let me change gears for a moment and go to

your DOD education needs in Europe.
I think you may have alluded in your testimony to your need for
school construction in Europe. Can you describe that need and the
current state of the schools? I think you mentioned about $300 million to $400 million in Mil Con needs per year.
Does that support the current transformation efforts? And of
what is that comprised? Other than schools, are there any other
major construction or infrastructure needs that you have?
Mr. FARR. Before you arrived, the general went through that
quite
Mr. BISHOP. I am sorry. I apologize.
Mr. FARR [continuing]. Respond to your question.
Mr. BISHOP. Okay.
General CRADDOCK. What we have is, over the years we have
taken and patched together school facilities, school infrastructure,
fiscaland we put patches on it because we never had enough
money to be able to buy new in a quality facility.
DODEA, for whatever reason, only gave us 15 percent of the
available funds, yet we have 43 percent of the schools and the students. So we werent getting a fair share. Because of that, we could
never completely fix a problem. We had to Band-Aid several problems.
So we have gone in these last couple of years, we have identified
that, we have asked for a greater share. Right now, 72 percent of
our school facilities, on a grading system, Q1 through 4 with four
being worse, 72 percent of ours are three or four. Three means
major repair. Four means needs a new facility.
So we are just about at the end of being able to patch these
things. We are going to have to do some new construction. That is
the challenge we have got. We have got good staffs, good teachers,
good curricula. Physical plants are decaying faster than we can
ever
If we dont do that, if we dont get these facilities up to Q1 soon,
we are going to have families elect to stay in the States and the
service member comes alone. And that is going to be a readiness
issue.
Now, beyond that, there are several programs. We are still going
to need to finish up our barracks modernization. We are still going
need to finish up our family housing system. That is already in the
plan. And then, as we head towards the objective force for the land
army for the air, there are some command and control requirements for the Army as they pull together several different units
into the Weisbaden location. So that is all in the program that we
have got now.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00475
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
476
Mr. BISHOP. I apologize for going back over information you had
already covered. I was in a Defense Subcommittee meeting simultaneously with this, so I apologize.
But thank you so very much.
TAJIKISTAN
Mr. FARR. Recently, I got a call from a professor at Monterey Institute of International Studies. She is Russian. And she has been
teaching problems of the region. And she was really leaning on me
about how we have sort of paid no attention to Tajikistan.
You mentioned it. And she said the ills of Afghanistan are flopping into that country without people paying any attention to it
and it could become really explosive. Do you concur with that
General CRADDOCK. I dont have a lot of detailed knowledge because Takijistan is in the CENTCOM AOR. But, obviously, as a
neighbor there, as a border state in Afghanistan, we see that.
The fact is that smuggling routes, historically, have gone through
that area up through Tajikistan. We know drugs are moving
through Tajikistan into Russia. The Russians know that. They
have a growing problem with heroin addiction coming out of Afghanistan.
So the fact is we cant approach Afghanistan by itself as a regional issue, and we have got to then see both from the Pakistan
side and the Iranian side, which are the two big players, but we
have got to look north. And then you have got Turkmenistan and
Tajikistan andthose nations are also going to feel the problems
move across borders to them the better it gets in Afghanistan.
There is a natural flowthere has been for centuriesand had
runs from the south of Afghanistan up through the north through
the Kunduz Corridor where the Germans are. And that is where
they are facing problems because it is a Pashtun belt there. And
so there are a lot of bad things happening. And then you have got
another one out west into Turkmenistan. Those are the two main
corridors.
And as we are able to increase the security situation, it is going
to move that way. And the other way it is going to move is through
the Khyber Pass into Pakistan. And then you have gotout west
not as defined, not as large, you have got one large corridor into
Iran, but it is pretty well covered. We watched thatsouth of that,
it is a wide open border and there is all kinds ofthere isthere
is a truck park in southwestern Afghanistan where there are no
paved roads that, at any one time, you will fly a predator over or
a UAV and there will be a thousand trucks there and they are
marshaled there coming and going.
And they are smuggling gasoline. They are smuggling anything
that is a commodity that they can make money on on the black
market. It is incredible.
Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. No further questions.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Crenshaw.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00476
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
477
PRIVATIZED HOUSING/QUALITY OF LIFE
Mr. CRENSHAW. Just a quick question. You were talking about

quality of life and family housing. Do you ever useyou know, over
here, we have kind of seen how privatized housing can kind of
speed up the process and not wait. Is that something that you all
have looked at over there?
General CRADDOCK. We are doing that. Actually, all the new
things we are doing, the Army is moving into these new main operating bases, it is all done on a build-to-lease. Absolutely.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Great.
General CRADDOCK. Yes. We even looked at it to see if there was
a possibility for schools. Is there a way we could build them, but
it didnt pan out because, you know, the host nation has their own
requirements, their own standards. And we couldnt make the
thing meet.
Mr. FARR. I dont have any other further questions. I think your
testimony is probably the most extensive I have ever seen before
this committee, and I really appreciate it. It is very substantive.
QUALITY OF LIFE
Maybe in closing, there is one issue that I think the schools, obviously, for a Mil Con project, are a high priority. Is there anything
else you wanted to share with the committee to prioritize as something we ought to be paying attention to?
General CRADDOCK. I just came out of a quality-of-life conference
that we had before the EUCOM about a month ago. And what I
was struck withand I haveagain, I have been back and forth,
in and out since 1972, 16 years now. So I have seen this and I have
watched the transformation of the quality of life.
And I will tell you that it is incredible. From 1972 to today, the
folks todaythe kids, as I call themif they were transported in
time back to 1972 and they saw the quality of life, they would say,
wow, this is a pretty good deal. But, of course, in life, everything
is relative. So you gauge how you are based on what you had before, maybe, in the States.
So I think that what we have to do here is we have to make sure
the servicesand that is the challenge we have got. The services
have to understand that they do have some responsibility for these
forward-deployed forces not only in Europe but also in the Pacific.
And we have got to keep an awareness and a recognition that,
while it is not going to be the same as what they are going to find
in a camp, post, station, installation back in the states, we have got
to make it as close as possible to that in the delivery of infrastructure and services.
The support relationships are going to be more difficult. You cannot go off post at night in Vilseck down to a 7-Eleven and pick up
a gallon of milk. It is different. But what you can do is get as close
as possible. And you can go to a Shoppette, if you can get that. And
it is open 24 hours a day. That is something we have done. That
is a good thing.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00477
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
478
So I think that is what I would focus on. The low-hanging fruit
is gone. It is quality of life. I said, look, folks, what we have got
to have here is you have got to tell us what you need, and there
are probably three categories.
One is what can I do in EUCOM to fix that problem. Do I have
the authority? Do I have the resources? We have got some of that,
not much left.
What does the Department of Defense have in terms of authorities and resources to fix the next basket of problems? And then
what is it going to take to fix the next basket, which is statute.
That is you all.
What are those problems that we are going to have to fix? The
low-hanging fruit is gone. The hard ones, to a certain extent, have
already been pushed up and, sometimes, rejected.
You know, I asked for a COLA, a cost-of-living allowance review.
I felt that no one adequately explained COLA for overseas camps,
posts, and stations. And I talked to David Chu when he was there
and all of his people, and they came over and theyand my COLA
expert is right here. I mean, this is a passion. And we worked this
together.
But he is the guy that tried to break in to the proprietary formula. It is proprietary. The contractor that does it, we could not
he couldnt tell us. It is proprietary. What do you mean it is proprietary? But it was.
And we had these folks come over, Department of Defense folks,
civil service, and explain it, and we couldnt understand it. I
couldnt understand it. You had to be a Ph.D. in economics, I guess.
I couldnt get it.
So we said, please, put it in English. We have got to be able to
tell our people that. And I asked, then, the Undersecretary, the
Deputy Secretary, Gordon England. I dont accept it, please review
this. And he initiated a panel, and they came back and said it is
all okay. But the problem is we still dont know how it works.
Recently, we were told you have got to take a cut because we
have overpaid you too long. And we didnt cut you earlier because
Craddock requested a review. We reviewed and he lost. So now you
have got to take two points a month for 4 months. So that is eight
pointswhat? About $50 a point?
Mr. BISHOP. Is this in reference to the civilian employees?
General CRADDOCK. No. This is military. This is military.
Mr. FARR. It is $25
General CRADDOCK. It is going to be a couple hundred dollars a
month difference now.
Okay. But one place didnt take a cut to that extent. And that
place has better facilities than anywhere else. The most modern facilities. Somewhere else that doesnt have that access, smaller commissaries, smaller PX, took a bigger cut. What kind of formula does
that? So that is the challenge.
Mr. FARR. Is there a recommendation coming to us on what those
statutory changes ought to be?
General CRADDOCK. Yes. We have put some requests in to the department on some changes to the law that would help the quality
of life. And that is all being pulled together in OSD general coun-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00478
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
479
sel, and they are going to review this through their legal legislative
affairs and push it over.
I dont know how much it will survive.
Mr. FARR. Well, we will have our staff look at it.
General CRADDOCK. Good. Good. I appreciate that.
Sergeant Major, anything on COLA that you want to add? I
mean, he is reallyit is a passion.
Mr. FARR. Well, the hearing is, I think, over. So why dont you
introduce the officers that you brought with you to the committee?
General CRADDOCK. Go ahead, guys. This isJim Sears is my
special assistant. EUCOMhe is in a EUCOM billet, but he works
with the attache.
In the back row, leg affairs, Rick Myers, my XO. J.L. Briggs. And
this is the Mil Con expert from EUCOM, and the colonel knows
that he is the absolute brain on all the history here, where we have
been, and where we are going. And he is the guy that told me, because of the OMB restrictions, I cant talk programs or dollars.
Mr. FARR. Our committees dont like it when we
General CRADDOCK. Necessary evil, I guess. But, yes.
Mr. BISHOP. Do the currency and the fall of the dollar impact
your need for that COLA?
General CRADDOCK. It plays into that, yes. Yes.
VOICE. COLA is broken down into three componentswhich indicates where I do my shopping. In the militarydo I shop off post
or do I shop on post. That is one.
And then there is a market analysis where they compare the cost
of items for us overseas to numerous CONUS locations. Once that
is all done, then the dollar to Euro or dollar to Yen or dollar to
Won isas the last thing.
So the dollar-Euro fluctuation for usdoes not take effect until
5 percent thresholdfor it to be 2 percentnumerous timesand
they have rejected that request saying that the system was not
16 to 31. They said that they couldnt react fast enough2 percent
threshold.
Thethings like that.
Mr. BISHOP. Thank you.
Mr. FARR. Thank you. That is the first time I have had that explanation. I appreciate it.
General CRADDOCK. And the argument is, over time, it all balances out. The problem is many of our families arent there over
time. They are there for a specific period, and if it is caught in the
downturn, it is always lagging behind. It is always lagging behind
the depreciation of the dollar. And they never catch up.
So if you are there 5, 6, 10 years2 yearsbut wewhat we
have asked for is, explain it to us in English so we can understand
it so we could put an article in the Stars and Stripes and say, folks,
here is how it works and everybody could read that and say, I understand that. We have yet to have that.
Mr. FARR. Well, the president is arguing a new era of transparency. Maybe we will have that go down to COLA analysis.
General CRADDOCK. And if the contractor that figures it out has
got a proprietary formula that we cant get access to, I dont think
it isI hope that doesnt continue. But that is really strange.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00479
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
480
Mr. FARR. Thank you for your presentation. And thank you all
for your service to our country. We really appreciate it.
The committee stands adjourned until 2:00 p.m. when we are
going to reassemble for an afternoon hearing on the interoperability between the Department of Veterans Affairs and DOD on
medical records.
[CLERKS NOTE.Questions for the record submitted by Chairman Edwards.]
FORCE LEVELS/DEMANDS
IN
EUROPE
Question. You have recommended that the Army retain four brigade combat
teams in Europe. What are your recommendations for the other service components
(USAFE, NAVEUR, MARFOREUR) of EUCOM?
Answer.
United States Army Europe requirements in addition to four Brigade Combat
Teams (BCT):
Seven enabling brigades
One division headquarters
One Army service component command headquarters
United States Air Force Europe requirements:
Eight fighter squadrons
One theater airlift squadron
One air refueling squadron
One combat search and rescue group
One Intelligence Surveillance Reconnaissance/Global Hawk squadron
Associated air base wings to support above requirements
Navy Europe requirements:
One Command Ship (USS MOUNT WHITNEY)
One Navy service component command headquarters
Associated port and base support units
Naval presence in EUCOM area of responsibility of 2.5 major surface combatants (These forces are better suited as rotational forces and may be fulfilled
through Global Force Management/Request for Forces processes)
Special Operations Command Europe requirements:
One Special Forces Battalion
One Special Operations Group with vertical lift capability
One Naval Special Warfare Unit
One Theater Special Operations Command Headquarters
Marine Force Europe requirements:
Deployable Combined Joint Task Force Headquarters for air, land, and sea
components
Rotational requirements: These force requirements are better filled by rotational
forces and may be satisfied through Global Force Management/Request for Forces
processes:
Naval presence in EUCOM area of responsibility of 2.5 major surface combatants (mentioned above)
1.0 presence of a Littoral Combat Ship
1.0 presence of the Joint High Speed Vessel
0.5 presence of a United States Marine Corp Special Purpose Marine Air
Ground Task Force
Question. You also indicate that along with the two BCTs, EUCOM should retain
Division HQ structure within the theater. Does this mean retaining two division
headquarters? Why is it necessary to retain division headquarters structure?
Answer. EUCOM requires at least one intermediate, tactical level headquarters
in order to meet directed mission requirements, which includes having a deployable
Combined Joint Task Force Headquarters for the land component commander and
to effectively and efficiently conduct Theater Security assistance missions.
Today United States Army Europe has only one Division Headquarters (1st Armored Division) assigned in the EUCOM area of responsibility and one Corps Headquarters (V Corps).
In 2009, V Corps consolidates with United States Army Europe Headquarters into 7th Army and will relocate to Wiesbaden, Germany. This consolidation will remove it as tactical level headquarters from EUCOM.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00480
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
481
The 1st Armored Division Headquarters (Wiesbaden, Germany) is scheduled to return in 2011.
Thus, by 2011 EUCOM will not have an intermediate tactical headquarters
land component capability.
A Division or Corps Headquarters includes a tactical command and control capability for U.S. and North Atlantic Treaty Organization operations and training, staff
expertise, and military-to-military exchanges. This includes Division or Corps level
exercises with North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies and regional partners. A
tactical level Headquarters enables EUCOM to support NATO Headquarters with
peer Headquarters or subordinate tactical Headquarters. A ready, deployable, fullspectrum, land-based tactical level Headquarters separate from the Army Service
Component Commander is a keystone of EUCOMs ability to build partner capacity
and export security from Europe. EUCOM requirements include having Service
Component capabilities to maintain and deploy a Joint Task Force Headquarters.
The Navy and Air Force Joint Task Force Headquarters are challenged to deploy
quickly to a land based scenario away from sea and air ports.
Question. Where are the two temporary additional BCTs currently stationed? If
the two BCTs were made permanent, would you recommend that they remain at
these locations or be relocated somewhere else?
Answer. The two BCTs are currently home stationed in Baumholder and
Grafenwoehr. If they remain in Germany, they will remain stationed at these locations.
EUCOM is currently assigned 4 Brigade Combat Teams. The current plan has
EUCOM permanently retaining the 173rd (Airborne) Brigade Combat Team, which
is split based between Germany and Italy, awaiting Fiscal Year 2012 construction
completion at the Dal Molin complex, Vicenza, Italy, and the 2CR Striker Brigade
Combat Team is stationed at Vilseck, Germany within the Grafenwoehr Major Operating Base (MOB) area.
Question. The relocation of two brigades and divisional headquarters from Europe
to CONUS was a key element of the Global Defense Posture Review, and a decision
to wholly or partly reverse that decision would seem to rebuke the conclusions of
that review. In your opinion, was this review fundamentally flawed, or was it overtaken by unforeseen developments?
Answer. The review was not fundamentally flawed; however, decisions made at
that time were based on geostrategic assumptions that have been invalidated by recent events, e.g., the Caucasus. The resurgence of Russia and its encroachment on
Georgian sovereignty was clearly not anticipated among NATO and in U.S. bilateral
relations. Russias willingness to use force outside her borders was an unforeseen
development that renders a reassessment of whether previous strategic assumptions
made in the GDP Review are adequate regarding stability and security in the region. Additionally, the global economic downturn has underscored the importance of
the European nations dependence upon Russia as an energy exporter, which has
complicated the understanding of the dynamics involved with respect to Russia. The
continuing actions in CENTCOM requiring increased support and cooperation from
our European Allies and partners has also elevated the importance of EUCOMs
ability to build those partnerships and export security to regions in conflict or prone
to crisis.
Question. Have you seen an increased demand from other countries for bilateral/
multilateral training with U.S. forces since the Russian invasion of Georgia?
Answer. Absolutely. The Russian aggression against Georgia and its intimidation
and meddling in the internal affairs of other nations has intensified the requests
for all forms of Theater Security Cooperation both from those nations who have been
directly threatened and those key supporting partners who understand the importance of a strong and cohesive NATO. The most urgent requests are from Georgia,
itself, along with the Baltic States of Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia. These nations
want to see U.S. forces exercising with their forces. The NATO nations that border
Russia have all asked for increased assistance in building their own capacity to defend themselves as well as increased exercises as a demonstration of U.S. commitment and capacity. The Poles, Hungarians, Czechs, Slovaks, Romanians, Turks and
Bulgarians have requested more U.S. support than I can provide. In addition, nonNATO nations such as Azerbaijan have requested exercises and training events with
the U.S. Our long standing NATO partners such as the UK, France, and Denmark
have requested increased interoperability training. Last, traditionally neutral nations such as Sweden, Finland and Austria have shown interest in Theater Security
Cooperation. This issue is as much about avoiding a reduction of our current level
of bi-lateral and multi-lateral training as it is about a growing demand signal for
increased training.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00481
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
482
We have noted an increased concern by our partners with regard to Russian military activities and intentions and a corresponding desire for the U.S. and NATO to
reinforce our commitment to European security. From an intelligence standpoint our
newly-developing relationships with several European partner nations include not
only intelligence sharing but also tactical level intelligence training.
DODEA SCHOOLS
IN
EUROPE
Question. Please provide a listing of DODEA schools within your AOR and indicate the quality rating of each schools facilities.
Answer. As I noted in my recent testimony, DoDEA measures and articulates the
quality of its school facilities in terms of DoD Q-Ratings as defined below.
Q-1 Facility is new or well maintainedGood Condition
Q-2 Facility is satisfactorily maintainedFair Condition
Q-3 Facility is under-maintainedPoor Condition
Q-4 Facility Requires ReplacementFailing Condition
The attached table provides aggregate Q-Ratings for each school in the EUCOM
AOR.
DoDDS-Europe District/School Name
Installation Country
Bavaria:
Ansbach Elementary School ............................
Ansbach High School ......................................
Bamberg Elementary School ...........................
Bamberg High School .....................................
Garmisch Elementary/Middle School ..............
USAG Grafenwoehr, Elementary School ..........
Hohenfels Elementary School ..........................
Hohenfels High School ....................................
Illesheim Elementary School ...........................
Netzaberg Elementary/Middle School .............
Rainbow Elementary School ............................
Schweinfurt Elementary School ......................
Schweinfurt Middle School .............................
Vilseck Elementary School ..............................
Vilseck High School ........................................
Heidelberg:
Aukamm Elementary School ...........................
Boeblingen Elementary/Middle School ............
Hainerberg Elementary School ........................
Heidelberg High School ...................................
Heidelberg Middle School ...............................
Mannheim Elementary School .........................
Mannheim High School ...................................
Mannheim Middle School ................................
Mark Twain Elementary School .......................
Patch Elementary School ................................
Patch High School ..........................................
Patrick Henry Elementary School ....................
Robinson Barracks Elementary/Middle School
Wiesbaden (Arnold) High School ....................
Wiesbaden Middle School ...............................
Isles:
AFNORTH Elementary/High School ..................
Alconbury Elementary School ..........................
Alconbury High School ....................................
Bahrain Elementary/High School ....................
Brussels Elementary/High School ...................
Croughton Elementary School .........................
Feltwell Elementary School .............................
Geilenkirchen Elementary School ....................
Kleine Brogel Elementary School ....................
Lakenheath Elementary School .......................
Lakenheath High School .................................
Lakenheath Middle School ..............................
Liberty Intermediate School ............................
Menwith Hill Elementary/High School ............
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00482
Q-Rating
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
Ansbach, Germany ........................................

Ansbach, Germany ........................................
Bamberg, Germany .......................................
Bamberg, Germany .......................................
Garmisch, Germany .......................................
Grafenwoehr, Germany ..................................
Hohenfels, Germany ......................................
Hohenfels, Germany ......................................
Ansbach, Germany ........................................
Ansbach, Germany ........................................
Schweinfurt, Germany ...................................
Schweinfurt, Germany ...................................
Q3
Q3
Q4
Q3
Q3
Q3
Q3
Q1
Q4
Q1
Q3
Q4
Q3
Q3
Q4
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
USAG
Wiesbaden, Germany .....................................

Stuttgart, Germany .......................................
Heidelberg, Germany .....................................
Mannheim, Germany .....................................
Q3
Q4
Q4
Q4
Q4
Q4
Q4
Q4
Q3
Q4
Q4
Q4
Q3
Q4
Q4
Joint Force Command Headquarters Brunssum,

Netherlands.
RAF Alconbury, United Kingdom .............................
RAF Alconbury, United Kingdom .............................
NSA Bahrain, Bahrain .............................................
USAG Benelux ..........................................................
RAF Croughton, United Kingdom ............................
RAF Feltwell, United Kingdom ................................
Geilenkirchen AB, Germany .....................................
Klein Brogel AB, Belgium .......................................
RAF Lakenheath, United Kingdom ..........................
RAF Feltwell, United Kingdom ................................
RAF Menwith Hill, United Kingdom ........................
Q2
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
Q4
Q4
Q4
Q4
Q3
Q3
Q3
Q3
Q2
Q3
Q1
Q3
Q3
A526P2
483
DoDDS-Europe District/School Name
Installation Country
Q-Rating
SHAPE Elementary School ...............................

SHAPE High School .........................................
Kaiserslautern:
Baumholder High School ................................
Bitburg Elementary School .............................
Bitburg High School ........................................
Bitburg Middle School ....................................
Kaiserslautern ES/MS/HS ................................
Landstuhl Elementary/Middle School ..............
Ramstein American Middle School .................
Ramstein Elementary School ..........................
Ramstein High School ....................................
Ramstein Intermediate School .......................
Sembach Elementary School ...........................
Sembach Middle School ..................................
Smith Elementary School ................................
Spangdahlem Elementary School ...................
Spangdahlem Middle School ..........................
Vogelweh Elementary School ..........................
Wetzel Elementary School ...............................
Mediterranean:
Ankara Elementary/High School ......................
Aviano ES/MS/HS Complex ..............................
Incirlik Elementary/High School ......................
Lajes Elementary/High School ........................
Livorno Elementary/High School .....................
Naples Elementary School ..............................
Naples High School .........................................
Rota Elementary School ..................................
Rota High School ............................................
SHAPE, Belgium ......................................................

SHAPE, Belgium ......................................................
Q3
Q4
USAG Baumholder, Germany ...................................

Spangdahlem AB, Germany ....................................
Vogelweh AB, Germany ...........................................
Landstuhl, Germany ................................................
Ramstein AB, Germany ...........................................
Sembach AB, Germany ...........................................
Sembach AB, Germany ...........................................
Vogelweh AB, Germany ...........................................
Q3
Q4
Q4
Q4
Q4
Q3
Q3
Q2
Q4
Q3
Q4
Q3
Q4
Q3
Q3
Q4
Q3
Ankara AB, Turkey ...................................................

Aviano AB, Italy ......................................................
Incirlik AB, Turkey ...................................................
Lajes Field, Portugal ...............................................
USAG Livorno, Italy .................................................
NSA Naples, Italy ....................................................
NSA Naples, Italy ....................................................
United States Naval Station, Rota .........................
United States Naval Station, Rota .........................
Q4
Q1
Q3
Q4
Q3
Q2
Q2
Q1
Under
Construction
Q3
Q2
Q4
Sevilla Elementary/Middle School ...................

Sigonella Elementary/Middle/High School ......
Vicenza ES/MS/HS Complex ............................
Moron AB, Spain .....................................................

NAS Sigonella, Italy ................................................
USAG Vicenza, Italy .................................................
Question. What is the annual sustainment requirement for DODEA schools in

your AOR, and how does this compare to the actual funding level?
Answer. Based on applicable currency exchange rates, the facility sustainment requirement for DoD Dependent Schools Europe (DoDDSE) is $39M for FY09 and
$37M for FY10. Actual DoDDSE sustainment funding for FY09 is $34.1M and is
projected to be $32.2M in FY10.
Question. What is the backlog of restoration and modernization for DODEA
schools in your AOR?
Answer. The backlog of Restoration and Modernization (R&M) is defined as total
unfunded requirement. DoDEA reports a $1,150M unfunded R&M requirement for
schools at enduring bases in Europe.
Working in close partnership with DoDEA, we have generated broad support
within OSD for increased investment in our schools and anticipate making significant gains on this backlog over the next 5 years.
Of important note: The backlog figure above does not include $450M in unfunded
R&M requirements for schools in communities currently slated for closure. While
DoDEA tracks the backlog at all of their facilities, they do not intend to recapitalize
or make any non-emergent investment in schools at these closing locations.
DEPLOYMENT
AND
EN ROUTE INFRASTRUCTURE
Question. You note in your testimony that forward stationed units meet the same
deployment schedules to Afghanistan and Iraq as CONUS units. The 2004
Strengthening U.S. Global Defense Posture report from the Department of Defense
noted that heavy divisions in Europe may be closer to the Persian Gulf region than
units in the U.S., but as Operation Iraqi Freedom demonstrated, their movement
by sea requires a circuitous route via the Baltic and North Seas, the Atlantic Ocean,
and the Mediterranean. Therefore Europes proximity provides no particularly significant time advantage for movement of such heavy forces compared to movement
from the United States. You seem to argue that the advantages of forward-stationed in forces in building partner capacity should tilt the balance in favor of re-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00483
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
484
taining a larger force in Europe. At the same time, are there any potential changes
that could be made to EUCOMs posture and infrastructure that would bypass the
Baltic/North Seas/Atlantic Ocean route and allow for a more direct movement of
heavy forces by sea to Southwest/South Asia?
Answer. Yes, but such changes would drive tremendous infrastructure costs as
they would require significant rail network expansion and seaport infrastructure improvements for southern European ports.
However, the most expeditious route for deployment of EUCOM heavy forces to
Southwest/South Asia remains the use of mature rail and seaport infrastructure in
Western Europe through seaports such as Rotterdam, Netherlands; Bremerhaven,
Germany; and Antwerp, Belgium via the North Sea, Atlantic Ocean, and Mediterranean Sea. Currently, we flow our Germany-based heavy brigade via ports on the
North Sea via the Baltic Sea. U.S. Transportation Command estimates a 25 to 30
day transit timeline to Southwest Asia. Alternatively, CONUS based heavy brigades
take up to 45 days.
Our route utilizes the mature rail and seaport infrastructure in Western Europe
and is facilitated by well established, dependable host nation support. In the event
of major combat operations requiring multiple U.S. Divisions, U.S. ports and rail
lines could quickly become overwhelmed. Deploying some of the force from Europe
could save valuable time. It is quite possible that four EUCOM BCTs could be loaded on ships and under way from Europe while their CONUS BCT counterparts are
still waiting their turn at the smaller number of U.S. ports that could accommodate
them.
Last, I would like to point out, that while forward presence offers advantages for
rapid deployability to a crisis in Europe, Africa, or the Caucasus, it significantly increases the effectiveness of Building Partner Capacity (BPC) activities in several
ways. There is tremendous value added for BPC within the theater through the habitual relationships which only forward stationed units can provide. These relationships are critical to building trust and confidence with both our traditional and new
partners and allies alike. In addition, under current BCT rotation and reset procedures for global sourcing, forward stationed units can contribute to BPC activities
for approximately twice the length of time that rotational forces can provide. This
is because the forward stationed units training cycles are conducted in theater and
can be leveraged for BPC.
Question. What specific recommendations has TRANSCOM made regarding en
route infrastructure in the EUCOM AOR?
Answer. EUCOM works collaboratively with Transportation Command via the European En-route Infrastructure Steering Committee to identify and assess en-route
infrastructure requirements within the context of the strategies of both Commands
and accounting for the strategies and requirements for adjacent Commands. Beginning in 2003, Transportation Command specifically recommended infrastructure enhancements at Rota, Spain to increase the capability of this location to support strategic air transport and multimodal (ship to aircraft) operations. Recommendations
by Transportation Command for en route infrastructure at other locations in the
EUCOM area of responsibility, for example Ramstein, Germany or Souda Bay,
Greece, have similarly been provided by Transportation Command. Again, the recommendations are made by Transportation Command with the coordination of
EUCOM and are further vetted within the Transportation Command-led Global Enroute Infrastructure Steering Committee, a governance body that ensures the most
vital infrastructure requirements are moved forward.
Question. What role do airfields, ports and other facilities in the Black Sea/
Caucasus region perform in the US/NATO supply effort for Afghanistan?
Answer. The Black Sea/Caucasus region is proving to be an area of strategic importance to both the U.S. and NATO as we expand our ground lines of communication through countries other than Pakistan. The nations in this region have made
their airfields, ports and other facilities available to our Afghanistan resupply effort,
called the Northern Distribution Network.
Specifically, access to Georgia and Azerbaijan allows us to use their road, rail, and
port networks to move construction and general supplies into Afghanistan. Our aircrews use the airports at Tbilisi, Georgia; Burgas, Bulgaria; Varna, Bulgaria; and
Constanta, Romania as refueling and crew rest stops.
NATO is similarly engaged in the region to expand the flow of logistics toward
Afghanistan. A line of communication is planned via Georgia, Azerbaijan, and
Turkmenistan. Also, the international airport at Baku, Azerbaijan is an important
hub for moving cargo from Germany to Afghanistan.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00484
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
485
MISSILE DEFENSE
Question. What on-site activities are you able to conduct at the BMD locations
without ratification of the bilateral agreements?
Answer. Only site surveys have been allowed without Parliamentary ratification
of our bilateral agreements. Permanent changes, such as ground clearing and construction, cannot begin at the sites in Poland and the Czech Republic until entry
into force of a Site Agreement and a Status of Forces Agreement which supplements
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Status of Forces Agreement.
Both the Site and Status of Forces Agreement with Czech Republic were signed
in 2008; however, ratification in the Czech Republic remains uncertain and will not
occur until after new Parliamentary elections (likely fall 2009provided the winning party will support the radar site).
The site agreement for Poland was signed in 2008 and negotiations for the Status
of Forces Agreement Supplemental are ongoing. Key issues regarding construction,
criminal jurisdiction, tax relief, and the application of Polish law to U.S. forces must
still be agreed upon. The State Department is lead on Status of Forces Agreement
Supplemental negotiations.
Question. Would the personnel manning the BMD sites fall under EUCOM operational command? How would the operation of the two bases be integrated with existing garrison/wing command organizations in EUCOM?
Answer. Yes, EUCOM will command and control (C2) personnel manning the
BMD sites.
The operation of the two bases will be integrated through the individual service
components that have been assigned manning responsibilities for those planned
bases: U.S. Air Forces Europe for the European Midcourse Radar Site in the Czech
Republic, and U.S. Army Europe for the European Interceptor Site in Poland.
EUCOM, Missile Defense Agency, and the European Service component staffs are
working closely with the services (U.S. Air Force and U.S. Army) to ensure issues
related to manning, sustainment, and required facilities are addressed. EUCOM is
monitoring the command organizations which are being planned by the services,
however the organization of sustainment commands remain a service responsibility.
Question. Have the construction contracts for the BMD sites been awarded? How
much of the fiscal year 2009 military construction funds for the BMD sites in Europe have been obligated and expended?
Answer. Construction contracts for the Ballistic Missile Defense sites in Europe
have not been awarded, nor has any of the Fiscal Year 09 Military Construction
funding been obligated and/or expended. No construction contracts will be awarded
nor Military Construction funds obligated and/or expended until all necessary Status of Forces Agreement Supplemental and Implementing Agreements are complete.
Facility-related activities are currently limited to design and pre-negotiation of
agreements that must be in place prior to award of construction contracts.
Question. The amounts programmed in the fiscal year 2009 FYDP for construction
of the BMD sites did not include amounts necessary for housing or community facilities to support personnel. The agreements allow for up to 250 personnel at the radar
site, and 500 at the interceptor site. Do you have an estimate and/or a list of facilities necessary to provide such support?
Answer. No, we do not have an estimate. While support facility planning is underway, the scope and cost of required facilities at both sites are largely dependent on
the terms of SOFA Supplemental and/or Implementing Agreements that have yet
to be finalized. Although we cannot provide meaningful cost estimates at this time,
it is important to note that EUCOM, MDA, and the lead services at each site are
committed to meeting mission and mission support requirements with the smallest
practicable personnel and infrastructure footprints. Once the terms of applicable
agreements are finalized, the lead services for each site (Army for the European Interceptor Site and Air Force for the European Midcourse Radar) will work with
MDA to develop mission support facility requirements.
Question. The agreements with the Czech Republic and Poland retain title to facilities on both sites with the respective host nation governments, including permanent structures built with U.S. military construction funds. How does this compare
with basing arrangements with other European host nations?
Answer. Our basing agreements typically retain title with the respective host nation. Our use of facilities at overseas locations is governed by the terms of host nation specific implementing arrangements for real estate, which require consignment
agreements be established for all U.S. occupied facilities. These agreements are
binding and valid until terminated with the consent of both parties. Implementing
arrangements for real estate with both the Czech Republic and Poland will include
similar terms.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00485
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
486
Question. In your written statement, you discuss a multi-national Heavy Airlift
Wing to be established at Papa Air Base, Hungary by the U.S. and twelve other
countries. Are there any facility requirements for this unit, and will they be borne
by the U.S., NSIP, or some other cost-sharing arrangement?
Answer. Operational facility requirements have been identified for supporting the
Heavy Airlift Wing and in 2009 these costs will be approximately $12.5M. Costs are
shared among the twelve nations in accordance with the cost-sharing arrangements
contained in the Strategic Airlift Capability (SAC) C17 Program Memorandum of
Understanding. The U.S. pays 33%, or an approximate $4.2M share. There is an active effort on behalf of host nation Hungary, with support from the U.S., to secure
NSIP to cover a portion of the facility requirements.
NSIP eligibility for a given infrastructure requirement is based upon the minimum military requirement, or that infrastructure which is essential to a NATO
Commanders ability to fulfill his or her military roles and responsibilities. Infrastructure required to fulfill that minimum requirement is eligible for NSIP funding.
Infrastructure above and beyond that capability is to be funded by national assets,
or in this case the SAC C17 Consortium.
NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM
Question. In recent years, an increasing portion of NATO Security Investment

Program funds have gone to support the out of area mission in Afghanistan. As
both commander of EUCOM and Supreme Allied Commander, do you believe that
the current NSIP program is well balanced between the ISAF mission and needs
within Europe?
Answer. The current NSIP program is reasonably balanced according to partner
nation priorities with respect to current operations in Afghanistan and NATO needs
within Europe. While the amount of the NSIP available for investment within Europe has reduced with the increased need for financing common-use requirements
in Afghanistan, this shift has not resulted in undue negative consequences for the
Alliance.
Question. How will Frances rejoining of NATO as a full member of the alliance
affect the cost-sharing distribution within NSIP?
Answer. France will assume a 12.4% share of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Programs annual 640.5 million annual program. Previously, France participated in approximately 60% of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program funded expenditures to include, among others, capital investments for ongoing military operations (Afghanistan, Kosovo, etc),
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Response Force, and the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization Air Command and Control System. France will now participate
in the remaining 40% of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program funded activities such as the infrastructure for the military headquarters and airfield and port improvements. The French re-integration, along with
the accession of Albania and Croatia will reduce the U.S. North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program cost share from 23.2% to 21.7%. This cost
share will be phased in over several years as, under normal North Atlantic Treaty
Organization procedures, France, Albania, and Croatia will participate in the funding of newly programmed projects but not previously programmed ones.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00486
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009.

MEDICAL TRANSITION: DEFENSE TO VETERANS
AFFAIRS
WITNESSES
MICHAEL J. KUSSMAN, M.D., UNDER SECRETARY FOR HEALTH, DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
S. WARD CASSCELLS, M.D., ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
STATEMENT
OF THE
CHAIRMAN
Mr. FARR [presiding]. This meeting will come to order.

Chairman Chet Edwards is at the Budget Committee, and has
asked me, as vice chair, to chair this afternoons hearing.
As you know, this hearing is on the Department of Defense and
the Department of Veterans Affairs medical transition. The purpose of this hearing is to review the progress that these departments have made in ensuring a seamless transition for our veterans and to identify and to discuss what still needs to be done.
Witnesses from GAO and the VA inspector general, at one of our
earlier hearings, the review of the VA challenges, acknowledged
that the departments have moved forward in their development of
electronic medical interoperability, but they also indicated that the
process would be improved by identifying results-oriented performance goals.
This is only one example of the many issues that must be addressed if we are to ensure that no veteran falls through the cracks
and is left to navigate that system alone. And I know a lot of members have been asking those questions all year.
Our witnesses for this hearing will be Dr. Michael Kussman, who
is the Under Secretary of Health for the Department of Veterans
Affairs, and Dr. Ward Casscells, the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Health Affairs.
As the senior physicians and essentially the CEOs of the veterans health systems and military health systems, they are responsible for not only ensuring that their systems meet the medical
needs of their patients, but that patients can move between these
systems in order to provide those who have served this nation with
the very best in care.
I would like to welcome both of our witnesses to this hearing and
look forward to your testimony and discussion.
Before we hear from Dr. Kussman, I would like to recognize my
colleague from Tennessee, Mr. Wamp, for any opening remarks he
might have.
(487)
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00487
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
488
STATEMENT
OF THE

Dr. Kussman and Dr. Casscells, you are at the forefront of a very
important issue; that is, the improving status of our VA health care
delivery system at a critical time in history, where our veterans
have problems that we havent encountered in other wars, and, certainly, the asymmetrical nature of this war and constant rotation
of our veterans.
They come back with afflictions, and we are very keen on this,
but, also, the overall bureaucracy of the VA is a beast that has to
be tamed.
I know we are on the road to recovery. And I appreciate Dr.
Kussman from last year and Dr. Casscells coming this year, and
the new secretary calling me and reiterating his commitment to
trying to improve the efficiencies at the VA, because it is an absolutely essential agency.
But the bureaucracy is still, in my opinion, an impediment to the
delivery system being as efficient and as effective as it can be.
So I look forward to your testimony today and a lot of give-andtake, and then, frankly, the follow-up through the year as we write
the bill so that, by statute, we can assist you in any and every way
to deliver the health care as effectively as possible.
And I am grateful that you are both physicians and that you are
on the job and you are prepared to address this need. I think that
is very, very helpful, based on your knowledge.
And Dr. Kussman and I developed a good relationship last year
and I feel like we are going in the right direction, but we have still
got a ways to go.
So I look forward to your testimony this afternoon.
Dr. Kussman was confirmed as the Under Secretary for Health,
Veterans Health Administration, in May 2007. He served as brigadier general and retired after 28 years of active duty service in the
United States Army, culminating in his assignment as the commander of Europe Regional Medical Command.
He earned his undergraduate and medical degrees from Boston
University. He became the Army Surgeon Generals chief consultant in internal medicine and serves on the faculty of the Uniformed
Services University of Health Sciences.
For the record, we will, without objection, accept your written
statement and if you would just like to give us some brief opening
remarks, we would really appreciate that.
STATEMENT
OF
MICHAEL J. KUSSMAN
Dr. KUSSMAN. Yes, sir. Good afternoon, Mr. Vice Chairman and
members of the subcommittee.
It is a pleasure for me to sit here with my friend, Trip Casscells,
before you today to discuss VAs work with the Department of Defense to support medical transitions for injured or ill veterans and
service members.
VAs mission is to care for those who have borne the battle. As
medical technology has advanced, more and more of our brave he-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00488
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
489
roes survive what would have been fatal wounds in previous conflicts.
But survival is only the immediate goal. Our job is to restore veterans to the greatest level of health, independence and quality of
life that is medically possible.
We are achieving this goal through close collaboration with DOD
to facilitate a smooth medical transition and continuum that ensures veterans and service members receive the full continuum of
care.
And just as an aside, I was probably responsible for using the
term seamless transition, but I really believe that this is not necessarily a transition.
That has a connotation of a handoff from DOD to the VA, but
we have gotten together so closely, this is a continuum.
There are a lot of active duty people who are in the VA. There
are veterans who are in DOD and it really is an issue related to
the continuum of the life cycle of the soldier, sailor, airman, Marine, and veteran.
We recognize from some of our patients this transition is not a
one-way road, as mentioned. Many of our facilities, particularly our
polytrauma rehabilitation centers, treat active duty service members who maintain their status with DOD, while other facilities
treat members of the Reserves or the National Guard between periods of activation.
Regardless of the desired outcome for each individual patient,
communication is the critical link in this transition process, communication with our patients, with their families, and among clinicians.
Effective communication encompasses tailoring rehabilitation
plans to meet the needs and expectations of our patients and their
families. Dialogue between clinicians, whether in different disciplines or different departments, brings together capable medical
minds to ensure all patients receive high quality care that they deserve.
My written statement focuses on four areas of cooperation and
coordination between DOD and the VA regarding medical transition for veterans and service members. Those are mental health,
traumatic brain injury, the electronic health record, and outreach.
In each of these areas, VA and DOD have established processes
to improve care coordination, quality, no matter which department
is providing services.
Our facilities are active parts of their communities and participate in so many initiatives that seldom receive the praise they deserve.
I would like to use the few minutes I have now to provide some
examples of recent initiatives where VA outreach and programs
have improved the lives of veterans, service members, and their
families.
Near the beginning of the month, in Chicago, one of our facilities
held a welcome home event for more than 100 OEF/OIF veterans.
VA staff in southern Oregon recently attended two pre-mobilization events to establish contacts with Oregon National Guardsmen
and their families, in anticipation of their deployment to Iraq.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00489
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
490
Through these meetings, VA staff educates service members before they deploy about the health care that they will earn in service
to their country.
One major initiative that facilitates a service members transition
to veteran status is the yellow ribbon reintegration program, which
engages service members and their families in the pre, during and
post-deployment phases.
VA has a full-time liaison person with this office. This program
is currently active in 54 states and territories and almost 20,000
service members have participated so far.
In Wilmington, North Carolina, just last week, VA staff participated in a yellow ribbon event held for the Marine Corps returnees,
in which we assisted approximately 50 Marines and their family
members with VA health care registration.
At another event in Kansas, members of the Army National
Guard participated in a similar event.
Mr. Chairman, these are just a few examples of the countless
events and measures taken every day by both VA and DOD staff
to assist veterans and service members in need.
Thank you again for this opportunity to speak about VAs role in
collaborating with DOD to support the continuum of care for injured or ill veterans and service members.
I am prepared to answer any of your questions.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Michael J. Kussman follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00490
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00491
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
491
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00492
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
492
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00493
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
493
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00494
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
494
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00495
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
495
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00496
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
496
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00497
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
497
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00498
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
498
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00499
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
499
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00500
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
500
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00501
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
501
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00502
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
502
503
Our next witness is Dr. Casscells. He was sworn in as Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs on April 16, 2007.
Prior to his appointment, Dr. Casscells served as John Edward
Tyson distinguished professor of medicine and cardiology at the
University of Texas Health Science Center in Houston, Texas.
Dr. Casscells has a bachelor of science from Yale University and
graduated from Harvard Medical School.
STATEMENT
OF
S. WARD CASSCELLS
Dr. CASSCELLS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I will be very brief and just mention the things that we have
learned from the VA over the past 2 years.
I, first, want to recognize Mike Kussmans gracious tutelage in
so many of these things, because, as he mentioned, he has got a
long military career, much longer than mine, and he was on the job
there as acting, and been of great help to me.
His mobile is on my speed dial. It gives you an idea how often
we talk.
First, the disability evaluation system, we are struggling with
that. Our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines were frustrated
with it and we have basically yielded that to the VA, single exam.
VA decides how much people are going to be paid, the
servicemembers.
I am very happy with that. Disability evaluations, the time is cut
in half, and that pilot has been very successful. We expect to roll
out with that next year. It is now in a secondary pilot in 17 centers.
Related to that is vocational rehab. It is particularly important
now because some 15 percent of returning warriors are unemployed.
As an Army Reservist myself, who will soon be entering the job
market in about a month, I can tell you that it doesnt help us that
the world seems to think now that so many of our returning troops
are not quite right, that they have got anger problems.
The fact is most of them come back stronger, better, wiser,
kinder, gentler, knowing their strengths and knowing their limitations, and with better strengths than they went in.
And if there is one message I would convey to you, it is that we,
particularly the VA, could use some help, I think, in the vocational
rehab area, because so many of our guys and gals deserve jobs and
a job is the best treatment.
It is the best therapy and it is the best way to preserve your sanity and your marriage and everything.
Let me mention, also, in the area of PTSD, post-traumatic stress
disorder, most of what we know we learned from the VA and we
want to recognize that.
Now, as we have the defense centers of excellence, psychological
health and traumatic brain injury, we have shared leadership.
DOD and VA co-lead it.
The same is true for electronic health records. We in the military
have struggled with that. VA has had a more popular electronic
health record. We have learned from that. We have adopted the
graphical user interface on that and together, we have got a unified
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00503
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
504
strategy now, governed by an interagency program office, and I

think we are both going to be upgrading our electronic health
records.
I do believe we will be leading the country in that area. We are
recovering from our stumbles in that area.
The fourth area, sir, is research. We have adopted the VA model
of having our research grants go out in a competitive way.
The affiliations with the universities that the VA pioneered have
been an important lesson for us and we are doing more and more
of that.
Lastly, in the area of facilities, VA has upgraded their facilities.
They are among the finest hospitals in the country, many of them.
My hometown of Houston, the Michael DeBakey VA, is as good
as any hospital in the world, and now, DOD, we are trying to do
likewise.
I will close by saying that yesterday, Secretary Shinseki and Secretary Gates met with the senior leadership on a number of issues,
particularly the electronic health records, and Dr. Gates left us
with these orders, which I will share with you.
He said, Surface all the disagreements. Dont drag them out.
Dont paper over them. And in a Texas colloquialism, he said, No
wrestling under the blanket.
I think we understood what he meant by thatget it on the
table, resolve it, and I think we are on the right road that way.
I am subject to your questions, sir.
[The prepared statement of S. Ward Casscells follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00504
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00505
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
505
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00506
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
506
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00507
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
507
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00508
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
508
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00509
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
509
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00510
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
510
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00511
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
511
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00512
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
512
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00513
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
513
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00514
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
514
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00515
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
515
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00516
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
516
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00517
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
517
VerDate Nov 24 2008
23:52 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00518
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
518
VerDate Nov 24 2008
23:52 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00519
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
519
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00520
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
520
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00521
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
521
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00522
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
522
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00523
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
523
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00524
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
524
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00525
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
525
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00526
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
526
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00527
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
527
528
DOD/VA MEDICAL FACILITIES
Mr. FARR. Well, thank you very much.

I will just lead off with a couple of questions and then we will
go around the room.
You have several medical facilities that are considered joint ventures together. I am very interested in pursuing that in my own
district.
I wonder how many of these there are and whether this is sort
of the way you are going to move together in the future.
Dr. CASSCELLS. Sir, we have got 11 under development and more
being studied. The big one has been in the Great Lakes area north
of Chicago, where we have a big Navy facility and a lot of vets, and
that has been a multiyear effort.
Currently, now, the plan is that VA will own the asset. Some
pending legislation will, I think, allow the Secretary of the Navy
to transfer those facilities to the VA.
And some other legislation is pending, as I understand it, to declare that facility a DOD hospital. So even though it is a VA asset,
it can treat active duty service members.
This is called the Captain James A. Lovell Federal Health Care
Center, after the astronaut, former Navy flyer.
Mr. FARR. So the facility can be accessed by qualified VA.
Dr. CASSCELLS. Right.
Mr. FARR. And by retirees.
Dr. CASSCELLS. Yes, sir.
Mr. FARR. Military retirees, and by active duty.
Dr. CASSCELLS. Yes, sir. The VA, of course, is currently a
TRICARE network partner, but this particular hospital needs legislation to allow the active duty service members to go there directly
without using the TRICARE network.
Mr. FARR. Because in these joint facilities, you have different
billing. The active duty you bill through the military.
Mr. FARR. And then if they are retirees, they are through
TRICARE billing.
Mr. FARR. And if they are VA
Dr. KUSSMAN. I am sorry to interrupt sir, but it depends, because
if you are a retiree like myself, I can go to the north Chicago facility as a veteran, not as a TRICARE person.
But the regular veteran, who is not a retiree
Mr. FARR. Then they see your income is higher, then you would
have to
Dr. KUSSMAN. I am classifiedfor 28 years, I have been evaluated. I wont get into all the gory details, but that
Mr. FARR. You have a service-related disability.
Dr. KUSSMAN. That is what VA says.
Mr. FARR. It is very interesting to hear this. I am keenly interested in this jointness and then when you get into how it is managed and paid for, it isnt as joint.
Dr. KUSSMAN. Well, there have been some challenges, I think, as
Dr. Casscells was mentioning. This is a uniqueit is not a sharing
effort. It is a true joint effort.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00528
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
529
And we have been challenged occasionally by the policies that
exist. For instance, funding the facility, weand I know that the
Appropriations Committee, your committee, is keenly aware that
we have Title 38 money, we have Title 10 money, and how do you
get that money mixed together.
Early on, I think some of us thought that, Gee, it would be nice
to have a Title 28 and do that, but that wasnt legal. So we have
been looking at getting maybe some legislation that would allow an
innovative way of putting the money in and then using it.
One of the proposals that has been enjoined in the Senate is that
we both put money in every year to do that, but that is no year
money and that leads to some issues, as well.
So I think that is one of the things that we are looking at is trying to develop a way of funding it in a different way.
Mr. FARR. Does this create problems in trying to get an electronic
record that is interoperable?
Dr. KUSSMAN. No. I dont think that the challenge
Mr. FARR. In terms of the record information used for billing.
Dr. KUSSMAN. No. I think there are challenges for us not only in
Chicago, but to work the two systems to make sure that they are
close and user-friendly.
Dr. Casscells and I testified, I think, in front of the SFAC last
October and we brought in, as a demonstration, Ross Fletcher, who
is the chief of staff at the Washington VA, and had a live demonstration of how we can actually download a great deal of medical
information and medical interoperability from DOD to the VA to
help the providers.
But we still have a ways to go on this.
Mr. FARR. Thank you. My time is up.
Mr. Wamp.
MENTAL HEALTH
Mr. WAMP. Well, let me say, I have one question for each of the
two of you. I appreciate what Dr. Casscells said, and I have seen
that.
I have got a nephew who is redeploying this week to Iraq for the
second time, another nephew who is active duty. The first one is
Guard, the second one is active Marine, deploying this week from
California. And they both are the better for it.
But when we are talking about the suicide rate, which was kind
of the first point we started on with this years hearings, kind of
the canary in the mine, obviously, the incredible operational tempo
that these troops are on and their families and the family pressures that this places on the families.
It is not roadside bombsas much as it is just the stress on the
families. So while I know that they are the better for their service,
the mental health capabilities here have got to be looked at, because of the stress on the families. So many marriages are breaking up, and they are so stressed out.
So I do think it is important, too, that VA learn from DOD and
DOD learn from VA, and I think that is real helpful, because I see
strengths and weaknesses that, clearly, like a good marriageyou
can help each other, almost cover each others weak spots, the VA
still needs some of that military reform, in my opinion, instead of
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00529
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
530
a government agency bureaucracy and, things like medical records,
which the VA actually leads the entire health care system on, DOD
can certainly learn from those models, as well.
So that is just a little commentary.
But I still am a little confused, Dr. Kussman, as to how all of
this screening works and who gets screened for what. Can you kind
of break throughI think there are 272,000 OIF and OEF veterans.
Does everybody get screened for PTSD and TBI? Is it a comprehensive thing that everybody is included?
Dr. KUSSMAN. Everybody that comes to us, whether they are
OIF/OEF or anybody else, get screened for TBI, PTSD, military
sexual trauma, and substance abuse.
That is done on a yearly basis, because we have been doing that
for a long time. The TBI is relatively new, but the PTSD, military
sexual trauma and substance abuse has been going on for years.
That is part of our core assessment of patients. It is done with
the electronic health record. A drop-down menu comes and forces
the provider to ask those questions and if they are positive, the
person gets referred as appropriate for the evaluation.
Mr. WAMP. Which is about a 35 or 40 percent referral of those
that are assessed and then of those referrals, most of them go to
VA medical centers and then a smaller number goes to the vet centers.
But where do the rest of them go? Does everyone get referred
somewhere? It looks like 21,000 fall in the category of not being referred to a VA medical center or a clinic.
Dr. KUSSMAN. I would have to go back and look at the specific
numbers. You are talking about TBI?
Mr. WAMP. Just the referrals from 250,000 post-deployment
health assessments.
Dr. KUSSMAN. I believe that was in thebut regardless of what
the screening is for, if it is PTSD, for instance, we have two ways
that we can provide services for PTSD, depending on the patients
choice.
They can go to a vet center or they can use the more traditional
mainstream mental health services.
That depends on how many people are positive and whether they
want help. We cant force people to go get assistance if they dont
want to.
DISABILITY EVALUATION SYSTEM PILOT PROGRAM
Mr. WAMP. Dr. Casscells, when you were talking about the DES,
you mentioned it, but not in real specific detail, and I think the
number is a 62 percent reduction in the amount of time that you
are able to cut out under this pilot program.
I think the number was 329 days that a veteran had to wait outside of the pilot program for them to be completely processed and,
under this, you are able to reduce that time by 62 percent.
Where do we go from here in terms of the pilot program and are
the other veterans having to wait that long still outside of these
pilot programs?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00530
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
531
Dr. CASSCELLS. Sir, the veterans who are severely injured are on
a separate fast track. They are getting their paycheck within 100
days or so.
But the veterans who are not severely injured are either in this
pilot, which has now been extended to 17 centers, or they are in
the traditional MEB, PEB, two exams, two paychecks system which
has caused so much confusion, so much delay, and so much resentment.
The pilot is almost certainly going to be ratified or whatever you
call it, substantiated by the 17 new centers.
Mr. WAMP. And they are all up and running, all 17, or you are
working on setting them up?
Dr. CASSCELLS. I think they are all up and running and it looks
like the rollout will be about a year from now, that all the people
leaving service for medical reasons will go through this system, and
it has been very popular.
You can imagine, they get their check faster, it is a bigger check.
They still have the safetythey still have the appeals processes in
there for fairness.
Mr. WAMP. What about hiring on setting all these up and filling
the staff positions? I understand that not all of them were filled,
at least by the end of last fiscal year, and I just wonder what the
status is now on filling all the positions.
Dr. CASSCELLS. Sir, it is taking a while to train people in the VA
way of doing things, but I think we are fully staffed on that. Let
me take that for the record and get back to you.
Our focus with the Disability Evaluation System (DES) Pilot has been to ensure
we have the necessary tools in place to take care of the Service member and their
family. Besides equipment and facilities, the Military Departments and Department
of Veterans Affairs identified, through site assessments, the requirement for additional human resources to meet the needs of our Service members. In the case of
the Military Departments, they have either hired additional staff or reassigned personnel to meet the needs of our Service members at the 15 DES Pilot locations. The
Military Departments report that they are on track with regards to the other five
expansion locations. Similarly, the Veterans Affairs has identified their requirements for each Pilot location. The VA is preparing a separate response that will be
forwarded in the near future.
Mr. FARR. We will have a second round.

The order of recognition, by order of people showing up, is Mr.
Young, Mr. Bishop, Mr. Crenshaw, Mr. Israel and Mr. Carter.
Next is Mr. Young.
DOD/VA DATA SHARING
Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.

Dr. Casscells, Dr. Kussman, welcome to the subcommittee.
I am curious about where we are on arranging for medical
records to be available for the VA from, for example, Bethesda or
Walter Reed and vice versa.
I know we have had a couple of pilot programs where they could
be transferred electronically. I am also very personally aware of
some difficult situations that developed because medical records
were not available or were not accurate.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00531
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
532
Are we working on this? Are we trying to get a handle on this
transfer of records and making these records available to VA and
military?
Dr. KUSSMAN. Sir, we have been directed and committed to interoperability by September of 2009.
I wouldnt sit here and say that we are going to have total interoperability by then, because there are issues technically and otherwise.
But as I mentioned in our testimony, and we would be happy to
give a demonstration, that we have pretty much interoperability for
medical delivery that is available throughout the VA system of
records at Bethesda and wherever else that they are, and they can
be downloaded.
Right now, they are not computable in the sense that we cant
add to the DOD record, but we can download the record to see
what was going on all the way far back as Landstuhl, to the Walter
Reeds and Bethesdas, on down the line.
Mr. YOUNG. Doctor, can the hospital at Bethesda reverse that
and get information from the VA system by downloading, also?
Dr. CASSCELLS. They go two ways.
Dr. KUSSMAN. I believe that that isquite frankly, sir, one of the
challenges is making sure our people know how to do it, that the
technical capability exists for the information to flow back and
forth.
The bidirectional health program has the lab, the diagnoses, and
all those things are available to go back and forth. Sometimes our
challenge is to make sure that every physician and nurse knows
how to do that.
MEDICAL BRAC IN THE NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION
Mr. YOUNG. Dr. Casscells, I think this question would probably

be for the Defense Department, and it has to do with BRAC and
it has to do with BRACs recommendation, with the presidents approval and the Congress approval, to merge Walter Reed Hospital
with the Navy Hospital at Bethesda.
Knowing many of the doctors personally, working with them as
they treat their patients, I can tell you that quite a few of the doctors are not really happy or they are frustrated about the way this
merger is actually working out.
Some have already left the service. Others are threatening to
leave the service.
Are we getting to the point that maybe the frustrations are going
to be behind us, maybe the merger will be at the point where doctors can function like they should rather than having to worry
about who is in charge of what, if anybody?
Dr. CASSCELLS. Mr. Young, thanks, that is a very legitimate concern.
Doctors cite three basic reasons for talking about leaving early.
One is that they dont like the electronic health recordsthis is
from DODit is clunky. Now, most of them will grudgingly admit
it seems to be improving.
The second reason is that, for Walter Reed doctors, they are concerned that they may bethey are not sure if they are going to go
to Bethesda or to Belvoir, and that is upsetting for the families, be-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00532
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
533
cause that is a very long commute if you get sent to the one you
dont want.
And then there is only going to be one radiology chairman, only
one emergency department chief, and so forth. So as those announcements are made, there is a little bit of sour grapes involved.
But the other big reason, sir, people leave is because they dont
have enough patients. So they want to go out and practice orthopedic surgery or neurosurgery or something.
If they are not doing enough neurosurgery or pediatric surgery,
whatever, they are not going to be able to work in the private sector when they retire.
So one of the great things about the BRAC decision and the Congress ratification of it is that it will create, in Bethesda, a center
where there are enough patients, enough volume, that people can
actually maintain expertise.
So I think when we get through these growing pains, we will
have there a center which will be one where everyone wants to go
in military medicine. It is going to be joint. It is going to have high
volume. It is going to have the best teachers. It is right next door
to NIH.
Of course, you know it well, you spend a lot of time up there, and
it is next to the Uniformed Services University.
So location is a big part of it. Volume is a big part of it. And I
think we are going to get this passed. I think we will meet the
BRAC deadlines.
I toured Belvoir today with Admiral Mateczun and General
Schoomaker. We will make that BRAC deadline. Belvoir is going to
be, also, a wonderful community hospital. It has very patient-empowering, hospitable features.
I am not saying it well, but the kinds of modern amenities that
patients expect, without which they will go to Fairfax INOVA or
Suburban Hospital or Sibley.
So we have got to compete with the private sector and what you
all have done with BRAC is the right thing. We are going to get
it done.
Mr. YOUNG. Well, I want to say hooray for the fact that they
dont have enough work to do right now. That means the kids
arent getting hurt in as large numbers as they were.
But I can tell you that for a long time, both hospitals were
crowded. I have been to Bethesda many times when patients were
in the hallways because there were no rooms left and they were
overworked.
So when we go by to visit with wounded Marines at Bethesda,
for example, and we hear there are only three or four there, our
heart flutters because we are happy that they are just not getting
hurt.
Now, as Afghanistan begins to become the primary consideration
militarily, I am afraid it is going to start happening again, because
what we are seeing in Afghanistanwe just had some pretty interesting briefings. It is not a pretty picture for our military.
But anyway, my concern isand as far as the long commute, I
can tell you, I know about that, because we live 10 miles south of
Fort Belvoir. During the heavy days of the casualties coming in, my
wife was at the hospitals, at Walter Reed and Bethesda, every day
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00533
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
534
to help with soldiers and their families, to do things for them that
the government doesnt do.
So I know about that long commute and I asked, if I keep track
of the mileage, maybe I can deduct it from my income tax, but she
never would do that.
Well, I understand that you have a large job and a large responsibility, both of you and both or your systems, and I think you will
find that this subcommittee wants to provide whatever we can provide, and what we do is appropriate money, to provide what you
need to do the job for these soldiers that are giving so much to the
country and their families.
And so thank you for listening to my concerns. Thank you for
being here, and God bless you for the good work that your systems
do.
Mr. FARR. Thank you, Mr. Young. Thank you for all your personal experience with these hospitals and attending and going out
there and seeing the soldiers, airmen and Marines.
Mr. Bishop.
JOINT DOD/VA FACILITIES
Mr. BISHOP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Welcome, gentlemen. Dr. Casscells and Dr. Kussman, let me
thank both of you for your distinguished careers.
And let me go back to a subject that Mr. Farr, I think, raised
a little earlier: the issue of joint facilities between DOD and VA.
Could you walk me through what will be necessary? For example, last year, the committee passed legislation that authorized the
building of the Martin Army Community Hospital at Fort Benning,
and there is a great deal of interest in having that facility serve
as a joint DOD/VA facility.
It is now, I think, moving forward with the construction. But at
some point, if we were to be able to start moving toward jointness,
what would be necessary for us to prepare? What kind of reports
would we need? What kinds of assessments or appropriations, if
any, would be necessary to make any planning adjustments in the
architecture to accommodate our veterans population, in addition
to the DOD military and, of course, dependent family needs?
Is that something that you think is a holistic approach to the
warrior and the wounded warrior?
Dr. KUSSMAN. Sir, as you know, I was a former commander of
the Martin Army Community Hospital. So I have got a lot of interest in what happens at Fort Benning.
We are dialoging very aggressively right now with the Army,
looking at what partnering can take place at Fort Benning.
One of the things, though, that, from my experience, and I
havent been personally involved in the negotiations, but Fort
Benning is a huge post and although it is in Columbus, Georgia,
it is a long way from downtown.
So our intent is to try to have a veterans clinic collocated with
the hospital, but it is not so easy to get to. We have a clinic downtown, as you know, in Columbus, community-based outpatient clinic. And where would be the best access for veterans whoit is a
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00534
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
535
long ride and trying to get through the gates and all those other
things can potentially be
Mr. BISHOP. I can assure you that the city would make whatever
necessary accommodations for transportation. The security access
would be the only challenge.
Dr. KUSSMAN. But it is not as big a challenge as some other
places, because 185 goesI think it is 185 that goes right onto the
base. There is no gate there, because you are going 60 miles an
hour. It would be kind of hard
Mr. BISHOP. Well, there is a gate now.
Dr. KUSSMAN. Oh, there is?
Mr. BISHOP. Yes, sir.
Dr. KUSSMAN. That shows how much I know what is going on.
But the fact is, sir, that I think the issue of partnering and sharing
is an ongoing discussion. I think we are all committed to maximizing the efforts all over to what we can do and, obviously, if
Martin Army Community Hospital, just say, the new one, was
going to be involved with potentially admitting veterans rather
than just the traditional things, it would have to be looked at from
a business case plan B, adapted to the sizing, because it would
have to be much larger than it would be for taking care ofI dont
want to say justfamily members and retirees and active duty
people.
So there is dialogue going on about that.
Mr. BISHOP. I asked that question to try to determine whether
we need to try to put some funds in to deal with that kind of planning issue or whether you have a line item that is sufficient to deal
with those planning concerns.
Dr. KUSSMAN. I would have to get back to you for the record to
see what has been taking place. I dont really know what the
Armys thoughts were about that, so it would be a little hard for
me to say what they would be interested in doing.
Mr. BISHOP. I thought I would ask that since we have the counterpart at the table.
Dr. CASSCELLS. Sorry, Mr. Bishop. Which part of that question
was mine?
Mr. BISHOP. The possibility of the cooperation between the two.
My follow-up question was going to ask who would pay for the
planning for the jointness, if it were to be deemed feasibleVA,
DOD or the Army?
Dr. CASSCELLS. Well, certainly, if it was in BRAC, we, the defense health program, would pay for it.
New Army construction is typically paid for by the line, the big
Army, but we have on occasion helped them out with that.
Mr. BISHOP. The Army part is already appropriated. It is a done
deal as far as the military part goes.
What we are talking about is a conversion to jointness so that
by the time the hospital is completed, or shortly thereafter, it could
serve as a joint VA/DOD facility.
Dr. CASSCELLS. I would think we would share those costs.
Mr. FARR. We will both pursue that on a second round.
Mr. Crenshaw.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00535
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
536
DISABILITY EVALUATION SYSTEM PILOT PROGRAM

Thank you all for being here.
I want to go back to the DES pilot project that we talked a little
bit about. One of the things that I read is that GAO had said that
there were some gaps in both DOD and VA and their ability to
evaluate how that is going.
I know you extended the pilot project. We have touched on it and
it is doing well.
But what did they say were some of those gaps and do you feel
like you have got the mechanisms in place to really evaluate all the
good and the bad that that program is doing?
Dr. CASSCELLS. Sir, I think the first pilot was just too small to
give definitive numbers, the number of people who were satisfied
with their appeals, for example. Well, there werent many appeals.
Whether the appeals process was adequate, well, you need more
experience with the program. So I think when these next 17 report
in, we should have the information that we need to roll it out nationwide.
I am confident about that. But GAO, they have got a way of coming in and asking questions we havent asked. So we are standing
by for their input on that.
Mr. CRENSHAW. So mostly it was a smaller number. So it is hard
right now to decide what is the good and what is the bad, and that
is why you have expanded to have morethen you will have a
more comprehensive analysis.
Dr. KUSSMAN. Sir, it is even broader than that. We started it
here and I think, by all indications, it was quite successful, albeit
small numbers, but it was easy.
We have got a lot of resources here and we could do all the
things we need to do.
What we are learning, as we move it out to more of the hinterlands, away from the facilities where we have a large VA, with all
the comprehensive things, of how we make sure that infrastructure
exists.
Fort Drum, other places, the medical community there isnt very
robust and our nearest VA is 90 miles away. So we are trying to
learn how to do that and we are aggressively trying to develop
some networks, say, in Watertown, New York, to be better able to
provide the subspecialty consultations that are needed.
We dont have a problem with the primary evaluation, but if people need an orthopedic part of it or a neurologic part of it, how do
we get those services to that; and, as we move it out, we are moving now toward the Bennings, the Braggs and the Hoods in the
next thing. Those are huge numbers.
So this is a challenge that we are committed to. What we have
done, by telescoping the days from 500 to 300, I cant remember exactly the numbers, has really been mostly the fact that when somebody gets their DD214, when they are finally going to get out,
there is nothing more for them to do.
They dont have to come to the VA. They have already had their
evaluation and, generally, usually, they will get their check within
30 days, because that whole thing has been done.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00536
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
537
So we have stopped that second part of it. I think the challenge
we have is, together, working on the MEB/PEB process that we all
know needs to be streamlined and things, and that is the next step
in trying to expedite the process. But it is clearly much better.
Mr. CRENSHAW. No question. It is one of the questions that we
get asked most, why it takes so long, the duplicity. So it is a great
program.
You mentioned just the initial physical, for instance. What do
you do if there is not a VA facility near someone, just that entry
level physical?
Dr. KUSSMAN. Well, to do the single exam, we will provide, either
through contract or directly
Mr. CRENSHAW. Even if it is far away from an existing clinic.
Dr. KUSSMAN. Yes.
Mr. CRENSHAW. I got you.
Dr. KUSSMAN. The real challenge is not the actual basic exam.
It is the consults.
Mr. CRENSHAW. It is all the specialties, I got you.
Dr. KUSSMAN [continuing]. If you are in a rural area. Killeen,
Texas isnt exactly a metropolitan area for services. The Temple VA
is not too far away, but it is a distance, whereas here in town, it
was three or four miles.
ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS

Let me ask one question to you, sir, about electronic records, because I know we touched on that, as well, and the VA has been
a leader. You have been doing this for 20 years and now everybody
knows it is a good way to save money, ensure patient safety, et
cetera.
But in your testimony, I think you said twice that we are on the
brink of change. So what does that mean? You have worked so
hard for 20 years to be a leader. You won a Harvard award.
And you want to leverage that to continue to provide care and,
also, help other folks as they move toward electronic records. But
what does it mean we are on the brink of change?
Dr. KUSSMAN. Let me try to clarify that. I think our intent is to
maximize as much of a common electronic record between DOD
and the VA.
DOD is on the cusp of making changes and moving forward and
improving their electronic record, and we are on the cusp of reengineering and rebasing our, I think, world class record MUMPSbased to JAVA-based and make it Web-based.
So together, I think that is what has to bethe decision that was
made yesterday at the joint executive committee was we need to
maximize common applications and common services.
So as we move forward and on the precipice of these changes, we
maximize the integration of those changes so there is less and less
difference between the two systems.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Can you, A, figure out how much you have saved
through this 20-year process that you have become very good at,
and, number two, is this brink of change, is this going to cost some
more money?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00537
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
538
But can you quantify those savings? Probably, as other people
move toward this, it would be a great
Dr. KUSSMAN. I dont have that, but I can tell you that it has
been thought that in the civilian community, for instance, that only
1.5 percent of practicing people have an integrated electronic
record.
If you throw the VA hospitals in there, you make it three percent
for the whole country. So we have that much of an impact.
One in seven lab tests and one in seven admissions to hospitals
are done because somebody cant find the record or cant find a test.
So it is a huge amount of money if you looked at a $1 trillion
industry. I dont know exactly what it is. But it does cost a lot of
money to migrate this system from where we are right now to what
we believe is the future to make sure that we are integrated where
the country goes.
The country will move, as we have with the presidents leadership, toward a Web-based, JAVA-based electronic health record,
and we want to be part of that. The MUMPS is very good right
now, but we are limited to where we can move forward.
No one has done this before. So we are in the process of getting
the best minds to figure out how to move it and then everything
new that we have developed with it is done as much as possible
in conjunction with DOD.
So we dont have to have interaction. It is the same.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Got you. Thank you.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Israel, we have some votes pending. Why dont we
take your questions and responses and then we will vote, and hopefully everybody comes right back.
WARRIOR TRANSITION UNITS

I would like to ask Dr. Casscells to focus with me on the warrior
transition units.
Several weeks ago, a group of personnel from the Fighting 69th
met in this room with Chairman Edwards and me and shared their
experiences in the warrior transition unit, particularly at Fort
Bragg, and what they told us was bone-chilling.
They talked about an acute shortage of mental health professionals. They talked about being handed bags of medicine, all sorts
of different medications, and being told to self-administer.
And when they would say, Can I see a psychiatrist, they were
told there arent enough psychiatrists. That problem has since been
solved with respect to being handed bags of medicine, but it did
happen to them and they complained about it.
They talked about being given medication, no psychiatrist, no
mental health counseling, but then kind of living in isolation. They
would go to a room at the Airborne Inn, they could go out at night,
drink, come back, take their medicine, and get no supervision at
all.
They talked about the complete disarray in case management,
not being able to see the same doctor, not being able to see the
same professional.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00538
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
539
So my questions to you are: do we have enough war transition
units? Are they fully staffed? Do we need to stand up more? Are
the personnel in the warrior transition units trained properly?
What is the metric for success?
I know these are a bunch of questions. But who is taking a look
at how these units are operating and making determinations on
whether improvements are necessary?
Dr. CASSCELLS. Sir, this went to the highest levels of the Army
a year ago. General Casey and General Chiarelli asked us for help,
and General Granger, my deputy for TRICARE, went to Fort
Bragg, I went to Fort Bragg. We talked to the families there.
And there is no doubt that as these warrior transition units were
started, there was a tendency for commanders to put service members in there who just had a minor injury that really could get better in the barracks. And they just were afraid of another Walter
Reed publicity episode.
So people were just put in these warrior transition units and
there werent enough staff. So it is hard. Army staffing is a laborious process, with a lot of regulations. So we fell behind in the
staffing.
We are about caught up in the staffing. The weak spot is still
mental health counselors. And many of them are not physicians,
which is fine. The problem is a lot of those patients are taking
medications, perhaps too many.
General Schoomaker, the Army surgeon general, and I are looking at how we can do a better job of making sure that if people are
on an antidepressant or something like that, that it is actually
working. If not, they need to get off it. You cant just give people
antidepressants without counseling.
So this balance is one that General Schoomaker is working hard
to achieve. I think we are getting there.
I heard the same things at Fort Bragg, not enough counselors.
Mr. ISRAEL. Is it just Fort Bragg? I am sorry for interrupting, but
my time is going to
Dr. CASSCELLS. No, sir. There are a lot of places where
Mr. ISRAEL. The problem is not isolated to Fort Bragg. Isnt this
a systemwide
Mr. ISRAEL [continuing]. Problem over the 36 WTUs?
Dr. CASSCELLS. Sir, it is particularly true where you have a big
Army post and a small nearby town, because the small nearby
town doesnt have enough doctors.
I could help out with TRICARE contracted doctors in the town,
but if there arent enough of them, what we really need is more
caregivers at the installation, and the installation is in a remote location. It is hard to attract civilian employees to work at that fort.
So we are looking at a variety of approaches to this. At Fort
Drum, they have been able to do this pretty well, contracting with
people down at Watertown.
In Bethesda, they are now pioneering a new approach to get at
this other issue you mentioned, sir. People want to see the same
doctor. They want to have a relationship with someone they trust,
someone who can tell if they have lost weight or gained weight, if
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00539
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
540
their color is off, eyes are red-rimmed, looked like they had been
crying.
Doctors knowing you for some time can pick up on those things.
So it is a very legitimate point and it is difficult, because so many
providers are deploying or they are getting caught up in meetings
about Army transformation or other administrative meetings.
There are too darn many meetings.
So what they are doing at Bethesda is a terrific thing at the
Navy Hospital. It is called Medical Home, where they get a small
group of doctors and say this is like a partnership, like an obstetrics practice. So on a given day, you may not see your doctor, but
you are going to see one of the two or three partners that you have
gotten to know and they are trusted. So it brings it down in size.
This Medical Home situation, where people can call in and get
an appointment right away and they may not see Dr. Kussman,
but they could see Dr. Casscells and Casscells knows Kussmans
practice style and, in fact, I might have seen that patient once before, that is a source of solace to those soldiers or sailors.
We are working on it.
Mr. ISRAEL. It needs more work and I am anxious to partner
with you.
Mr. FARR. We have 5 minutes left in voting and when we come
back, Mr. Carter will be the first questioner.
[Recess.]
Mr. FARR. Well, Mr. Carter isnt back yet.
Mr. Wamp, you have another commitment. Do you want towe
have another vote right after this.
Mr. WAMP. Just to keep it moving, though, so that you dont have
to wait, this is the chairman being courteous while I ask you a
question.
CONTINUUM OF CARE
Dr. Kussman, in your testimony, you make reference to at least

11 commissions, plans, committees, programs or work groups, including the senior oversight committee, joint executive council,
health executive council, federal recovery coordination program,
yellow ribbon reintegration program, wounded and injured oversight committee, polytrauma liaison officer, deployment health
working group, patient safety work group, medical records work
group, joint strategic planning.
We talk about the bureaucracy and I do commend you for whittling away and trying to coordinate and being efficient, but how do
you coordinate all the different groups, agencies, task forces, to
make sure that our health care is delivered in the most efficient
and less bureaucratic way?
Dr. KUSSMAN. Sir, thank you for that question, because that is
the goal.
We should be helping the service member and his or her family
and soon to be veteran in that process of moving along that continuum and not creating more aggravation for them, particularly
when they are sick. Our job is to make that smooth and easy.
We have developed over the years a great deal of infrastructure,
and you mentioned some of the things. We could start with the fed-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00540
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
541
eral recovery coordinators. That was an entity that grew out of the
Dole-Shalala group to assure that particularly seriously injured
people had somebody that they could go to who would be coordinating their movement, not just from DOD to the VA or back, but
in the civilian community, as well, because there are people tapping into a multiplicity of services and sometimes they do fall
through the cracks, because we dont have visibility all the time of
what happened, particularly in the civilian world.
So the federal recovery coordinator, for lack of a better description, has been the air traffic control person. They are not actually
providing the care, but they are assuring that the families and the
service member have someplace to go to get questions answered
and then are leveraging the large number of people, both in DOD
and the VA.
We have VA people in 17 military facilities. We have military
people in VA facilities. We have care coordinators. We have OIF/
OEF coordinators, transition coordinators.
All these people are meant to assist people as they move along
the continuum from the Walter Reeds and Bethesdas to our
polytrauma centers and onward or people who dont need a
polytrauma center, but need assistance as they move from Bethesda to wherever they are going to live.
In the beginning, we werent too good at that, but I believe now
that I hear very few complaints anymore about whether we have
been able to assist or not.
Paul Hunter, who is here, is my coordinator related to all DOD/
VA actions and the continuum of care for particularly OIF/OEF,
but for everybody, and we believe we put the infrastructure, that
it is done on a case-by-case basis.
Mr. WAMP. I know the purpose of this hearing is the interoperability in the DOD/VA partnership, but while I have got you here,
Dr. Kussman, last year, I think you sat in on a meeting that we
had on collections from third-party payments and all.
How is that going? Are we making progress on collecting money
that is owed to VA that we are not leaving on the table?
Dr. KUSSMAN. I am amazed that every year we get better. I get
scared sometimes that one of these years, we are going to project
how much we are going to get and then we will run into the wall,
because it is part of our overall budget considerations.
We have shown significant increases every year and we continue
to do that.
As you know, we had a pilot on a CPAC, a combined center in
VISN6, in Asheville. It was expanded. It has been very successful
and, with the secretarys guidance, we are going to move up that
schedule from 2013 to 2011 to have six more around the country
that have shown up to 18 percent increase in third-party collections
for non-service-connected.
Mr. WAMP. You said in Asheville, not in Nashville.
Dr. KUSSMAN. Asheville.
Mr. WAMP. I am just making sure we are staying together there.
Dr. KUSSMAN. North Carolina.
Mr. WAMP. To most members of Congress, the VA is not all of
what we talk about here. To them, it is a CBOC or a super CBOC
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00541
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
542
or maybe they are fortunate enough to have a hospital in their district or close to their district.
So do you believe, in the wake of CARES and all the reforms and
everything else, that we are delivering health care as smart and efficiently as possible?
We are seeing more CBOCs and more super CBOCs being built
and we are seeing more care contracted, but not privatized, but
just where it is necessary to contract it, increase the contracting so
that veterans have more options and access immediately to the
care that they need, and these seem to be trends that almost fill
the gaps between some sweeping reforms where you would actually
close hospitals.
I had hoped, when CARES came along, being from the south,
where people are moving and we have lakes and retirees and low
cost of living, we get a lot of veterans, but we dont get the new
infrastructure. We dont get the facilities to compensate for it.
And I had hoped that CARES might realign a bunch of that,
where all of a sudden you would see the hospitals built where the
veterans are moving. But what we are seeing is the current facilities expanded. So instead of a CBOC, you get a super CBOC.
And that is good, we are grateful, but we still have gaps. But I
am seeing that the super CBOC kind of fills the gaps. We serve a
tremendous number of veterans down in the Chattanooga area, but
you have got to drive 2 hours to get inpatient care.
Yet, contracting can fill some of those gaps, because then they
can see the local provider that they might have to traditionally go
to Murfreesboro to see, and that is 2 hours away.
So is that a trend you think is filling some of the gaps in the delivery system?
Dr. KUSSMAN. Yes, sir. CARES was a process. We could, arguably, say it didnt succeed.
Mr. WAMP. That is what I would say.
Dr. KUSSMAN. I dont want to get into that whole thing. So we
have been looking at a way of changing our approach from facility
centric to veteran centric; that the veterans live wherever they do
and our job is to provide services in the maximum way possible as
close to where they live.
So the way we have done that, partly, is primary care with the
CBOCs that are up in thealmost 900 all together and we have
a continuum of care from highly rural areas that use telemedicine
and outreach clinics and multiple vans to the traditional CBOC,
which is mostly primary care, so mental health and those things,
to large independent CBOCs, to what we have now described as
health care clinics, HCCs, that are large, robust, ambulatory care,
same-day surgery centers that provide 90 to 95 percent of why people go to a hospital.
Any hospital you talk about in this country, when you look at
why people pull up to the door, 90 to 95 percent of the people coming are doing some kind of ambulatory care thing. They might even
have their hernia repaired or their appendix taken out or a
colonoscopy, but they dont stay over. They leave.
Relatively small numbers of people actually get admitted to the
hospital. So we are trying to push the services out and not be hospital centric, but veteran centric, to do that.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00542
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
543
Building hospitals is an exorbitant cost these days, as you know,
anywhere from 500 to $1 billion for small hospitals. And we, effectively, with 153 hospitals on the edge of 57 years old, there is no
way we are going to be able to replace these facilities and you can
only retrofit facilities to a certain point.
So the question then is how can we maximize the services close
to wherelike in Chattanooga, so they dont have to drive 90 percent of the time to Murfreesboro, and then partner for acute hospitalization with the local community, but still retaining the right
for complex surgery, neurosurgery, thoracic surgery, to move these
into our system, because if we dont do that, we wont be able to
sustain ourselves in the complex care.
Mr. WAMP. If I can have another minute.
My wife, 3 years ago, went full-blown severe septemia/ARDS in
hospital. So trust me, I would hope people can stay out of hospitals,
because sometimes that is
Dr. KUSSMAN. They are dangerous places to go.
Mr. WAMP. They are dangerous places and we actually have had
a problem in Murfreesboro with colonoscopies, where you are inpatient and there is release, it is easy.
TELEMEDICINE
I was going to ask one other question, though, because I noticed

where Chairman Mullen went to Fort Campbell last month and
talked about some of the innovations, and this may play to both
DOD and VA, of virtual care, where maybe you can get some of
these treatments online.
How is that working and is that a demonstration that has some
validity?
Dr. KUSSMAN. We have probably led the country in telemedicine,
tele-psychiatry, tele-dermatology, and we haveI dont know what
the latest number is, probably around 40,000 or 50,000 people who
are getting their care that way with the technology that allows you
to communicate with your primary care nurse or your primary care
person without leaving home.
Mr. WAMP. Some veterans may be more inclined to be interviewed in that capacity than to come in, right?
Dr. KUSSMAN. So we are moving, as we can, emphasizing rural
health, but also patients who cant get out to do things, because we
can check the blood pressure, we can check the glucose, we can
check their weight, and somebody who has a problem with, say,
congestive heart failure, the fluid kind of backs up because the
pump isnt working so well, they will gain weight and if they are
monitored on a daily or every other day basis, the nurse says,
Mike Kussman, what is your weight, and I say, I have gained
two pounds, maybe we ought to take another Lasix, because if you
dont do that, the next week, they are seven or eight pounds and
then they are in the emergency room and end up being admitted.
So you can cut off some of this stuff with technology and the patients are much happier, obviously.
INTEROPERABILITY
Mr. FARR. I have two questions. One, sort of the purpose of this
hearing and this interoperability, the other is money is sort of the
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00543
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
544
interoperability of the rest of government now, spending billions of
dollars on electronic files.
Are you engaged in this? Are there people that have done this
and know the pitfalls?
Dr. KUSSMAN. Are people coming to us?
Mr. FARR. We have put billions of dollars in the stimulus package to convert paper files to electronic files and now there is going
to be a lot of vendors out there selling systems and it is going to
be a madhouse.
The concept, obviously, is that when you are finished with all
this, you will have some interoperability. You wont be owned by
one system. But it seems to me that if I were engaged in getting
the rest of the country, the civilian community to convert to electronic files, I would come to the VA first.
Dr. KUSSMAN. I think we are partnering with HHS. As you know,
Rob Kolodner used to be in charge of that initiative. Dr.
Blumenthal, I think, is the new designee to do that. We are working daily with them.
But our hope is that we can lead the country together, DOD and
the VA, as a forcing mechanism, because we also have a lot of patients that Trip takes care of that are in TRICARE.
And if we start working with our TRICARE partners to make
sure that they have electronic records, and we buy a lot of feebased care, and if we do it, you can suddenly have a mass that
might be able to lead the country.
Mr. FARR. Lead the rest, yes.
Dr. KUSSMAN. So we are very conscious of that responsibility.
Mr. FARR. We have land owned by DOD that Veterans are going
to build a building. And my question about that building is that
you are exploring this new model to fund medical facilities under
the health care facilities
Dr. KUSSMAN. HCC, sir.
Mr. FARR. HCC. That is essentially a private development, build
to suit, and then leased back to you.
Dr. KUSSMAN. Lease to build or build to lease is one way of doing
it. We could also build our own building. But getting major construction is always difficult and leasing sometimes is easy.
Mr. FARR. Are you going to include these facilities in this years
budget?
Dr. KUSSMAN. I think that we have already identified some with
HCC down in south Texas, because there was a strong movement
to have us build a hospital, because we were very sensitive to the
needs of the community, having to drive 5 hours to San Antonio
for anything more than basic
Mr. FARR. But you dont know if there is any in the budget this
year.
Dr. KUSSMAN. I dont think we are
Mr. FARR. I will come back on that.
Dr. KUSSMAN. The budget hasnt been, as you know, completed.
[Recess.]
Mr. FARR. We will come back to some of these other issues, but
Mr. Carter has been patient all day.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00544
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
545
DOD/VA DATA SHARINGINTEROPERABILITY
Mr. CARTER. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Secretary, we were just visiting on what my question was
going to be about. We are very excited at Fort Hood that we are
going to have a new hospital in 2010, along with Camp Pendleton,
and they already have authorization for building at Raleigh and
Lejeune. So you are going to be in the hospital building business.
Where I live, we are a fast-growing hospital district and they
have built two large hospitals in my hometown in the last 4 years.
In visiting Seton Hospital, they were talking about the miles and
miles of wiring that they have put in Seton Hospital in anticipation
of electronic recordkeeping.
So this has been an ongoing issue, we have talked about it today,
and we talk about it just about every time we get you guys in here.
Do you have any ideas about what kind of plans they have for
the integration of new technology, putting together the interoperability between the VA and the DOD on this recordkeeping at all
the new hospital facilities?
Is that going to be part of the anticipated planning that you see
on the hospital?
Dr. CASSCELLS. Yes, sir. We are very fortunate that we have got
really a technical breakthrough, which should finally reduce the
cost of achieving interoperability.
It got so bad that Secretary Peake was having us fax and scan
every piece of paper to the VA and just recently, the technical people, DOD and VA, have come up with a joint solution using what
they call services oriented architecture.
This is open source architecture, which enables you to be modular in the way you build your connectivity, in the way you build
your electronic health record and yet you dont give up any security, but you add flexibility and you markedly shrink the time.
In the military, the acquisition process takes many years. By the
time you pick a product and start to contract to get it, the product,
when it is delivered, is out of date. So now, with moving to this
services oriented architecture, it is like design-build in the construction community. You have got a chance to change the design
at the last minute.
This is going to rapidlythis is going to decrease markedly the
time from picking the product to the delivery and installation of
the product.
It also lets you uninstall a piece without the whole thing coming
down. So you can do your maintenance and so forth. So this thing
called services oriented architecture, SOA, is huge.
AHLTAUPCOMING CHANGES
The other thing it does is decrease the cost estimate. A year ago,
when there was so much unhappiness about our electronic health
records, we went back with a clean sheet of paper, even talked
about pulling out the DODs record system, called AHLTA, which
was slow and hard to learn and would often crash.
So we looked at the cost of pulling that out and putting in Vista,
knowing full well that they want to upgrade theirs. What we had
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00545
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
546
put in, by the time we put it in, would already be version 1.0 and
they would be on to 2.0.
Even if we did thatand we had a certain number of doctors
who said just give us the VA system. If the VA upgrades it, okay,
but we would rather have the VA system.
We looked at the cost of that. Estimates ranged from $10 billion
to $15 billion to pull out AHLTA and put in Vista.
So now, we will get back to you when this budget comes out. We
will have estimates that are a quarter of that. And instead of the
2015 delivery date, we will be talking about 2012. This is technology coming to the rescue.
So I am finally confident that we are going to have fully interoperable records and not only that, but we will have records as
good as anybody out there has got.
Mr. CARTER. That is exciting, because just having the opportunity to go through the construction phase and looking at these
hospitals and what is being done today, it is really space age, it is
really something, and that is exactly what we want.
We want to have the best we can do with smart technology. So
I am pleased to hear that.
MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS
A question had been asked here earlier and I wanted to just

mention something to you. I have mentioned it to the folks at Fort
Hood.
I had a bunch of people from Texas, the mental health and mental retardation state agency, come to my office in Cedarville and
say that they had an abundance of mental health workers that
were on staff that they needed help with, meaning to work for
them, and wanted to know if the Army wanted to contract at Fort
Hood with them to provide mental health, both psychiatrists and
certified mental health workers.
It has just been in the talking phase more than anything else
and we may match them, but it may be that you find that a lot
of places, that the MHMR departments in states might have accessibility to contract for some of the shortfall that you have for mental health professionals.
I just bring that to your attention because you have talked about
it today and that has always stuck in my mind that they said we
have an abundance of psychiatrists and certified professionals that
we can use to contract with the Army.
So I just wanted to put that on the table for you and see what
you thought about that.
Dr. CASSCELLS. Loree Sutton, on our staff, has looked at that, as
you know, sir, and she gave it a thumbs-up. The Texas reintegration project is what they call it.
Mr. CARTER. Right.
Dr. CASSCELLS. Yes, sir. And so she is still wrestling with our
personnel and readiness people as to whether that could be a onetime MOU or whether it actually might be a template for a wider
rollout.
Sir, I would have to take that for the record and get back to you.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00546
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
547
Thank you for your inquiry regarding the Texas State Integration Program. We
are always interested in learning more about new and innovative ways to assist
Service members, Veterans, and their families. Community efforts to assist with the
reintegration of recently deployed Service members and their families are particularly needed, and we welcome civilian, local, and state initiatives in this regard. As
to this specific program, although we have been able to gain some information, we
are not yet familiar enough with this particular program to give a definitive response. As a result, we have been in contact with them, and hope to set up a meeting where we can learn more about the program, and better determine whether it
would be of benefit.
Mr. CARTER. I just mention it really as a suggestion that would

be helpful. You might find the same thing exists in Tennessee and
other states, California and so forth. But there are ways we can
contract with firms that have the professionals available since we
are having such an abundance of need right now that it might help
and I just bring it up for that purpose and that purpose only.
DOD/VA HEALTH CARE COLLABORATION IN MONTEREY
Mr. FARR. I would like to get back to my question for both of you.
Let me give you a little of the scenario.
Fort Ord used to be one of the largest training bases in the
United States. It had probably 32,000 folks there.
The base was downsized, remaining as a residence for active
duty soldiers assigned to language studies at the Defense Language
Institute in Monterey and to students at the Naval post-graduate
school.
What happened at Fort Ord, you had a 400-bed licensed hospital
that closed and up to that time, everybody in the military community, the active duty personnel, the families of the active duty personnel, the retirees in the community, and the veterans all used
that hospital, because there was plenty of space and it was space
available, but there was plenty of it.
But the hospital closed, and I think you are going to find this in
a lot of communities. They didnt have a hospital anymore.
You opened a clinic at the Defense Language Institute, a dropin clinic for the soldiers, but a lot of them didnt know, particularly
at the Naval post-graduate school, that they could go over to the
Presidio in Monterey, not too far away, but several miles, and get
their clinical care there.
The TRICARE families ended up in mass confusion about trying
to find TRICARE doctors and we found none in the community that
would serve pediatric care, because the reimbursement rates
werent large enough.
So they contracted with a firm in Salinas, which is about 30
miles away. Then in the meantime, we have rebuilt all of that,
with the RCI project. So you have this wonderful military community who is very happy, with the exception that there is a lot of
confusion in how you get access to TRICARE.
And the Monterey Bay area being very expensive, it is very difficult to find doctors who can come in. Our senior doctors are leaving their practices. So you can imagine how difficult it is for a
young doctor, and they are not coming in and picking up these
services.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00547
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
548
They have told us, however, that if we have facilities where the
cost of the overhead, cost of the rent, is not so high as it is in the
private sector, they would be glad to partner up.
So what we have tried to do, in the meantime, Veterans opened
a clinic. It has been so successful it is cracking at its seams. We
have now a piece of property that the local active duty community,
Army and Navy, both agree is ideal, because it is right in the community, in the RCI community, and VA is willing to build a facility
there.
The question is whether you are going to build it as an HCCF,
and what I hear from Palo Alto is that there are seven potential
HCCF sites scheduled for construction in 2010.
Your last answer to me was that you didnt know.
Dr. KUSSMAN. Well, it was planned, but the budget hasnt been
confirmed. So I dont know. But a lot of them are in leasing, so they
wouldnt be in the construction budget.
There are things that we would like to do that we are looking
at, but I dont know where they got 17 from.
Mr. FARR. Seven.
Dr. KUSSMAN. Seven from. I would have to go back and ask.
Mr. FARR. Could we find that out?
Dr. KUSSMAN. Sure.
Mr. FARR. And I would like to find it is just one of them.
Dr. Casscells, I dont know if you know, but the Monterey Bay
area has about 6,000 men and women in uniform and about, between veterans and retirees, another 28,000 people.
So it really makes sense now to try to make this combined facility that VA is going to build to have you as a partner in that facility. But that decision is in the feasibility studies out there and it
is going to show that you are going to have about a $10 million
savings, just TRICARE alone.
But you havent made the decision whether to partner with the
VA yet on this and I am waiting to see that decision to be made.
Hopefully, it can be made as soon as possible, because we would
like towe will have all the numbers for you and it will show that
it is financially a smart thing to do.
Dr. CASSCELLS. Sir, as you know, from your visit with Major
General Horoho and Ken Cox from my office, the Army is collecting
their part of the data for this joint study, what is called the joint
market assessment team.
VA generously offered to build a joint clinic. They also paid for
the study. The Army surgeon general is completing the study. The
team goes out there the 13th of April to do their site inspection and
wrap up the report.
So we should know very soon, certainly, during the appropriations cycle, whether anything more is needed. Of course, we would
love to hearget a solution, because on TRICARE, my hands are
a little bit tied. I can offer a 10 percent adjustment to get pediatricians in the Monterey Bay area to take TRICARE, but that is
Medicare plus 10 percent.
And pediatricians arent millionaires, but they still dont want it.
It is hard to get theour TRICARE network is very thin in some
of these areas. It is thin in areas that are very wealthy. It is also
thin in areas that are very rural.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00548
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
549
And Congress has given us
Mr. FARR. Well, I think the lesson learned here that is really
some advice to both of you, because veterans are everywhere that
there are active duty military. If you are going to close a hospital,
you are going to have unintended purposes, which are never measured, but, obviously, felt when the hospital closes.
People have got to consider that. We thank God you did respond,
TRICARE, you werent in command at the time, but TRICARE had
to fly in doctors just to be there. It was very expensive, and they
didnt anticipate that it was going to happen.
But our Medicare reimbursements are the lowest in the country,
for one of the highest cost communities. That is another problem
and we are fighting that. But your TRICARE reimbursements then
are based on this low, low base, which none of the doctors are even
receiving or civilian doctors are not taking Medicare patients.
We have 2,000 senior citizens who get their health care through
emergency. It is appalling.
We have excellent veterans clinics. They are very successful. It
just seems to me that now that we are going to build a new facility,
that it just makes really good sense, this is right in your footprint,
to serve the families of the active duty members who now have to
truck over to Salinas.
We can get pediatric care right in that building. We have already
got commitments from doctors to come. So I am looking forward to
a favorable marriage here.
Dr. CASSCELLS. Sir, could you write in there that the clinic director would be Dr. Casscells? That would be a great favor.
Mr. FARR. Whatever it takes, we will do that. You want that in
the bill? [Laughter.]
Be careful what you ask for. Fortunately, the clinic is already
going to be, I promised, just before he died, to General Gourley,
who put all this together, and we are going to name it after him.
But we can name something after you.
Dr. CASSCELLS. I might have to go work there.
Mr. FARR. We can arrange that, too.
I think it is about time we wrap up.
CONGRESSIONAL SUPPORT
There is a tradition that Mr. Edwards has that I love and it sort
of just is a parting shot.
We are sitting here trying to prioritize a lot of issues. In your
opinion, what is the one thing thateach of your opinionswhat
is the one thing that this committee, as appropriators, can do to fix
what you think is the most serious problem right now?
Dr. CASSCELLS. Sir, on the defense side, I would say stay the
course that Mr. Edwards has charted. What he has done in supporting the construction of military hospitals, most of which were
built before I was in medical school, in asking that these hospitals
be built and that they be first class.
You not only boost the morale of the doctors and nurses, but you
boost the morale of the patients if they feel they area new hospital, a hospital that is safe and high tech, shows our respect for
them.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00549
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
550
And the hospitals that your funds have enabled us to have, we
now have hospitals that are leadthey are green, they save 28 percent on energy, reduce maintenance. The hospitals have safety features that our current hospitals dont have and they promote patient privacy and patient empowerment.
The new generation of hospitals is nothing like what we have
currently in the military.
So I would just ask that you stay the course, because these hospitals will pace themselves. If we have an Army hospital, for example, that is one-third full, it loses money. The patients go down the
street to a private hospital.
We pay twice. We are paying to keep the hospital open and then
TRICARE, me, paying for the downtown care.
So what you are helping us do, this committee, in shoring up
military hospitals will be cost-effective in the long run and we appreciate it enormously.
So my message would be, please, just stay the course.
Mr. FARR. You just made my speech for a joint clinic. It is a lot
cheaper than a hospital to serve a lot of people.
Dr. Kussman.
Dr. KUSSMAN. Thank you, sir, for the question.
First of all, I very much appreciate what the chairman and all
of you have done in support of what we have done and what we
have needed and you have always been willing to listen and help
us move forward.
My biggestwell, one of my biggestI was just running through
a list of things, but as you know, our appropriation is in four parts,
the services, used to be admin facilities, and then IT.
And one of the challenges is when this is separated, and I understand why it was done and I am not arguing about that, it is just
that it locks us in sometimes and it is very difficult to reprogram
money.
So when I want to do that, I have to go through the process of
asking permission to do it. This is particularly poignant in IT, because I think a lot of people presume that medical IT in support
of the delivery of health care is in medical services, because it is
part of medical services.
But the way the budget is structured, it isnt. It is in IT. So we
can buy a new piece of equipment, but the IT tail that goes with
it has to be funded out of something else.
Mr. FARR. Competing with something else.
Dr. KUSSMAN. Yes. I mean, there are a lot of things we need in
IT, security and things like that. So the unique necessity of medical
IT becomes a challenge when we are competing, and that is why,
the last 2 years I reprogrammed money out of medical services into
IT to support medical IT projects.
But I think that this is an unintended consequence of an IT, separate IT budget, because nothing we do now in medical services
doesnt have an IT tail.
So I hope I articulated that in a coherent manner. So the challenge for us is being sure that when you give us money in medical
services, we can actually use it, as well, because a lot of times, it
gets frustrating
Mr. FARR. Did we create these different accounting accounts?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00550
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
551
Dr. KUSSMAN. Yes.
Mr. FARR. The Congress did.
Dr. KUSSMAN. Yes.
Mr. FARR. So you are suggesting it needs to be modernized to essentially IT is really part of everything and not just a separate
standalone.
Dr. KUSSMAN. It is not just buying Blackberries and servers and
things. It is integral to everything I do medically.
Mr. FARR. Well, I know when we were in the California state legislature, I am sure Mr. Wamp knows the same thing, the problem
was that when IT came out, there were so many vendors up there
and everybody wanted it. It was going crazy. People were buying
things that didnt work.
Dr. KUSSMAN. And that is why I think
Mr. FARR. So we tried to professionalize it and bring it all under
one roof.
Dr. KUSSMAN. Right. And as you know, we moved to a centralized OI&T in the VA I think that that is very important to maintain standards and quality and make sure that people dont waste
their money on things.
And even if it was in medical services for medical IT, I think that
it is okay for them to have oversight to make sure we dont buy
something stupid.
But the challenge is to continue to expand medical services when
there is not enough money in the IT budget sometimes to meet all
the requirements. So things start competing with each other and
sometimesand I am not complaining about the money. It is just
the way that things are done now.
And I believe that when this was done, the presumption was that
there was a lot of medical IT that would be paid for in medical
services, because I believe it is part of medical services, but I cant
do it anymore.
So that is one of the things that I would think that might be
helpful.
Mr. FARR. Well, we will take a look at that. I would suggest that
your team, working with HHS on the electronic filing, I mean, your
IT has got to be the
Dr. KUSSMAN. It is more than just the electronic record. It is
wireless. It is things thatwe buy a new MRI. There is an IT support tail to that and that doesnt come out of medical services. It
comes out of the IT budget.
It is part and parcel of the delivery of care, but it has been separated from the delivery of care.
Mr. FARR. I dont know IT that much, but it seems to me if you
are buying equipment that is sophisticated as it is and you are trying to create an electronic records system, that equipment is going
to be informing a lot of your data itself.
You are going to have reinterpretation of data coming out of
I mean, I have seen these charts and scans and the way they put
things together, and it is remarkable information that is even understandable for a patient like me, and that is
Dr. KUSSMAN. I am a dinosaur, too.
Mr. FARR [continuing]. And that is generated by the machine
that scanned me. Isnt this all integrated and doesnt this have to
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00551
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
552
be something in this discussion, if we are all going to try to get the
entire country on some kind of interoperable system?
To me, interoperable means it is all like one. Isnt that included
in that? Dont you, in your recordkeeping, account for things like
that?
Dr. KUSSMAN. Supporting our electronic health record, money
comes out of IT.
Mr. FARR. Okay.
Dr. KUSSMAN. When we expand new services, in medical services,
there is frequently an IT tail. When I open a new CBOC or a new
HCC, there is IT support for that.
We can put all the equipment in and prepare ourselves to deliver
services, but I cant use medical services money to support the IT
part of it. It has got to come out of the IT funding.
It is very complicated.
Mr. FARR. Has that been brought to the congressional attention
before?
Dr. KUSSMAN. I dont know if I stuck my neck way out, but I
think we have had some dialogue about this in the past and it is
the way we do business right now.
And my plea would be we look at that and see if there is a better
way of doing it.
Mr. FARR. Has somebody got a better way to do it, anybody, because we are doing report language and we can set up a system
to get us some answers.
Dr. KUSSMAN. Maybe.
Mr. FARR. All right. We will work on that.
Dr. KUSSMAN. Thank you.
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE TO WOUNDED WARRIORS/MILITARY FAMILIES
Mr. WAMP. My staff should have put this in my notes and they
didnt, so they will next time.
General Casey and General Chiarelli have been working with me
to identify impediments to outside groups, private entities, from
helping our veterans and even helping the families of our active
duty men and women, because there are impediments in the law
to them being able to help, and I will give you an example.
We had a van offered to our outpatient clinic a couple years ago,
after we had the wreck, people lost their lives, and a new van was
offered, but there was an impediment to being able to accept that
van.
So anything that you can do, Dr. Casscells, on your way out? Dr.
Kussman? We are asking for you to share with us any impediments
to the private sector, that really wants to help our veterans and to
help our military families, from being able to help. There are impediments and we need to eliminate those as we pass this bill from
year to year so that everybody that wants to help is not prohibited
by a dumb law.
If there is a reason for it, we will back off. But if it is just some
illogical problem, we want to get rid of it. So help us, just send us
any ways you think that people are prohibited from helping our
veterans and our military families.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00552
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
553
NETWORK OF CARE WEBSITE
Mr. FARR. You just reminded me, I would like to also refer you
to a Web site, www.networkofcare.org. It has been brought to my
attention by our local doctors.
This organization is putting together on the Web all of the information, county-by-county, in the United States and it is contracted
for by the local governments to put together, for example, if you
were dealing with PTSD, all of the PTSD services that are available in that county and all of the funding that comes from it, both
private sector and public sector, the support community out there
to handle it, and pertinent legislation at the state and federal level
that would relate to it. And they even have ability for case management, where a personal file can be done.
The concept here was that as you have soldiers going back home
who know the DOD health care delivery system and they have to
go to a place to get it or a VA clinic that they might be assigned
to, but that may be miles, miles and miles away, that you could
actually give them a portfolio when they leave and say, By the
way, in your own community, here is what is available.
I think it is an incredible disclosure tool, because often in cases,
as you know, that community of care is sometimes the best and
families have no idea that there are support groups out there.
I have had parents come in to me with children with diabetes
and not even knowing that we have this huge network of families
with diabetic kids who have learned how to handle that.
And I want to provide that kind of same service for the soldiers.
Dr. KUSSMAN. We are aware of this and there is dialogue going
on about how to best utilize this across the continuum of care. Certainly, if nothing else, it makes people aware of where they could
go locally for services. It doesnt mean necessarily we would pay for
it there, but that is a separate issue.
At least they know that they have someplace and they may have
their own insurance or something else from work. The National
Guard and Reserve, when they get out, they would know where to
go quickly.
Mr. FARR. Well, if you are having a shortage of health care providers in areas, professional licensed people that could be counselors for PTSD, it seems to me that you have now got access to
a civilian licensed community that might be in your backyard.
Dr. CASSCELLS. Sir, I will make sure this is in our national resource directory and we have several similar Web sites,
afterdeployment.org, health.mil, militaryonesource.com, and we
will make sure that networkofcare is featured on those with a link,
establish a link.
Mr. FARR. I hope that is helpful to you.
Well, thank you very much, folks, for your professional and public service and career, and thank you for coming today.
The meeting is adjourned.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00553
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00554
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 22, 2009.

BASE POSTURE AND SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST
WITNESSES
WAYNE ARNY, DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, INSTALLATIONS AND ENVIRONMENT
KEITH E. EASTIN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY, INSTALLATIONS AND ENVIRONMENT
B.J. PENN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE NAVY, INSTALLATIONS
AND ENVIRONMENT
KATHLEEN I. FERGUSON, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE
AIR FORCE (INSTALLATIONS) FOR KEVIN W. BILLINGS, ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE, INSTALLATIONS, ENVIRONMENT AND LOGISTICS
STATEMENT
OF THE
CHAIRMAN
Mr. EDWARDS [presiding]. Good morning. I would like to call the

subcommittee to order. And I want to welcome each of the secretaries here. Secretary Arny, Secretary Easton, Secretary Penn, Secretary Ferguson, thank you all for being here.
Zach, we found out Mr. Billings airplane lost pressure at 37,000
feet last night, so he is somewhere between St. Louis and Washington, DC.
Mr. ARNY. And we are all upset. We forgot that
Mr. EDWARDS. That is right. That is a new one.
Mr. ARNY. I lost pressure in my car on the way to work.
Mr. EDWARDS. Absolutely. I will tell you.
Please, Secretary Ferguson, please tell Secretary Billings we understand, and just glad that no one was hurt. We understand it
was military aircraft, that no one was hurt.
Ms. FERGUSON. No one was hurt. It landed safely. The aircraft
is being repaired now. And he is on another airplane on his way
back right now.
Mr. EDWARDS. That is good to hear.
Well, again, I want to welcome all of you to our hearing on the
Department of Defenses ongoing implementation of the 2005 Base
Realignment and Closure round. BRAC 2005 became law on November 9, 2005.
The department has until September 15, 2011, to complete all of
the required actions, as you well know.
The cost of this roundat least the cost that is being funded
through the BRAC accountis $32 billion, according to the current
information that we have. And I believe that is up from the initial
estimate of BRAC somewhere in the $19 billion range.
I have two major concerns I would like to address at todays
hearing. The first concern is whether the department can, in fact,
complete all of the required closures and realignments by the legal
(555)
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00555
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
556
deadline. This BRAC round has been variously described as the
biggest, most complex and most costly round ever implemented.
Clearly, this BRAC round was much more than about saving
money. It was about executing a transformation of the military. A
number of very difficult actions will be pushing right up against
the deadline.
The second concern I have, related to the first, is whether the
deadline can be met wisely and effectively. What I mean is this.
Can we meet the deadline without cutting corners on facilities that
our troops and families need? Can we do it without paying exorbitant premiums to contractors to speed up construction? Are we
going to satisfy the mere legal requirements while leaving a tail of
expenditures to be funded through the regular MILCON appropriation or other accounts?
A number of GAO reports on BRAC have been released in the
past 2 years. The basic theme of all of these reports could be described as costs underestimated, savings over-estimated.
Not only were the savings underestimated, but some of the savings could best be described as theoretical. But as we all know,
however, the costs are very real.
We have reason to believe that some of this cost is coming at the
expense of other pressing military infrastructure needs. The department is committed to a number of major initiatives with high
military construction costs, such as growing the force and realignment of the Marines from Okinawa to Guam. Unlike BRAC, however, these actions are not mandated by law.
Our worry and our concern is that, under current economic and
fiscal conditions, BRAC could end up crowding out other needed investments for the next 212 years. We also must not forget that we
still have a large unfunded obligation to clean up and dispose of
military properties that were closed during the previous four BRAC
rounds, going back to 1988.
Is that correct? Was the first BRAC round in 1988?
According to the 2007 Defense Environmental Programs Report,
the total cost to complete cleanup at these sites is nearly $3.5 billion. And I have not seen that number going down in recent years.
I am very pleased that our witnesses are here today. Since you
bear the burden of implementing BRAC, I am interested in hearing
your frank assessments of the challenges you face and how the
services are meeting these challenges.
Before I introduce our witnesses, let me turn to our ranking
member, Mr. Wamp, for any opening remarks that he would care
to make.
STATEMENT
OF THE
Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, thank you for being punctual and efficient yourself. And welcome back here after our Easter work period. I just traveled 4,000 miles in 17 days all across the state of
Tennessee in my Volkswagen, so I have got a whole new perspective of life. [Laughter.]
I want to thank our witnesses for coming, and those that tried
to get here.
As you know, Mr. Chairman, you were very cooperative as we
raised this issue over the last 2 years on whether the money for
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00556
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
557
BRAC to close out by 2011 was in place. And we did the very best
we could to provide the resources. I think your two objectives of the
hearing today are entirely appropriate.
I would even add a third. And that is to make sure that the monies that we have dedicated have been spent efficiently to-date, so
that as we continue to work towards some new timelinesobviously, I read the report showing that we do not expect most of
these sites to meet their target goals in terms of finishing out the
BRAC realignment on schedulebut to make sure that as we put
additional resources into BRAC, that the money is being spent as
efficiently and as effectively as possible.
I do think you are right on target about the long-term obligation
of the cleanup efforts, because I think many times, from my experience in Tennessee, that is just punted down the field. And frankly,
the ongoing cost of maintaining these facilities continues to climb.
And the cleanup is few and far between, so to speak.
So, I think this is an important hearing. Even though it might
not be the highest profile hearing that we have this spring, it is
an important hearing on an important objective. And I do think the
whole BRAC process, Mr. Chairman, is one that the government
can point to for true reform.
There are very few processes that government can actually say,
this works. Because everybody talks about government reform, but
there is very little reform of the government. The government just
grows. At every level it grows, but particularly in Washington.
And actually, BRAC, as a model, if we do it right and make sure
it is efficient and accountable, is a good process for an objective
look at how to reform a host of other programs. And that is why
BRAC is important, because this is sort of a benchmark as to
whether or not the government can ever reform itself, or clean
itself up, or make itself more efficient. And there are a host of federal agencies that could learn from the BRAC model, as long as we
have a good story to tell.
And I thank you very much, and look forward to the testimony.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Wamp, thank you for your comments. And I
think your points are well taken in terms of our need to focus on
the efficient use and wise use of the BRAC dollars, and help us
apply that to future BRAC rounds and lessons learned.
For the sake of time, I am going to forego the long introduction.
With the exception of Secretary Ferguson, each of you has been before this committee multiple times.
Again, I thank you.
I would note for the record that Assistant Secretary Penn is also
the Acting Secretary of the Navy. And we welcome you back.
I would like, on a personal note, to thank Secretary Eastin for
your long and distinguished service to our country, to our military
and the United States Army. I know that Monday is, I believe,
your last day in your present position. And I have no doubt you
will continue to find other ways to serve our country.
But I would be remiss if I did not personally take the time to
thank you, Secretary Eastin, for your incredible work on behalf of
our country and our Army soldiers and their families. You have
made a real difference, and I have seen that first hand on multiple
occasions with your hard work.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00557
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
558
Mr. WAMP. Hear, hear.
Mr. EDWARDS. Secretary Arny, we are honored to have you here.
And as deputy undersecretary, let me begin with you, and then we
will follow with people on down
STATEMENT
OF
WAYNE ARNY
Mr. ARNY. I would be happy to.

Chairman Edwards, Mr. Wamp and distinguished members of
the subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before
you today to address the Departments implementation of the
BRAC Commissions decisions.
As previously discussed with this committee, BRAC 2005 effort
is the largest round undertaken by the Department. And we continue to monitor BRAC implementation to ensure we are meeting
our legal obligation.
Further, the Administration, as before, will request sufficient
funding to enable the Department to continue its efforts to meet
the requirements of the BRAC process and be completed by September 15, 2011.
Implementation of this round is an exceedingly complex undertaking, as you have mentioned, not merely as a function of its magnitude, but to the largest extent, as a function of the original goal
established for this round. The BRAC 2005 would focus on the reconfiguration of operational capacity to maximize warfighting capability and efficiency.
Focusing on operational capacity required that we appropriately
assess the increased military capabilities we are achieving through
these recommendations. We accomplished that requirement and,
through BRAC, are significantly enhancing this capability.
For example, in the largest operational Army BRAC movement,
the Army plans to build three brigade combat team complexes, a
combat aviation brigade complex and a division headquarters at
Fort Bliss, Texas, to accommodate the 15,000 soldiers and their
families who are being relocated there.
The closure of Naval Air Station Brunswick is another example.
This action will allow the single-siting of the East Coast Maritime
Patrol community at NAS Jacksonville, while reducing operating
costs. Construction is moving ahead as planned.
Besides these individual actions, the key component of this
BRAC round was a goal to rationalize medical infrastructure to address the transformation we have seen in health care, and to adapt
our facilities to address the continuing change in warrior care.
We were able to realign two of our major military medical markets, San Antonio and the National Capital Region. These address
a critical need to realign and consolidate key clinical and clinical
research capabilities while addressing serious facility modernization requirements.
In San Antonio, the Department is consolidating inpatient service into a recapitalized Brooke Army Medical Center while replacing the aging Wilford Hall with a state-of-the-art ambulatory outpatient center.
In the National Capital Region, we are closing the aged and degrading Walter Reed and transferring its services to both an expanded Bethesda and the new community hospital at Fort Belvoir.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00558
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
559
In addition, the medical center at Andrews will be transformed into
a clinic. This allows DoD to forego the cost of renovating Walter
Reed, and instead focus its resources to realign the active duty
beneficiaries to the remaining hospitals in line with changing demographics.
Because these transformations required facility closures as well
as restructuring, we could not have beenthese could not have
been accomplished efficiently without the authority provided by
BRAC.
BRAC 2005 also calls for the transfer of installation management
functions to create 12 joint bases from 26 separate bases. The Department is using this opportunity to create conditions for more
consistent and effective delivery of installation support at these
sites, capitalizing on the fact that these bases either share a common boundary or are in close proximity.
Consequently, the installation management functions and the delivery of installations support functions can be consolidated to ensure best business practices, while warfighting capabilities are preserved or enhanced.
A Memorandum of Agreement for each Joint Base, signed by the
affected service vice chief, is defining the relationships between the
components and will govern the supporting components delivery of
support at approved output levelssomething we have never done
before.
A governance framework, called the Joint Management Oversight Structure, allows for approval of variations to policy guidance,
deviations to approved output levels, and dispute resolution.
The supporting componentin other words, the lead componentwill establish a joint base commander, who will be responsible for installation support to the supported component or components and the tenants. The deputy joint base commander will be
from the supported or follower command. To-date, five of the 12
MOAs have been signed, and the 12 joint bases are being established in two phases, with full operational capability for phase one
in October 2009, and phase two in October 2010.
At FOC, both the total obligational authority and the real property will transfer from the supported component or components to
the supporting component. And if you want, we can talk about that
at greater length in the hearing.
As I said, and as you mentioned, these are complex recommendations, and we recognize the unique challenges associated with their
implementation, particularly for those recommendations where
synchronization is required to manage interdependencies with
other initiatives.
To provide necessary oversight and to apprise senior leadership
whenever issues require attention, we institutionalized an implementation execution oversight program. We do come up with good
titles, I thought
[Laughter.]
The recent GAO report acknowledged that this is a positive step
in oversight. This level of review allows our managers to explain
actions underway, to mitigate the impacts of problem issues.
The recently published GAO report also acknowledges that the
Department has made steady progress thus far in implementing
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00559
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
560
BRAC 2005. There has been a great deal of concern, as you mentioned, about the increased costs of BRAC 2005.
It is important to note that almost 70 percent of the BRAC 2005
program supports military construction requirements, compared to
33 percent experienced in previous rounds. This is because in this
round, the Department decided to use new construction versus renovated space, with existing space diverted to other needs, to accommodate changes in unit sizes, functions or responsibilities by increasing facilities, changing configurations or building additional
facilities, and to accept inflation factors exceeding previous planning factors.
Finally, it is our policy that every practical consideration shall be
given to implementing DoD actions that seriously affect the economy of a community in a manner that minimizes the local impact.
To that end, the Department provides economic adjustment assistance through its Office of Economic Adjustment, or OEA, to help
communities who have decreasesand in this case, in this round,
increasesto help them help themselves use the combined resources of federal, state and local governments and the private sector.
Regarding prior BRAC disposal and redevelopment, the department has used the full range of transfer and conveyance authorities to dispose of real property made available. Property disposal
is complete at 205 out of 250 prior BRAC locations where property
became available for disposal. And local redevelopment efforts, in
turn, have resulted in the creation of 143,700 jobs, more than offsetting the 129,600 civilian jobs that were lost across 73 prior
BRAC locations where OEA is monitoring redevelopment activity.
As of December 2008, our last data, we have disposed of over
367,000 acres of the 422,000 or so acres at these legacy locations,
leaving only a little over 55,000 acres left to go. When we exclude
leases in furtherance of conveyance, which will be transferred in
many cases when cleanup is complete, only 34,000 acres or so remain.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, I sincerely thank you for this opportunity to highlight the Departments BRAC efforts.
[The prepared statement of Wayne Arny follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00560
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00561
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
561
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00562
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
562
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00563
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
563
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00564
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
564
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00565
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
565
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00566
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
566
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00567
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
567
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00568
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
568
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00569
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
569
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00570
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
570
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00571
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
571
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00572
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
572
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00573
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
573
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00574
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
574
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00575
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
575
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00576
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
576
577
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Secretary Arny.
Secretary Eastin.
STATEMENT
OF
KEITH E. EASTIN
Mr. EASTIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Wamp and members
of the committee.
I will try to be brief.
The Army has 102 specific BRAC actions that are our responsibility, and another 11 that were business plans that we manage.
We are now 312 years into this process. And I think I can count
firmly by saying we have 2 years, 4 months and 24 days before
September 15, 2011. [Laughter.]
As you mentioned, unfortunately, I will not be around to see the
end of
Mr. EDWARDS. And we regret that.
Mr. EASTIN. We have a very carefully orchestrated plan and
group that runs our BRAC program. And all of these projects are,
as announced, on schedule.
Since I have been here, I have asked the question: Who are we
kidding? We are not going to get all of this done by 2011.
And we ask it, and I ask it, virtually every couple weeks. Do we
know of any of BRAC actions that are not going to make the deadline? And the answer is no. They will all make September 15,
2011, in the Army.
We all know that something is likely to go on between now and
2 years from now, but we do not see anything specifically. My
guess is, one of the AFRCs might slip a little bit, or something like
that. But we do not see that right now.
And we are in the process, as you know, of closing 387 National
Guard and Reserve Centers, and at the same time, building 125
Armed Forces Reserve Centers that will encompass those activities
abroad.
We areas Wayne has indicated, Fort Bliss is growing vastly.
We are basically tripling its size. Fort Belvoir is doubling in size,
and adding the National Geospatial Agency out there will bring
8,500 new people to it alone, plus the new Dewitt Army Hospital,
which will supplement the Bethesda complex.
All of that is on time, on schedule, and I would like to say under
budget. Budgets will now and then change, butwe are on track
to complete all of it.
We got into environmental restoration. Of course, the disposition
of property from the installations we were closing, we wouldit is
our goal to move this property within 6 months after a request
from an LRA or land, local reuse authority. And we are trying to
do our best to take the property disposal aspect of this and then
put it into effect.
Standing in the way of that, of course, is that most of these installations, in one way or another, are subject to some contamination, either something fairly benign like a corporation yard, to
something where we have unexploded ordnance and have to clean
up before we turn it over.
Everything, I am happy to report, is on track. We think the scope
has not been degradated in any way, to answer one of your questions.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00577
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
578
And as I say, crossing our fingers securely behind our back, September 15, 2011, will come and go with our successful completion
of this. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Keith E. Eastin follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00578
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00579
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
579
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00580
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
580
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00581
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
581
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00582
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
582
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00583
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
583
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00584
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
584
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00585
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
585
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00586
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
586
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00587
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
587
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00588
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
588
589
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Secretary Eastin, thank you very much.
Secretary Penn.
STATEMENT
OF
B.J. PENN
Mr. PENN. Mr. Chairman, Representative Wamp, members of the

committee, I am pleased to appear before you today to provide an
overview of the Departments BRAC program.
Regarding BRAC 2005, we have moved swiftly from planning to
execution since I last briefed you in March of 2007. All 59 led business plans are approved and underway, and our program is on
track to fully meet the September 15, 2011, statutory deadline.
In total, the Department awarded 85 of the 118 BRAC construction projects with a combined value of $1.4 billion. Eighteen
projects worth $256 million are on track to be awarded this year.
At the end of the fiscal year 2008, the Department has closed 43
percent of the BRAC 2005 properties slated for closure.
One success story I would like to highlight comes from New Orleans, which still struggles to recover from the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
We entered into a 75-year leasing agreement with the Algiers
Development District, ADD, in September of 2008. In exchange for
leasing 149 acres of Naval Support Activity New Orleans, the headquarters, Marine Forces Reserve, will receive approximately $150
million in new facilities. Demolition began recently, and we have
established temporary quarters for the commissary, so that the
military personnel, retirees and their families still have access to
the quality of life service during construction. We continue to work
with ADD to ensure this partnerships successful outcome.
Our remaining environmental liabilities for BRAC 2005 are substantially less than in prior rounds of BRAC. We have spent $148
million in cleanup through fiscal year 2008. We attribute this to
the relatively few numbers of closures, the absence of major industrial facilities and the extensive environmental work that the Department has accomplished over the past several decades.
Financially, we continue to control costs, keeping cost growth
down to a modest 2 to 212 percent per year.
Our overall execution rate is nearly 90 percent, a significant improvement over the same period last year, and further evidence of
the shift from planning to accelerated implementation.
We are also on track to obligate over 90 percent of our fiscal year
2009 funds by the end of September. We appreciate the efforts of
this committee, which contributed directly to our success by providing these funds early in the fiscal year.
Although we are on track to meet the statutory deadline, we do
face some challenges. Seven major construction projects require
complex site approvals and operational certifications from the DOD
Explosive Safety Board. And we also have correctional facilities
that require certification before occupancy. We are monitoring construction closely, so that the projects complete in time to conduct
the necessary certifications.
With respect to Legacy BRAC, the Department has achieved a
steady savings rate of approximately $2.7 billion per year since fiscal year 2002. At the end of fiscal year 2008, we disposed of 93 per-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00589
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
590
cent of our real properties slated for closure in the first four rounds
of BRAC.
Many factors play into developing a conveyance strategy, including environmental mitigation, indemnity and liability considerations and the financial capacity of recipients to manage or develop
the property. We have used a variety of disposal methods, including the Economic Development Conveyance, EDC, that was specifically created for BRAC properties.
We have conveyed 91 percent of Navy real property at no cost.
From the remaining 9 percent, we received over $1.1 billion in revenue through a variety of conveyance mechanisms, nearly all of it
since fiscal year 2003. Since then, we have used these funds to accelerate cleanup and finance the entire prior BRAC effort, including caretaker costs from fiscal year 2005 through fiscal year 2008.
Despite our success in using property sales to augment cleanup
and disposal and recover value for taxpayers, future revenues are
very limited. We resumed our request for appropriated funding last
year.
It is also our experience that EDCs do not necessarily spur economic redevelopment any faster than traditional conveyance methods. Some communities that receive no-cost EDCs during a more
robust economy have not developed the property, or have yet to realize the benefits of having property on the tax rolls.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify before this committee.
And we look forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of B.J. Penn follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00590
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00591
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
591
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00592
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
592
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00593
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
593
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00594
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
594
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00595
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
595
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00596
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
596
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00597
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
597
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00598
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
598
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00599
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
599
600
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Secretary Penn.
Secretary Ferguson, thank you again for being here to fill in for
Secretary Billings, who lost the pressure on his plane at 37,000 feet
on the way back to Washington last night.
We are glad you are here, and would like to recognize you now
for your testimony.
STATEMENT
OF
KATHLEEN I. FERGUSON
Ms. FERGUSON. Thank you. And he, again, sends his apologies for
not being here. He spent the last two days in San Antonio visiting
Fort Sam Houston and Lackland Air Force Base for all the BRAC
recommendations. So, he is going to come in with a fresh look on
the ground. And unfortunately, he was unable to make it this
morning.
Mr. EDWARDS. I understand. Thank you.
Ms. FERGUSON. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Wamp, members of the committee, thank you for this opportunity to provide an update on the
Air Forces efforts in support of Base Realignment and Closure and
our implementation progress to-date.
More than 42 months ago, the recommendations of the BRAC
2005 Commission were approved. Today, we find ourselves a mere
29 months away from reaching the commission-mandated completion date of September 15, 2011. While we still have much more
work to do, I am confident in informing the committee that the Air
Force BRAC implementation efforts are on track, on time and on
budget.
BRAC 2005 resulted in seven Air Force installation closures and
59 realignments affecting 122 installations. To achieve these closures and realignments, the Air Force must execute more than 410
separate implementation actions. This complex effort involves more
than just bricks and mortar. It includes military construction, operations and maintenance, environmental reviews, training and the
movement of people and things.
Mr. Billings written statement, which had previously been provided to the committee, outlines in detail two BRAC undertakings
in San Antonio which illustrate the complexity of the Air Force
BRAC program. I will not go into those today in the interest of
time, but these are the largest efforts the Air Force has undertaken
in the San Antonio area, with the TRICARE Management Activity
for SAMMC and or the MEtC. And I will be happy to talk about
those in more detail.
During past testimony, the Air Force has also stressed its strong
support of the BRAC 2005 Commission joint basing recommendations. I can tell you the Services and DOD have been working hard
to implement one of BRACs most transformational initiatives, and
are working through many complex issues to make joint basing
work.
The Air Force wants to personally thank Mr. Wayne Arny for his
leadership over the last year in guiding all the services in the implementation of the BRAC recommendations. We have made tremendous progress and are now in the process of reviewing and coordinating numerous implementation plan details and formal
memorandum of agreement for each joint base.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00600
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
601
The Air Force has a long and successful history of working towards common goals in a joint environment, and joint basing is no
different.
Mr. Chairman, the last item I would like to address is the BRAC
recommendation to bed down the Joint Strike Fighter, integrate a
joint training center at Eglin Air Force Base. The last 212 years
has demonstrated the use of BRAC to bed down a weapons system
still in development is very difficult.
In the case of the Joint Strike Fighter, the noise profile of the
aircraft was unknown at the time of the BRAC decision. And issues
identified through the National Environmental Policy Act process
required further study, which are now underway. The result of this
analysis will help us identify ways to operate the aircraft and mitigate the potential noise impacts on the community as we bed down
this important weapon system at Eglin.
At this time, Mr. Chairman, I will finish with a short execution
overview.
BRAC 2005 impacts more than 120 Air Force installations.
Whether establishing the F35, Joint Strike Fighter initial training
site at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida, closing Kulis Air Guard
Station in Alaska, or transferring Pope Air Force Base, North Carolina, to the Army, the Air Force community as a whole, Active,
Guard and Reserve, will benefit from the changes BRAC directed.
The Air Forces total BRAC budget is approximately $3.8 billion,
which the Air Force and DOD have fully funded. Our largest costs
are for military construction projects, totaling more than $2.6 billion.
Operations and maintenance expenditures are just over $900
million. And there are other BRAC expenses as well, which include
information technology, equipment procurement and Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard training, to name a few, at $142 million. Other BRAC program expenses include $136 million for military personnel expenses and environmental planning and cleanup.
The Air Forces primary focus in the 2010 program is in budget
areas other than Military Construction, because we are now focused on personnel-related issues, relocating assets and functions,
outfitting new and renovated facilities and procuring those endstate necessities, continuing environmental actions to realign and
integrate the total force.
Thousands of man-hours have been spent on planning, coordinating, meetings, visiting bases and executing the more than 410
actions we must implement to complete BRAC 2005, and we have
many more ahead. The good news is, Mr. Chairman, we will be
done no later than September 15th, and we will have executed our
program within budget.
This concludes my formal remarks, and I thank you and the committee for your time and opportunity to provide you this update.
And I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Kevin W. Billings follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00601
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00602
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
602
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00603
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
603
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00604
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
604
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00605
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
605
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00606
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
606
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00607
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
607
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00608
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
608
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00609
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
609
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00610
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
610
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00611
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
611
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00612
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
612
613
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Secretary Ferguson.
And thank you again, all.
For the record, your complete statements will be submitted and
made part of that record.
You each will begin with the 5-minute rule, and we will be able
to do multiple rounds here and cover a lot of the subjects. You will
begin with me.
You answered my first question. But for the record, each of you
is this correcteach of you has said that your respective service
will meet the BRAC time deadline. Is that correct?
Mr. EASTIN. Yes, sir.
Mr. PENN. Yes, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. So, that answers the follow-up question I
was going to ask.
Do any of you see any need to provide exemptions from BRAC
or extend the BRAC deadline?
Mr. EDWARDS. The answer would be no. For the record, all
have answered no.
COST ESTIMATES FOR BRAC
Let me ask this, then. In some ways, it is like fitting a size 12

foot into a size nine shoe. I know we have had challenges between
some of the original cost estimates for BRAC.
It seems that initially, we went from around $19 billion estimate
to about $31 or $32 billion. It seems like we have locked in on that
$32 billion figure for several years.
Could I ask each of you, has your respective service or Secretary
Arny, from your oversight position at DOD, have you seen projects,
or would it be possible to get a list of projects, that were either
pushed outside of the BRAC account or pushed outside of the future year defense plan timeline in order to make the BRAC numbers stay within the estimates of the last year or two?
Mr. ARNY. Let me
Mr. EDWARDS. Secretary Arny.
Mr. ARNY. Let me respond to that. I know of no projects that
were pushed out that were necessary for BRAC, that we may have
decided that a project was unnecessary for one reason or another,
and it is not out in the out years, so it was chopped completely.
The
Mr. EDWARDS. So, you say not necessary. There might have been
projects that perhaps our base commanders wanted or supported,
but maybe the Department decided it was not absolutely necessary?
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. As part of the BRAC
Mr. ARNY. I remember one in particular. There were a couple
that flashed through my mind. But one was the lack of communications between Crane and China Lake. We were supposed to build,
like, 40 weapons storage bunkers. And we, in Navywhen I was
in Navy at the timesent a tiger team out to every base to scrub
the recommendations, and found lots of errors.
In this case, the question was asked of Cranethey thought the
question was: How many bunkers do you have? And they said, 40something. And the real question that was being asked was: How
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00613
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
614
many do we need to build at China Lake for this function? And it
was five, or six or something.
And so, those, if you look back at the record, there were 40-something out of five or six.
So, we scrubbed. We had places where somebody wanted a dog
kennel. A dog kennel was not required. Somebody wanted tonot
that humans are frailbut somebody wanted to upgrade a police
station that did not require being upgraded. So, there were those
kinds of changes.
And I assume you will ask questions about COBRA. But our initial estimates were based off of COBRA, which is not as, you know,
as confirmed, not a budgeting tool.
And so, in the process of going from COBRA to actual budget
plans, I think we have stuck pretty close, because once we got
through that first year of planning, when we were actually putting
engineers on the ground, what are soil conditions? What exactly is
this building going to look like, and where is it going to sit? And
we got decent estimates.
And if you recall back then, inflation was going crazy at some of
our locations. Once we got a handle on that, then I think our cost
adjustments have been just pluses and minuses. And where there
have been increases or decreases, we have included them in the
budget. But relative toI think we are ataccording to my data,
we are at $33.2, relatively, billion. The changes have been minor
in the last couple of years.
LESSONS LEARNED
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. What I might, Secretary Arny, in my second round, is ask you about lessons learned. While you were not
in your present position when the BRAC process began, perhaps
I would be interested in following up on Mr. Wamps opening comments. I would like to find out what lessons you think we have
learned.
When you are doing a cost-benefit analysis and then making decisions based on that, obviously, there are serious implications if
the original costs were around $19 billion, then they jump up to
$32 billion. If you had the actual costs rather than the estimated
COBRA costs initially, a number of these decisions might have
been made differently, based on that additional
Mr. ARNY. I would love to, because I do not think they would
have, and I can explain why.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. I would welcome that in the second round.
Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. Well, we will have a lot of questions. Some we may
have to have you take with you and report back to us.
But start on the big picture, because the testimony we just heard
was all pretty positive, with a lot of forecasts that respective services were going to meet the September 15, 2011 schedule.
SURVEYS AND INVESTIGATIONS REPORT
But what I was talking about when I opened was the S&I report,
surveys and investigations here, that point to issues that may lead
to that not happening. Almost half of the 222 business plans have
varying degrees of risk of missing their deadline.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00614
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
615
Over half of the business plans have completion dates within the
final 2 weeks of the deadline, which obviously is very little margin
of error in terms of implementing a 212-year plan to meet those
deadlines. And therefore, S&I believes that it will not be as rosy
a picture on meeting those deadlines.
And frankly, if this were anything other than the United States
military sitting across the table having this versus what I just
heard, we would have a field day at ripping you apart. But in this
case, because the military has got an unbelievable record around
the world of meeting deadlines and doing things right, I just want
to know, is there any lack of continuity between what you are saying and what our investigators are telling us in terms of how tight
these schedules are?
It is probably yours, Secretary Arny?
Mr. ARNY. Yes, I would love to take a look at specific examples,
whichyou point to one thing that we often miss in this BRAC
2005 process, is that in this process, we had business plans. In
prior BRAC rounds, we had no business plans. It was just turned
over to the services, and they executed.
So, there was no way for anybody to go in and track progress or
by certain deadlines that we have now. And I can tell, having been
on the Navy side, the process is painful, because you have got to
lay down lots of requirements. And I and my current associates
were in different positions and warred often over those business
plans.
We would have liked to have started earlier, once BRAC 2005
hit. But we had extensive NEPA requirements to complete.
So, in earlier rounds, we just went in. There was no DoD budget
for it. Services just did it. As you heard earlier, we had less
MILCON.
And if you recall in the earlier rounds, the military was coming
down, tremendous sizes. So we were just eliminating whole units,
so that BRAC in many ways from the force movement was a lot
easier than this round.
You had rather large movements of people. And itlet me get
back to your question. A lot of these are at thewe would have
rather had them earlier, but because of our NEPA constraints and
our planning constraints, we could not.
We still believe we will make those deadlines. And I am constantly pushing the services and their chief engineers to get this
stuff done earlier. And now that they are on a roll, I think a lot
of those deadlines will come a little bit earlier.
Mr. WAMP. And for our purpose, the conclusion of this report
says, the unanimous view of BRAC program managers said that receiving fiscal year 2010 funds on time is going to be critical, if
many project deadlines are going to be met.
Obviously, last year we were working really hard, and the chairman did a great job of getting this bill done. But obviously, the flow
of funds is going to be key to any of these goals being met.
You cannot throw a schedule off 1 week, if over half of your business plans call for completion in the final 2 weeks without missing
your deadlines. And they do not need to be arbitrary when you are
trying to carry out a mission that other people are making plans
on.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00615
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
616
Mr. ARNY. Well, we do really appreciate the fact that this committee, especially, got this bill out. You are one of only two, if I recall. Right?
Mr. WAMP. Right. I do not know if we are making a habit of it.
[Laughter.]
My time is about up, so I will come back to the other questions
later. But
Mr. EDWARDS. Could I ask just
Mr. WAMP. Sure.
FIXED DEADLINE
Mr. EDWARDS. Just for the record, I would like to hear your answer to Mr. Wamps question about what are the consequences if
this bill is passed after the October 1 deadline? Would there be
any?
Mr. ARNY. It really affects this, because we have such a fixed
deadline. In fact, it affects all of our military construction. You will
not believe internally what hoops we jump through when we do not
get the money until October, November, December, January.
As you have seen in some years, it has come very late. And we
are borrowing money from other projects and really doing allexpending all sorts of effort. And some things cannot get started.
I think, fortunately, most of our stuff is started, so even with a
continuing resolution, we would be okay. But it will hurt us. It will
make life very difficult.
Mr. EDWARDS. Would it make itI do not want to put words in
your mouth.
Mr. ARNY. It is not impossible.
Mr. EDWARDS. Could it make it difficult, if not impossible, to finish a number of the key projects by the BRAC deadline, if you do
not get your funding
Mr. ARNY. Depending on how late. Frankly, because of the last
in my experience in this period of time as opposed to when I was
doing this in the 1980s, we tendbecause of the experience that
we have had, we tend to put cushions in there, so that if the bill
does not show up on the 1st of OctoberI mean, there are very few
of us at the table who remember the 1976 T, fiscal year 1976 T as
a transition year, when we went from one July to one October, so
that we could allit did not, you know.
So, we do putwe do put a cushion in there. So, depending on
how late, if it is just a week or two, we mightit might not be a
problem. But much later than that, it will be a problem.
Mr. WAMP. Well, just one other quick question.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Wamp, for any additional questions
Mr. WAMP. Thank you. That was very good.
Just one other quick thing on this round, and that is, the
takeaway point from the morning here, obviously, that was one of
them, for sure. Getting the money on time is huge. Is there another
one, a big takeaway point for this morning for this committee?
From any of you?
Mr. ARNY. I think
Mr. WAMP. Things we have got to get across?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00616
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
617
Mr. ARNY. Stay the course. Yes, just stay the course. And we do
not believe we need an extension at all. And that helps us keep it
all in a box.
Mr. WAMP. Got to have a deadline.
Mr. ARNY. Yes, sir.
Mr. WAMP. I will wait for the rest. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Farr.
Mr. FARR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for having this
hearing.
FORT ORD
Congress is synonymous with BRAC for me. I arrived with a base

closure at Fort Ord, 28,000 acres, probably the largest base ever
closed. And I think I have spent every single day in the last 15
years in Congress dealing with that closure.
Where deadlines are concerned on legacy bases, the Army never
met any of them. So, it will be interesting to see if DoD meets
deadlines in this round.
I have some questions for Secretary Eastin in regards to the
cleanup issues at Fort Ord, specifically the ESCA payment that we
agreed to and the contract we made for cleanup. That last payment
to FORA, which is the approximately $40 million, when will that
be made? And will it be in full?
Mr. EASTIN. It was my understanding that it is complete. If that
is not correct, I will get back to you.
Mr. FARR. It is? All right.
Mr. EASTIN. And I am happy to report that one.
Mr. FARR. So, the money is there.
Mr. EASTIN. There. It is out the door.
Mr. FARR. Has the Army finalized its cleanup protocols with
BLM on how the BLM land is to be cleaned? When I heard about
it last summer there were still about a half a dozen outstanding
issues between Army and BLM.
Mr. EASTIN. We are working through a couple other minor
issues, but we are still, as you are well aware, constrained by the
800acre-a-year burn that we are going to have on that land to
clean up with the UXO out there.
Mr. FARR. Can you give me a copy of the agreement, the latest
one?
Mr. EASTIN. Yes, I will get that to you.
Mr. FARR. Also, have you gotten into the cost of that cleanup?
Are any of those funds set aside?
Mr. EASTIN. I really have not done thewe expense something
like $250 million a year on cleanups. And to the extent that this
programs, there will be funds for it.
Mr. FARR. Well, that is the question. Is it
Mr. EASTIN. The 800 acres a year for burning is the limiting factor.
Mr. FARR. Has the Army set aside some money for that cleanup?
Mr. EASTIN. Yes.
Mr. FARR. Can we get that detail?
Mr. EASTIN. I am going to get you those details as well.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00617
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
618
The Army provided the final installment of $40 million on the Fort Ord Environmental Services Cooperative Agreement (ESCA) to the Fort Ord Reuse Authority on
December 17, 2008.
There is no formal agreement between the Army and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). BLMs final comments and the Armys response to comment are documented in the Fort Ord Track 3 munitions and explosives of concern Record of Decision that was completed on May 27, 2008.
Funding to continue cleanup of the range areas on Fort Ord will be included in
the fiscal year 2010 budget request.
Mr. FARR. Thank you. Thank you for your service.

Mr. EASTIN. My pleasure.
Mr. FARR. With your retirement, we are going to miss you.
Mr. ARNY. Dont congratulate him too much.
Mr. EASTIN. No, I
[Laughter.]
Mr. ARNY. Keith may be
Mr. EASTIN. I brought my Fort Ord map here with me. [Laughter.]
And it is duly annotated from last year.
TREASURE ISLAND
Mr. FARR. Mr. Penn, I would like to raise a couple of questions

regarding the conveyance of Treasure Island in the San Francisco
area.
I understand the City of San Francisco put aside $700 million
and the developers have put up $500 million for infrastructure improvements at Treasure Island, and the city has offered the Navy
a 5050 profit sharing for revenues from the development.
With this kind of offer, why hasnt the property been transferred?
Mr. PENN. We estimated the property at $250 million. And that
was substantiated by GSA. And the city has only offered us, I think
$17.5 million for it.
Mr. FARR. The purpose of this property is to do economic development, is it not?
Mr. PENN. But they are not going to be doing economic development the way we see it. The houses are already there and just
there will be no business, which is required for the EDC.
Mr. FARR. Who determines that?
Mr. PENN. The courts will. We push back on it. The courts will
determine if it will, in fact, meet the requirements for the creation
of jobs.
Treasure Island has houses. And the jobsthey want to make it
into a
Mr. FARR. When the service pulls out, it is the responsibility of
the local government to create a reuse plan, not the Navy to tell
the locals how to use it.
The local government
Mr. PENN. Given the land for nothing. We have certain requirements, as you well know, sir.
Mr. FARR. Well, you have a
Mr. PENN. With a no-cost EDC, right.
INFRASTRUCTURE
Mr. FARR. Yes. But that is not what my question is. There is a
plan of what, about $1.2 billion. This has been promised to do in-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00618
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
619
frastructure; that will provide jobs, and the city is offering a 50
50 profit sharing revenue. What problem is 5050? That is pretty
good.
Mr. ARNY. If I recall thatexcuse me, because I was working for
Mr. Penn doing thisthat 5050 is at the tail end after all the
other people have beenwe are notthe Department is not averse
at all to profit-sharing participation. But the profit sharing at T.I.,
the last time I checked itI do not know if it was changedis at
the very tail end, after everybody else gets something.
Mr. PENN. After the developer and everyone else has their profit
Mr. FARR. But you transferred all of Fort Ord without those conditions as
Mr. ARNY. Because there was an economic development for jobs.
Mr. FARR. Right.
Mr. ARNY. And that means permanent jobs for
Mr. FARR. Well, I would argue, the permanancy of those Fort Ord
jobs is questionable.
Mr. ARNY. Well, the plan
Mr. FARR [continuing]. Anyway.
Mr. ARNY. T.I. has gone through nine separate plans. And we
have always been openthe Department and the Navy, when I
was working thereto a no-cost EDC. We argued that, do a cost
EDC. If it works out to be no cost, it is fine. But to do an EDC,
which we are still doing lots of them, it requires permanent jobs.
And housing components are not part of that.
Mr. FARR. Yes, but the issue is the economics. Right now you estimate the value of the land at $250 million. But paying that kind
of money precludes building in public benefits. You cannot do it.
You cannot do the low-income housing. You cannot do the setasides for parks
Mr. ARNY. Oh, yes, sir.
I would argue you can, because we include that in the value. If
you are doing public benefit conveyances, those come at no cost. If
there are parks as part of the development, we based it onwe
based the cost estimatethe appraisal, I am sorrythe appraisal
strictly on what the city provided as the use, because we do not
control the use of the property. It is the zoning authority that controls the use of the property.
Mr. FARR. Well, I argue it would make a good EDC.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Sam.
Judge Carter.
Mr. CARTER. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. And thank each of you. It
is good to see many of you again.
BRAC COMMUNITIES
There are some GAO studies that show that some of the communities are located near the facilities that are gaining troups, are not
on track for the construction of schools, housing and infrastructure
required to accommodate arriving soldiers and their families.
Considering that Secretary Gates has indicated that he intends
to move many of the quality-of-life programs to the base budget,
which have been funded through supplementals, how are the Services assessing whether all those services, other than BRAC head-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00619
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
620
quarters and motor pools, will be in place, by September 15th of

2011?
Are the communities going to be ready?
Mr. ARNY. Well, sir, in many cases, it depends on the community.
If they have had plenty of notice, we are workingthe Office of
Economic Adjustment, which works for mehas been providing
loansor not loans, I am sorry, grantsto all the communities surrounding these gaining bases, so that they can go through the planning process, not only for BRAC closure, but for an openingI am
sorry, for where BRAC is increasing the number of people there.
And I know they are wrestling with some of these situations. I
do not know of a particular one. If you have got some particular
one, I would love to be able to go back and research that for you.
Mr. CARTER. I have heard knowledge that the communities are
struggling at Bliss and at Carson, and I have spoken with some of
the members of Congress, and they do indicate that some of the
school districts are struggling to try to meet these issues.
We have always had an issue about military construction money
going to building schools, at least as far as the fort that I represent
is concerned. We have had that issue, actual brick-and-mortar
schools. I am just curious as to where we thought they were as far
as the quality of life for our soldiers. Because that is what it is all
about. We want them to come back home to a place where families
can live.
Mr. ARNY. I believe that, with some exceptions, that we are in
decent shape, but I will get back to you on particulars on that.
Working with the Economic Adjustment Committee (EAC), established under Executive Order 12788, as amended, to support the Defense Economic Adjustment Program, senior leaders from Office of Economic Adjustment, Office of the Deputy
Under Secretary of Defense (Military Community & Family Policy), Army Headquarters, and U.S. Department of Education completed six site visits to a representative sample of mission-growth locations (Fort Benning, Fort Bliss, Fort Bragg, Fort
Carson, Fort Drum, and Fort Riley) to better understand the specific education
issues arising from mission growth; improve communication across cognizant Federal sources of assistance; and identify gaps and/or lags in capacities to respond.
Site visit findings and observations were completed and shared with the cognizant
Federal agencies, Executive Offices of the President, Congress states, locals and
local educational agencies and are posted at www.OEA.gov. The following represents
some of the issues discussed:
School capacity. Some local educational agencies (LEAs) will face challenges
providing facilities to accommodate student growth.
Consistent growth estimates. Communities and stakeholders would benefit from
more consistent growth estimates from the Department of Defense.
Deployment impacts. Some LEAs and the supporting communities face challenges to assist dependents of deployed military personnel.
Reciprocity, recruitment, and other soft costs. Curriculum requirements and
assessment levels vary from one state to another, presenting challenges to transferring military dependent students which often impact grade advancement, extra-curricular activities, and graduation. Furthermore, teacher certification requirements
vary, impacting spousal employment.
Improve communications with military parents. Communications and outreach
about educational resources could be improved, especially to military parents living
off post.
Special education. Some locations appear to be receiving a higher than expected
number of children with special education needs, which can generate unexpected demands for credentialed teachers, and higher than anticipated operating and facility
costs.
Regional planning capacity. Some areas would benefit from additional resources
dedicated to building regional responses to education growth challenges.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00620
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
621
Mr. CARTER. I think it is important.
Mr. ARNY. I agree.
Mr. CARTER. I realize you have a deadline. You cut yourself 2
weeks slack. That is fair. Let us hope you make it. But the world
has to also function to make life good for these soldiers. And it is
to some extent our responsibility to make sure it is moving along.
I am very proud of what the communities around my fort have
done in staying ahead of the game on school infrastructure. But it
is not that way everywhere.
I think, in the way we view the Army today, that the families
fight the wars, that we have got to be sure that we have got those
people. If they are not moving in that direction, we need to be
building fires under them.
Mr. ARNY. Well, we haveand I go back to my Navy experience,
which was more on the ground. When we were doing housing,
privatized housing at our bases, in most of our bases where we
needed more schools, we could not build the school legally, but we
could provide land, which we did, in the local school board.
And on some of our bigger bases like Camp Pendleton, we actually have the schools on the base, provided by the local community.
In one BRAC community inI mean, not BRAC, but housing in,
I believe it was Camp Lejeune, we actually built the school, but
that is because the schools on base are DODEA schools, so that a
housing privatization project actually built the school. So there are
some problems with local laws, too, as well.
Mr. CARTER. I would like to ask another question, if I have time,
Mr. Chairman.
Mr. EDWARDS. You do. You have another minute.
BRIGADE COMBAT TEAMS
Mr. CARTER. General Helmick said that he would like to retain

at least four BCTs in Europe for the purpose of meeting NATO obligations. However, the Armys plan called for drawing down two
BCTs in Europe, and one IBCT in Korea. Secretary Gates made an
announcement to cancel the activation of three of the Grow the
Army BCTs.
Can you talk about the long-term future attempt for overseas
forces and plans to ensure adequate infrastructure will be available
for them?
Mr. ARNY. Well, I will let Mr. Eastin talk to the BCTs, but I
would like to follow on, too.
Mr. EASTIN. Yes, we have not made a decision on where those
BCTs might be drawn from. But one thing that needs to be kept
in mind here, we are not talking about drawing down the size of
the Army. How it is organized, whether a BCT is there or not
there, people, soldiers are still there. So they may be in different
units.
But drawing down a formal BCT is not going to draw down the
number of soldiers, nor the number of soldiers we program for and
their families. So, thosethe support for them will be there.
Mr. ARNY. Let me go on to talk about planning. First of all, we
are starting up a Quadrennial Defense Review. And that, I am fairly sure, will be one of the major questions asked.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00621
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
622
Also, from my shop, we have been looking around at the major
combatant commands. And we are going to institute combatant
command infrastructure master plans, which we will sit down, for
instance, in European Command, with the EUCOM commander,
with the Army, Navy and Air Force and Marine Corps, whoever is
there, and the undersecretary for policy staff, and we will sit down,
and we will create an infrastructure master plan, based off the
QDR, because we do not want to make decisions based on policy,
to find that people do not have barracks to go to, or the base was
closed last year, or we need to open a new base.
So that we have a master plan that is updated periodically in
every region of the country. We do not have as formalized a process
right now as we need to for the infrastructure. And we want to institute that.
Mr. Bishop.
Let me thank all of you for your service. Particularly let me
thank Secretary Eastin, who I understand will be ending his service very shortly.
BRAC COMMUNITIES
I want to follow up on the line of questioning that Mr. Carter

was asking, particularly about BRAC communities that will be
upsizing.
I would like to address these specifically to Secretary Eastin and
Mr. Arny.
Secretary Eastin, according to a letter that I got from you on
April 7th of this year, you were projecting approximately 3,535 net
new school-aged children as a result of the BRAC personnel
changes at Fort Benning, which is considerably lower than was anticipated, given the local school systems in the area projecting
6,840 new children.
And in the Fort Benning area, you are talking about eight school
systems, four of which are on the Georgia side of the Chattahoochee River, Fort Benning, and three of which are on the Alabama
side, for a total of eight school systems.
Fort Sill in Oklahoma is projecting 2,349 new students, Fort
Bliss, 18,229, and Fort Bragg, 6,674. These are local school system
projections. And I know that Fort Bennings projections are based
upon collaboration with the Fort Benning authorities, as well as
the local school districts.
But your estimate is considerably lower than that, which causes
a great deal of concern, particularly from Mr. Arnys testimony,
with regard to the Office of Economic Adjustment, which really has
responsibility for making these communities able to accommodate
the DOD changes, particularly with school construction.
What can we do? It seems as if the responsibility here is almost
a matter of finger-pointing from one agency to another.
In your testimony, Mr. Arny, you indicate that you will be looking toward the Transportation, Commerce, Education and Agriculture Departments for help. But somebody has to bite the bullet.
And it seems as if the Department of Defense has a moral responsibility to these communities, to help them accommodate the needs
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00622
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
623
of our warfighters and their families when it comes to school construction.
And if we expect, for example, in the Fort Benning area, 6,680
or 640 new students, it would be a disservice to them and to their
warfighter parents for us not to have those communities ready with
schools in place.
I understand you have a conference set for the fall to discuss
some of these issues, but we have been talking about it for about
3 or 4 years in this subcommittee. In fact, I think in the authorization conference report, there was actually language authorizing
some additional funds to do the planning on that. But you have not
requested those additional funds in your budget submission for this
year.
So, I am very frustrated. And the communities that are being
upsized are very frustrated. We would like some concrete action
and some specifics on how we are going to fund the schools. Many
of these will be off-base, and we need some help. And these communities are really almost at panic mode, particularly given the current economic environment.
One, we need to get some kind of synchronization on the numbers. And two, we must decide how this is going to be paid for. I
know the Office of Economic Adjustment did build schools when
Kings Bay was constructed off the coast of Georgia. And they did
schools and housing, as you indicate.
But it seems to me that this is a much bigger problem than the
Department of Defense is recognizing. It needs to be dealt with
sooner rather than later.
Can I get a response on that?
Mr. EASTIN. Let me talk to the number problem, as we remember
from last year at this time, talking numbers.
Our formula, which is basically 0.4 child per family, which has
been around the department for many, many years, that was used
as a basis to start with how many children would be generated by
the increase in the size at Benning.
Then the senior mission commander at the time sat down with
the local community. And that is where the roughly 3,500 number
came from, is taking our standard procedure for figuring out how
many children are going to be there, and then fine-tuning it and
getting down to the aegis of how many are expected here, how
large are these family sizes, how many single soldiers are going to
come, this sort of thing.
But it was my understanding that there had been an agreement
with the local community.
Mr. BISHOP. Right. The agreement that we got was the 6,839 figure: 2,771 school-aged military, 1,096 government civilians, and
2,972 children of contractors. Those are the figures that both the
local base people and the eight local school systems agreed upon.
But, of course, when we sought to verify that we were both using
the same figures, you came back with a much lower figure.
My question is, with Fort Bliss and Fort Sill and Fort Bragg, are
those figures low-balled also?
Mr. EASTIN. I do not think any of these are low-balled, to be honest with you. What we are trying to do here is to arrive at a number. Because these kids are our kids.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00623
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
624
Mr. BISHOP. Exactly.
Mr. EASTIN. And we want to make sure they get educated.
The larger problem is, how do you pay for that?
Mr. BISHOP. That is the question I am asking.
Mr. EASTIN [continuing]. If it is 20,000 out there.
I do note from the New York Times this morning, which I read
occasionally, that you are going to get about 10,000 new from a Kia
plant. And everybody is happy as a clam about that. But I do not
know what the arrangements are for Kia to pay for their kids.
But these are, in large part
Mr. BISHOP. But
Mr. EASTIN [continuing]. They live on the economy and pay
Mr. BISHOP. Yes, it is a little bit distant from Fort Benning.
[Laughter.]
Mr. EASTIN. But no, in all seriousness, schools traditionally have
been the responsibility of the local community and supported by
the tax base.
IMPACT AID
Mr. BISHOP. We understand that. The Impact Aid program was

added to ameliorate that but has been always underfunded. And it
does not deal with a problem the size that is created by these
BRAC upsizings.
Mr. EDWARDS. I want to stick to the 5minute rule. But let me
add that we all know this is a significant issue, and we have been
kicking this around for a couple of years. We have not seen really
any change in policy from the Department of Defense.
But it seems to me the problem is, they get Impact Aid, Part A,
Part B money after the kids are in school, but no help with construction money up front. And there ought to be some way for us
to deal with that, even though Impact Aid is the jurisdiction of the
Health and Human Services Committee, there are military kids. If
a classroom goes from 20 kids to 40 kids, because of BRAC, then
that is affecting military families, many of whom are serving in
Iraq
Mr. BISHOP. Mr. Chairman, may I just add to that? You have
three subcommittees of Appropriations that have to address this.
You have defense, you have MILCON, and you have the education
subcommittees, all of whichwell, I should say none of which provides adequate funds to deal with a problem of this magnitude.
Mr. EDWARDS. Maybe we need to get all three. That may be part
of the problem. Maybe we need to get all three subcommittees together and talk about that.
LetI have
Mr. ARNY. I would like to make just one comment.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Mr. ARNY. We have tried very hard within the legal limits that
we have to help the communities plan and provide for these
schools. Seventy-five percent of our folks live off base.
So, when that increases their tax baseand I understand they
do not have the construction money up front, so they are coming
with a tax, you know, contribution. Even if they are renting, they
are going to rent a house where somebody is paying taxes. And in
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00624
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
625
some cases, like I said, we have actually offered land for nothing,
so that people could build schools on the bases.
The only one I know of that we have built was a DODEA school,
so I would have to check on the others.
Mr. EDWARDS. Well, let us continue on in a second round. I want
to let everybody have a chance to finish the first round. But this,
by cutting this off, I do not want to suggest I am not really concerned about this. I think we do have to deal with this issue somehow.
Mr. Salazar.
Mr. SALAZAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do not have any questions. I just wanted to commend all of you for all your hard work,
and especially, Secretary Eastin, on your retirement. I look forward
to continuing working with you in the future, especially on the
issue of Pinon Canyon. [Laughter.]
That seems to be a sore spot around here.
But I have enjoyed working with you, and God speed and take
care.
Mr. EASTIN. Likewise, and thank you.
Mr. SALAZAR. And I yield back.
Mr. Berry, thank you for being here. I think Mr. Berry indicated
he did not have any questions on this round.
LESSONS LEARNED
To begin the second round, let me go back, Secretary Arny, if I

could, to the question of lessons learned. You make decisions based
on a cost-benefit analysis. It turns out, according to GAO, that the
savings benefits have been maybe significantly overestimated, and,
obviously, the costs were underestimated. And unless cost-benefit
was not used in BRACand I assume it wasyou know, that
could significantly change decisions.
If you underestimate the cost of your decisions by $11 or $12 billion, and you overestimate the savings by $1 billion, you can argue
these changes on a policy basis. But I think, you know, administrations, Democratic and Republican alike, have argued BRAC recommendations based on costs and savings.
Could you give me your sense of the lessons learned? And do we
have any lessons that can help us accurately estimate both the savings and the costs, those factors, if there are any, with your backgrounds?
Mr. ARNY. I think, and I go back to, from Texas, the congressman, retired, who started thisclaims to have help started
Mr. EDWARDS. Dick Armey.
Mr. ARNY. Yes, Dick Armey.
Mr. EDWARDS. Who did
Mr. ARNY. Yes.
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Play a key role in initiating BRAC.
Mr. ARNY. Because I remember from before BRAC, when Admiral Zumwalt in the 1960s closed a bunch of bases. And that was
the last time we were able to close any bases. And we were going
from a 1,000ship Navy to 600 at the time. And in the last, we
have gone down to 300.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00625
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
626
What we found is, one of the hidden secrets of BRAC is it makes
the initial NEPA decision for you. Prior to BRAC, we could not
close a base, because when we decided to close a base, we would
go into NEPA, we would get suedlawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit. So, we were carrying lots of excess capacity that we did not
need.
So, the BRAC process has been very successful in allowing us to
make military decisions on capability. And I would emphasize that,
that the primary goal is military value.
Now, we do get lots of savings, and there are costs in that process. We believe that part of the problem with the costs being less
in the initial years is that we estimated the movements, and the
construction would begin earlier, so we have delayed some of the
savings.
We still believeand I do not have the numbers at the tip of my
tonguethere will be significant annual savings that will remain,
because of the decisions being made.
Mr. EDWARDS. Are you updating that? Is it
Mr. ARNY. Yes, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. You are always updating those numbers?
Mr. ARNY. We do. We do.
Mr. EDWARDS. When you have those and you are comfortable
with those numbers, could you provide that to the committee?
Mr. ARNY. We will.
COBRA
Mr. ARNY. As far as the initial estimates, people wentI mean,

not very many people understand the COBRA model. They believe
it to be the ultimate model when they go to it, and so the COBRA
model says $10. Therefore, it is $10.
And frankly, I did myself until you start digging into it. But once
you start digging into it, the COBRA model is very, very useful
comparing apples to apples, because you are making assumptions
on building size off of a model, and you are comparing it to another
installation doing the same sort of things. So it is very good at
helping you make relative decisions between do I do option A, B
or C.
But it is not very good at estimating long term the cost of a particular building, because it does not look atfirst of all, you freeze
inflation, so it does not discuss inflation at all. And by the time we
got to executing BRAC, the numbers that were in COBRA were 3
years old. So you already had 3 years of inflation on top of what
COBRA was saying.
Mr. EDWARDS. COBRA assumes no inflation?
Mr. ARNY. That is right. It
Mr. EDWARDS. That should be one lesson learned.
Mr. ARNY. Well, not for comparison. It looks at constant dollars.
So you are making a comparison, do I pick this or this, would I say,
because then, once you let inflation go, you are going to inflate all
of your estimates. Okay?
But once you have made that decision, the problem we have is,
then, okay, your costs have gone up here. You have forgotten about
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00626
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
627
option B and C, because you did not pick those. So the costs would
have gone up probably the same percentage on B and C.
Mr. EDWARDS. Unless you had a facility where you already had
the present buildings providing the structures for the services. And
instead of keeping those services at that installation, you decide to
move them somewhere else.
Mr. ARNY. Well, we
Mr. EDWARDS. And in that case, inflation is a real factor.
Mr. ARNY. Well, but we alsoyou also compare some of the decisions were made. We were going to renovate. We do look at renovation versusas compared with new construction. We do compare
those.
So, the other thing we did in this BRAC is, after the decisions
were made, we also added things on, especially in the Army and
especially for medical. We added a bunch of stuff to the BRAC that
were not really part of the initial decision. We wrapped in some
major force moves, the people coming in and out of Europe, that
were not part of BRAC 2005, because the BRAC process is continentalor not continentalthe 50 states only and the territories.
It is only the United States.
So, the costs went up, and I can give you a comparison of where
all theywe know, because of our business plan process, where all
those costs came from. Some was inflation, and a lot of it, a huge
part of it was adding stuff to the mix that really was not part of
BRAC 2005, because it was stuff coming from Europe into the
United States, so it was not really part of that whole BRAC 2005.
Mr. EDWARDS. In a way, if we were going back to determine lessons learned, is there a way to differentiate extra costs that were
because of other decisions on global repositioning
Mr. ARNY. Yes.
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Such as costs
Mr. ARNY. I have got those numbers here.
Mr. EDWARDS. Because otherwise, there is no accountability. You
just say, well, there were factors that came into playso what? We
had a $12 billion more expensive program than we had intended.
And certainly it has an impact on presidential budgets that are
presented for 5 years. So, I hope we would notand I do not think
you didunderestimate the importance of trying to build in realistic assumptions.
Mr. ARNY. That was some of the initial escalations right away.
And I was involved in it, because I did notI was not involved in
the run-up to BRAC. I got it after the decisions were made. And
we were having to escalate tremendously, based on not only just
normal inflation over 3 years, but if you recall, we in the Navy
were looking at, you know, after Hurricane Katrina and things like
that. So, we had some significant
Mr. EDWARDS. I will conclude with this, because I am over my
timebut we ought to assume in future models that there are unpredictable factors. We want to get an honest estimate of what the
real costs of a BRAC round would be, or building new installations
would be. We ought to build those factors in.
It is kind of like the federal government assuming there will
never be another hurricane, there will never be another war, there
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00627
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
628
will never be another tornado. Therefore, this is what our budget
is. Doesnt it look balanced?
Mr. ARNY. We have documented this one better than we have the
previous rounds. But I would argue, human nature, when you are
dealing with press headlines, we will do that, if we have another
round. Say, look, we are looking at COBRA numbers. You have got
to understand those are going to be different than real numbers.
But sometimes that gets lost in the initial onslaught of data.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right. Right. Thank you.
Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I think I have this round and then
one more round, just so you will know this side.
My experience is that three groups of people typically do not
admit their mistakes or liabilities: men, women and children.
[Laughter.]
Mr. EDWARDS. Not necessarily in that order.
Mr. WAMP. Right. And the fourth might be witnesses before hearings over the last 15 years that I have been here.
BRAC MONEY
But with that said, we talked earlier about lessons learned. Are
there more efficient ways that BRAC money is spent and less efficient ways? Is there anything to acknowledge what really, really
works, where we get the most bang for our buck on these investments in BRAC? Is there anything that really needs to be improved?
Mr. ARNY. Frankly, I am very satisfied with the process, the way
it is going. And there are not a lot of savings now, but one elementand we will talk about thatthat I think over the long term
will be efficiencies that will produce savingsyou cannot estimate
them nowand that is Joint Basing.
We areI mean, I grew up in the service, not as a kid, but from
the Naval Academy on, and did not realize until I was doing Joint
Basing how stuck we are in our own cultures. All right?
The Navy, in which I have the most experience, back in the
1960s, 1970s, 1980s, when I was in the service as a fighter pilot,
you never noticed who ran the base. It was just always there.
But each base was being run by its major claimant, its major
command. The Naval Air Systems Command ran PAX River where
I was stationed. Commander of Naval Air Forces Pacific ran
Miramar. Air Land ranwell, there were huge inefficiencies.
So, the services have begun to consolidate management as we get
smarter at it, so that you have the commander of Naval Installations Command. And you find huge inequities in howI mean, I
remember one with Congressman Dicks where we were doing firefighting differently all over the country.
Now that we are bringing these bases together, I have gotten up
in front of these Joint Base groups and said, look, you guys have
got to get out of your light blue-dark blue suit mentality. If somebody is driving up the Jersey Turnpike and they look at, they see
McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, they are going to look at it and say, oh,
it is all run as one DoD base. Well, it is not.
And so, including them together, bringing them together, we
have done somewe have made enormous progress, because we
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00628
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
629
now have common output levels of service that we are doing in
these jointwhere the services all agree that we are going toyou
know, you are going to have X amount of guard dogs per number
of people.
And we have developed joint groups at my level and below,
where we iron these things out, and we have, you know, at
McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, there will be an Air Force colonel as the
commanding officer, an Army colonel as the vice commander and
a Navy captain as the head of installation, the local installation
management. So we have brought all three services together, and
we are doing it all around.
It is much more difficult than I would have ever imagined, but
I think it will produce tremendous results for the country.
Mr. WAMP. She smiled down at the end of the table, because I
think the Air Force was the last one to come along with this new
vision.
Mr. Penn, you had a question?
Mr. PENN. One of the things we started doing, sir, was we created tiger teams to go out look at specific projects. I think you created that. And we found additional savings there, just by going out
and putting the individual eyes on and scrubbing.
Mr. WAMP. I have been at Hickam and Elmendorf, where this
was very much discussed, joint basing.
Mr. ARNY. Really?
Mr. WAMP. Yes, especially Hickam.
Let me ask, though, if there is a savings of an asset, and you say,
through joint basing we actually do not need this or that, is it disposed of like a BRAC site with the GSA disposal process, I think
is what they call it, or dispensation process?
Mr. ARNY. We have theunder BRAC, the GSA authorities are
transferred to the Department of Defense, so we can justwe have
read the law. If any base, gaining or joint, where there is excess
property, it can be disposed of under BRAC, or it can be disposed
of regularly.
Mr. WAMP. Yes.
Mr. ARNY. What we have found, thoughcoming to Hickam,
Pearl Harbor-Hickamis probably the toughest thing to make people realize is, what we were doing was, we were making the installation management of the base joint. The mission was still Air
Force or Navy.
Mr. WAMP. Right.
BRAC CLEANUP
Now, I have other questions about how this process works, because is there any differentiation between the cleanup responsibilities of a site that is in BRAC 2005, than any other site that happens to be BRACed along the way
Mr. ARNY. No, absolutely not.
Mr. WAMP. All the same.
Mr. ARNY. All the same.
Now, what is interesting is, especially since I was doing BRAC
cleanup for Mr. Penn before, when we looked at the bases in BRAC
2005, I mean, the total for Navy, total cost to complete on the
cleanup, wasI think it was like $150 million for all the bases, in-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00629
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
630
cluding two that dropped off that were industrial, Portsmouth and
the sub base, New London.
Now, we might have found some more. When you put shovels in
the ground you always do. But the cost was, say, less than $200
million for all those bases.
I mean, we have bases at Hunters Point, for one, which has more
than $200 million, and we will have probably spent we are done
$1 billion cleaning that base up.
So, what do I attribute it to? Well, in the early rounds, which
started in the 1980s, we had not done a lot of cleanup nationwide,
as a nation or as a military. And since that time, we have done a
heck of a lot of cleanup.
I mean, Albany, Georgia, when wewhen that was ready to dispose of, we had just finished cleaning up the gas station. Gas stations are typical on the bases for having problems. And so, Albany
is completely clean, all doneor remedy is in place.
So, the answer to your question is yes. The cleanup is nothe
requirements are no different, whether it is an active basewell,
there is some requirement that we do not have to comply with an
active base. But for closed bases, no matter what round it is, we
have to still comply with state and federal law.
Mr. WAMP. That is it for this round, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. EDWARDS. Can I quickly follow up and ask, have we updated
our models of estimating what cleanup costs are, so that we will
be more realistic in
Mr. ARNY. Yes, and
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Future decisions?
Mr. ARNY. We do not base them on models, interestingly. We
base them on signed affidavits, basically, from our RECs, our
what is RECs?
Ms. EDWARDS. Environmental coordinators
Mr. ARNY. Yes, the environmental coordinators on the bases have
to sign.
We go through a lengthy process with EPA. And we sit down and
we do discovery, basically. We use overhead photographs in many
cases to try and find locations. We test them. We identify sites.
And then the RECs, based on their experience and that of their
contractors, estimate the cost. And that costcost to complete.
What will it take to clean up this process?
We then go and aggregate those and report them annuallyI
think annually, or semiannuallyto Congress.
Now, what is interesting on some of our bases out West, the
team was doing that. And they were concerned that each year the
cost to complete would increase, if you open a shovel up.
And thisthe cleanup contracts were all done competitively. But
they went out and recompeted it, and got the costs down. You
knowSix Sigma.
So, we are constantly wrestling with, what is the cost to complete
on our FUD sites, our active sites and our cleanup sites. The estimates are the best that we can do through human nature.
Now, I will say, for instance, at Hunters Point you have a base
that was built in the 1800s. It has been a major construction site
ever since. We had radium dials, instruments, if you recall, back
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00630
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
631
in World War II. We would just throw those in the landfills. Well,
they were all radioactive, you know, trigger it off.
Not only that, at the end of World War II, we brought the ships
back from the Bikini Atoll tests, and it was a nuclear radiation effects test base. So there, the cost is not bringing in lasers and fancy
stuff. We have to dig down 10 feet and pull out sewers, because we
found a couple of sewers where there was traceyou could not find
anything on the surfacebut you would find trace radioactivity. So,
rather than investigating every sewer, we are digging them all up.
And there is no place in California to dump, to dispose of lowlevel radioactive waste, so we are trucking it to Utah. So, the cost
there is just truck-miles and steam shovels.
Mr. EDWARDS. That is expensive. Thank you.
Mr. Farr.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I just want to say that my base closed
18 years ago. It still is not cleaned up. It still is not though all the
land has been transferred. So, not everything is hunky-dory.
I think the Department of Defense is sitting on a lot of land that
should have been disposed of already. There are many ways of
doing so.
For growth communities it is impossible for them to absorb the
kind of impact that new missions bring, especially where education
is concerned. You finance schools through general obligation bonds,
which take a vote of the people. You do not finance the construction
of schools through the property taxes or other methods.
So there is no way you can build new schools relying on the local
process. The public will reject raising the taxes on their land just
to build schools for all the military kids. I do not think you could
pass a referendum like that.
DoD built a school down at Kings Bay, Georgia, when it built the
submarine base. There is nothing there. You went and built a
school. You build DoD schools. There is no reason you cannot work
out this through the OEA process to build the schools at mission
growth bases.
Mr. ARNY. Congressman, I agree with you entirely. And
Mr. FARR. I am trying to solve Mr. Bishops problem.
Mr. ARNY. Well, I want to check on the Kings Bay, because I am
dumbfounded. A friend of mine was the construction manager down
there.
Because my experience over the last 8 years is, we are not permitted to build schools in
Mr. FARR. Well, youOEAI understand there is a process
through OEA in which you can do that. And
Mr. ARNY. I will check. And OEA gives me the, you know, the
blah-blah-blah every week. And
Mr. FARR. I mean, I want to follow up on Mr. Wamps question
on cleanup.
I understand that the DoD estimates for backlog cleanup is $3.5
billion. That includes the 2005 round bases, the legacy bases.
What is it going to be in your budget for this year for the cleanup?
Mr. ARNY. A, I do not have the number at the tip of my tongue.
B, I cannot talk about it until it is out. But C, it will be, I suspect,
no less, if not more, than what we did last year.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00631
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
632
Mr. FARR. And can you break that down by pre2005 and 2005
bases?
Mr. ARNY. Yes.
Mr. FARR. So that it will committed that way? Or will it just be
in one item?
Mr. ARNY. Yes. I am told it will be.
Mr. FARR. Yes what? What
Mr. ARNY. Yes, it will beno, it will be broken out.
Mr. FARR. Okay.
TREASURE ISLAND
You know, I want to also tell Mr. Penn, you are sitting on that
property on Treasure Island. I am a native San Franciscan, so I am
very interested in this property.
It is not moving. The State of California has adopted laws saying
you can only sell it to the State of California, and they are willing
to sue that all the way up to the Supreme Court, if you want to
challenge it.
It seems to me that, as part of the whole stimulus effort we want
to create jobs. And I cannot think of a faster way to create jobs
than to transfer that base as fast as possible.
We sit around and debate with the City of San Francisco what
the fair market value is. And I do not even know if that fair market value was done with the California restrictions factored in, but
that has got to have some effect on value.
I would just encourage you to use whatever options you have
available to get that land transferred. We are hurting for jobs in
California and this is an area with the highest drop in housing
prices in the United States, the highest number of foreclosures.
You take a look at that Greater Bay Area, and it is really hurting.
Part of my frustration with this BRAC process is its incredible
slowness. I mean, you use the COBRA model, you go through the
BRAC process. The BRAC Commission recommends that these closures occur, and everything is going to be taken care of. All the
community needs will be taken care of. You can redevelop, you can
sell, you can create jobs. You can do this, do that.
But it is so slow. So, as I said, after 18 years Fort Ord is still
not finished.
BRAC ACRES PENDING DISPOSAL
I want to know from you, what are the total number of disposed
BRAC acres, not including the leases in furtherance of conveyances? Just how many acres have we gotten rid of in your total inventory?
Mr. ARNY. We have gotten rid ofI had that in
Mr. FARR. What is the total number of BRAC acres pending disposal by year?
Mr. ARNY. We can get you those. We disposed ofbecause I
asked for that numberwe have 205 of 250 prior BRAC are completely disposed of. We created 140almost 144,000
Mr. FARR. But you wouldI mean, you probably closed Fort Ord
in that. You have not disclosed
Mr. ARNY. I do not know. I will check on it.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00632
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
633
The total number of BRAC acres pending disposal by year (including Outgrant
LIFOC acres) are provided on the table below:
Air Force ...................

Army .........................
Navy .........................
Total ................
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
66,209
176,840
141,344
384,393
67,301
214,332
129,847
411,480
55,735
145,408
96,133
297,276
42,419
249,918
95,785
388,122
35,661
239,654
87,311
362,626
30,294
104,694
12,936
147,924
21,042
96,020
17,885
134,947
16,281
128,986
38,197
183,464
13,479
76,358
32,822
122,659
Mr. FARR. Remember, that goes to BLM, and we cannot do that

till we clean it up. It is just
Mr. ARNY. As of December 2008, we have disposed of 367,000
acres out of 422,000, leaving 55,000
Mr. FARR. And how many are going to be disposed of, of the
pending number that you have are going to be disposed of
Mr. ARNY. I can check on that.
Mr. FARR [continuing]. By years?
Mr. ARNY. Because I think a big chunk of the 34,000 acresremember, Lease in Furtherance of Conveyance (LIFOCs) are in
many cases, like at
Mr. FARR. You know what they are.
Mr. ARNY. But at El Toro, we have disposed of the whole base.
A bunch of it is a LIFOC. They are developing on top of our
LIFOC, because one of thelike 20 percent of the base is a large
LIFOC, where the pollution is down 200 feet. And there is a long,
many year, multi-year pump-and-treat that we are cooperating
with. So, that will remain a LIFOC for decades. But the development will take place on top of it.
Mr. FARR. I think we have done that with the university
Mr. ARNY. Yes.
So, we can get you those by
Mr. FARR. And I would also like to know the number of acres
conveyed by service and by property disposal type.
Mr. ARNY. We can do that.
Mr. FARR. And to which type of grantee.
And I would like to know the length of time for disposal of BRAC
acreage, and by disposal type.
What I am trying to get here is that, I think that if you look at
these numbers, you are not moving property as fast as you should
be.
Mr. ARNY. Well, in many cases, like at T.I., we rely on the LRAs
plan. And they have had nine separate plans over the last 15
years.
But we have
Mr. FARR. Those arguments cannot go to the San Francisco property. I mean, this is another example where
Mr. ARNY. No, that is the property I am talking about.
EDC
They have had nine separate plans that changes constantly. Because they wanted to do a no-cost EDC. And we were fine with
that.
Mr. FARR. But once they have an adopted plan, thats it. You do
not
Mr. ARNY. That is right.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00633
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
634
Mr. FARR [continuing]. Micro-manage the plan.
Mr. ARNY. No. But theybut we said, you know, we go in and
appraise it for the value, because a no-cost EDC, an EDC must be
for permanent jobs. That is the law.
And they finally, after nine plans, had come around to doing
mostly housing on there, which is fine. But that does not qualify
for an EDC. Part of it does.
Mr. FARR. Well, I think the planned value isyour estimated
$1 million
Mr. ARNY. We have
Mr. FARR [continuing]. If you are going to sit on that forever
Mr. PENN. Right. And we offeredwe want to go back and do it.
Mr. FARR. Well, they have made some offers.
Mr. PENN. We will pay for it, if we can.
Mr. FARR. They have made some pretty good offers.
Mr. ARNY. Well, and frankly
Mr. FARR. We are auditing that all
Mr. ARNY. Frankly, the City of San Francisco has been getting
the revenue. They have been renting the houses out on Treasure
Island to the public since the base was closed, and they have been
getting the revenue. So, it has not been revenue-negative. They
have been making rents off those houses since we closed it.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Two questions left, one for
Secretary Arny and one for Secretary Eastin.
VISION CENTER OF EXCELLENCE
Secretary Arny, I believe about 5,000 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have been diagnosed with direct eye injuries. Part of this realignment with the National Naval Medical Center, I think, is a
big investment in what is called the Vision Center of Excellence.
Can you go into more detail about where we are at with the Vision Center, and how is it coming along?
Mr. ARNY. No, sir, I cannot. I will have to get back to you on
that.
The Department has determined that space at the present National Naval Medical Center can be renovated to house the Vision Center of Excellence and staff,
such that it can be collocated with the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. DoD is examining options on the cost and the fiscal years in which to fund the
project. The current estimate is $4M in MILCON for renovation projects in the first
FY and $0.3M in operations and maintenance in next FY to outfit the facility. DoD
is reviewing when the renovation necessary to establish the center can take place
to integrate it with the extensive BRAC construction now underway at Bethesda.
Mr. WAMP. Okay. If you will get back to me on that.

And then, Secretary Eastin, this is probably
Mr. PENN. Sir, what would you like to know on the vision center?
Mr. WAMP. Just an update on where we are in the process, how
it is coming along.
Mr. PENN. Sir
Mr. WAMP. You have got that here?
Mr. PENN. Well, Army is the business plan manager for that. All
the plans are being held by TRICARE Management Activity, TMA.
We are putting it in an existing space in building eight, as part
of the BRAC movement from Walter Reed to Bethesda.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00634
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
635
Total cost is $3.2 million.
Mr. WAMP. And there is a $2.6 million HVAC upgrade, I think.
So, all of that money is in place and it is moving forward. We are
going to get this Vision Center of Excellence up and running.
Mr. PENN. Right.
Mr. ARNY. Let us double check. I am hearing some conflicting
data. We will get you
The Department has determined that space at the present National Naval Medical Center can be renovated to house the Vision Center of Excellence and staff,
such that it can be collocated with the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. DoD is examining options on the cost and the fiscal years in which to fund the
project. The current estimate is $4M in MILCON for renovation projects in the first
FY and $0.3M in operations and maintenance in next FY to outfit the facility. DoD
is reviewing when the renovation necessary to establish the center can take place
to integrate it with the extensive BRAC construction now underway at Bethesda.
Mr. PENN. Yes. But the money is still TMAs.

Mr. WAMP. Okay. If you would get that to us.
And then the second thing sounds parochial, because it is in Tennessee, but it is almost the opposite of what you normally hear.
None of us are immune from this.
MILAN ARSENAL
Normally, someone would be lobbying for BRAC to be changed.

My question about the Milan Arsenal in west Tennessee is whether
BRAC 2005 is being complied with. And here is why. I am going
to give you kind of a series of questions.
The newspaper tried to get some answers a couple of months ago
there in Milan, Tennessee, but they could not. A facilities use contract was awarded for one company to basically run Milan and the
Iowa AAP. But now, it appears that some of the missions are moving to Iowa.
And in 2005, under BRAC, the Milan Arsenal was named a Munitions Center of Excellence, and was supposed to receive funds
from Kansas and Lone Star. I was there and toured it, and listened
to what is happening. I am questioning whether or not this is actually running exactly opposite of BRAC.
This appears to be political influence set in to move some things
outside of BRAC. And I just need a series of questions answered
that, frankly, the newspaper could not get answered 2 months ago.
And I know you are leaving next week, so if you could have
somebody pick these questions up, get to the bottom of it, and let
me know, please, about Milan. I do not want to bug you too much
with an issue that is Tennessee, but this is a BRAC question.
Im glad you asked about that because there have been some misunderstandings.
First, as to the newspapers questions, the newspaper filed a Freedom of Information Act request for a Corrective Action Request from the commander of Iowa Army
Ammunition Plant to the operating contractor there, relating to the contractors
storage and housekeeping. The Army has been working on that FOIA request. We
want to be responsive to the newspapers request while protecting the operating proprietary information.
Second, I assure you that we are fully complying with BRAC Law. In the case
of Milan, BRAC Law required the Army to move certain munitions capabilities from
the Kansas and Lone Star plants to Milan. Those capabilities are moving to and
will be retained at Milan.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00635
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
636
Finally, let me address the new operating contract for the Milan and Iowa plants.
Both of these government-owned, contractor-operated ammunition plants have been
operated by a single contractor under a single contract, for a number of years. With
the contract at the end of its term, we held a competition for a new contract for
the operation and maintenance of these facilities. The successful offeror elected to
consolidate production workload at Iowa and to develop Milan as a commercial distribution hub, while retaining some production capabilities there. The Army did not
require that solution. It was a commercial decision by an offeror for its method to
maintain both facilities at no cost to the Government and provide the ammunition
we need.
Mr. EASTIN. I am surprised that I have not heard this. Soand

usually, these inquiries filter up to me. So, I will be happy to.
Mr. WAMP. Very good.
TRAFFIC CONGESTION AT BETHESDA AND FORT BELVOIR
Let me ask about Bethesda and Walter Reed, two questions.

One, why did the administration have to, in recent weeks, ask
for an additional $263 million for the fiscal year 2009 supplemental
to move this project forward?
And secondly, does the Department of Defense, the Navy or the
Army have a good analysis of what the impact is going to be on
traffic congestion at both Bethesda and Fort Belvoir? And if so, is
DoD putting any money into that transportation infrastructure, or
is that being left to the local communities to address that?
Mr. EASTIN. Let me talk about Belvoir, then I will let B.J. talk
aboutwhich avenue is that? [Laughter.]
We havethere are significant traffic problems at Belvoir. And
one of the ways you handle these traffic problems is to spread them
out, which is what we have tried to do with so-called BRAC 133,
moving 6,400 and some people up to Market Center instead of
down in Belvoir proper, keeping some out at EPG down there and
keeping them off of the more local roads, Route 1, especially.
There still existsand I have not looked at it in the last 4 or 5
monthsthere still exists probably $200 million worth of road improvements that are going to be needed down there. And it is basically state-funded activities.
We have a DAR, Defense Access Road program, that we have
funded for $36 million. We are looking at a couple othersome of
the off-ramps off of Fairfax County Parkway. But as to whether
they would be funded as DARit has very constrained ability to
pay for roads unless they are specifically, basically for military purposes.
But the traffic is going to be challenging, but we are going to be
able to handle it, I think, on Route 1 with respect to the hospitals
Mr. EDWARDS. When you say challenging, are there any estimates about what a 30-minute commute is going to be? Will it be
an hour-and-a-half commute? Or will it be a 40-minute commute?
Mr. EASTIN. We have estimates on probably every inch of road
at Belvoir, and I can get those to you. I have not looked at them
in a while.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00636
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
637
US Route 1 is critical to both morning and evening traffic conditions for Fort
Belvoirs Main Post. Dispersion of population growth among Fort Belvoir, the Engineering Proving Ground, and the Mark Center has mitigated some of the impact to
Route 1 and the Fairfax County Parkway. While off-post traffic will be slightly more
congested (5 to 10 more minutes of travel time) after 2011, the more dramatic
change in traffic will come in terms of adding about 15 minutes before and after
the peak traffic times. In accordance with the Environmental Impact Statement and
Record of Decision, Fort Belvoir is implementing a Traffic Demand Management
Plan to further mitigate traffic impacts.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay, thank you.

Mr. EASTIN. But we have a consultant that is all over this. And
it is, from day one when this recommendationthis whole BRAC
process was adopted, everybody looked at Fort Belvoir and said,
gee, isnt that near 95? Which is loosely called traffic condition F.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
Mr. EASTIN. Which meansand the question is, how long will it
be traffic condition F every day.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
Mr. EASTIN. So, what we are trying to doyes.
Mr. EDWARDS. In hindsight, in terms of lessons learned, do we
need to spend more time in any future base realignment decisions
carefully examining the traffic implications for those decisions?
Mr. EASTIN. In my remaining 3 days in this joba little more
freedom to talk. But it would have been nice if they had considered
traffic problems in some of these. I think that the outcome might
have been slightly different.
Mr. EDWARDS. So, based on what you have seen, those involved
in the original BRAC decision or recommendation on Belvoir, and
perhaps Bethesda, as well, did not do a careful analysis of the
Mr. EASTIN. I am not sure what analysis was done.
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Traffic implications.
Mr. EASTIN. I was not here at that end of the scheme either. But
in terms of someone that has had to deal with this, sometimes on
a daily basis, if there were no traffic problems, there would be zero
problems making this work at Belvoir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Mr. ARNY. I would add to that, that Mr. Eastin and his group
have done a great job, because there were recommendations to
move stuff to Belvoir that we have actually hadwe have created
Belvoir annexes to do it.
And I suspect that both the Commission and the Navy folks
doing it took their best shot at it, but did not have that level of
details.
Now, I will also look at the other side of the coin at Bethesda
and Belvoir. They, I am sureI was not therebut I am sure their
political leaders were at the BRAC Commission asking to move
things to those bases. So, I mean, it is a double-edged sword.
And to answer your question about the
Mr. EDWARDS. It is the whole security issue
Mr. ARNY. Well, it really was notI think we have a handle on
the security. It was really the traffic on the roads around Belvoir
and at Bethesda. And what we found at Bethesda was that Montgomery County had a lot of stuff in planning, because Bethesda
had a traffic problem before. And now, as a result of BRAC, but
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00637
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
638
even more as a result of Wounded Warrior, we have increased the
capacity.
There were a lot of things that Montgomery County and the
State of Maryland had put off that they had planned years ago, so
it just spurred into action.
And speaking of that, you had asked, the $263 million in the
supplemental was the second part of the amount that we talked
about last year, which was $416 million. Back in the old days when
we funded things in supplementals, the deputy secretary made the
decision to increase the capability of Bethesda, over and above
what BRAC had said. And that $679 million was to go into the supplemental, because it is all for Wounded Warriors.
Mr. Farr.
FUDS
Mr. FARR. One clarification on the cleanup ask, the money. Is

that going to be based on what the department asks for, or what
Mr. Edwardsthe end amount after Mr. Edwards adds last year?
Will it be on what we appropriated, or what you
Mr. ARNY. I will have to get the answer for that.
BRAC Cleanup:
The Department of Defense will apply the full appropriated amount (including
Congressional plus-ups) to cleanup of Environmental Restoration sites on BRAC
properties. The FY2009 Presidents Budget Request for BRAC Environmental was
$455 million, while the final appropriated amount was $525 million. The FY2010
request of $554 million is requirements-based, and reflects an increase over the
prior year due to a transition of several cleanup actions from the DERA program
into the BRAC 2005 program.
We will trywe have always tried toI notice that Mr. Penn
talked about it in BRAC. When we got the land sale revenues, we
increased our cleanup.
There are certain limits. And I share your concern about this
backlog, because you are focusing on BRAC, but I am having to
focus on the FUDs, the formerly used defense sites. In many of
these cases, even if you throw money at it, we cannot clean up faster than we are right now, because a lot of it is painstaking. There
is a lot of planning involved
Mr. FARR. But it helps to get some money in there. And not being
able to move forward without cleanupwell, that is usually what
holds up conveyances.
TREASURE ISLAND
Mr. Penn, this will be my last question. It is really about the

Treasure Island. What is your intent? We would like to move that
as fast as possible.
I know you say you want to get fair market value. But as I recall, the original BRAC law did not require that you have to get
fair market value. It only required that you seek fair market value
for bases closed after January 1, 2005. Treasure Island was prior
to that.
So, arent there other options? And I just heard you say maybe
you are going to go out and get another appraisal?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00638
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
639
Mr. PENN. Well, that was one of the options with the city, if they
want to purchase it. But you are right. They are trying at this time
for a no-cost EDC. And as Mr. Arny stated, that has to be for job
creation.
Mr. FARR. Well, look. At Fort Ord, DoD you transferred almost
all of it except the welfare and morale properties, which were golf
courses. You sold those. You had to.
You did one other sale of Fort Ord. But you have transferred
about 20,000 acres out there, all of it in a no-cost EDC.
But the job creation just never materialized like we thought it
would.
But anyway, there is nothing being built at Fort Ord. right now.
I mean, we did get a university, which is great, but that was public
benefit demand.
So, what is your intent? What are you doing right now to try to
get that property moved?
Mr. PENN. With Treasure Island, we have to go back to the city
and hopefully talk to them.
For example, we did eight no-cost EDCs between 2002 and 2009.
Zero-cost EDCs were executed. Now, all we have to do is get them
to align, and we can do it.
I mean, we are still in negotiations. The doors are not closed.
And, in fact, actually, it is more money out of our pocket to maintain these facilities, as you well know.
Mr. FARR. Yes, it is costly.
Mr. PENN. Exactly.
Mr. FARR. You have got the liability
Mr. PENN. So, the sooner we can rid of them
Mr. FARR [continuing]. Maintenance costs. How much a year is
it costing?
Mr. ARNY. I am not sure. Treasure Island, I think, is just some
human oversight, because, again, the city took it as a lease, and
they have been renting out the office space and the housing. So
they have been revenue-positive since the base closed.
Mr. PENN. They have acres. They have
Mr. FARR. You have got to build it all up to California code now.
Mr. ARNY. I understand, sir. I am just saying that it is not a cost
to us, because they have been renting it out and getting property.
I would have to give you the acreage
Mr. FARR. And there is cleanup, too, isnt there?
Mr. ARNY. And which we are proceeding with.
Mr. PENN. We are doing that, correct.
Mr. EDWARDS. Any ballpark on how many acres?
Mr. FARR. It is an island.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
Mr. ARNY. Well, it is two islands, actually. There is Treasure Island and Yerba Buena Island. And
Mr. FARR. We still have the Coast Guard
Mr. ARNY. Yes.
Mr. PENN. Right.
Mr. ARNY. The Coast Guard is there. We lost part of it to
Caltrans. They condemned part of it for the
Mr. FARR. This is the island that the Bay Bridge goes over to
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00639
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
640
Mr. EDWARDS. I have seen pictures, but I do not think I have
ever
Mr. ARNY. I am going to say it is likeI get 367 acres stuck in
my mind, but I do not know. I can get you the answer to that.
Mr. PENN. We will get back.
79 acres conveyed (Coast Guard, Federal Highway Authority and Job Corps)
996 acres (468 acres dry land/528 acres submerged land) remaining
Over 50% of dry land environmentally suitable for transfer
[CLERKS NOTE.Questions for the record submitted by Chair-
man Edwards.]
STATUTORY BRAC DEADLINE

Question. How does the Department define compliance with the BRAC mandate?
Answer. The Department has a legal obligation to complete all closures and realignments no later than six years from the date the President transmits the Commissions report to the Congress. The Department defines completion as the point
in time at which all functions specified in the BRAC recommendation have been relocated to and are functioning at the receiving installation(s) identified in the recommendation. In the case of closures, caretaker and environmental operations may
continue at the closed location, as long as the functions have been relocated to and
are functioning at the specified receiving location.
Question. Who determines or certifies that a BRAC action has been completed?
Answer. Implementing BRAC 2005 recommendations requires detailed plans that
delineate required actions, their timing, and necessary resources. The large number
of transformational recommendations, particularly recommendations to establish
joint operations, presented significant implementation challenges that underscore
the utility and necessity of good planning. As such, the Department developed Business Plans to serve as the foundation for the complex program management necessary to ensure BRAC 2005 recommendations are implemented efficiently and effectively. Responsibility for the development of each Business Plan was assigned, by
recommendation, generally to the Military Department or Defense Agency with facility management authority at the receiving site. Organizations significantly impacted by the recommendation were consulted and required to formally coordinate
on the plans. Business Plans form the initial operational and budgetary basis for
BRAC 2005 implementation and must be updated twice each year. Each business
plan manager is required to certify that the BRAC recommendation for which they
are responsible have been completed.
Question. What are the actual legal consequences, if any, of not meeting the
BRAC deadline?
Answer. The Department is obligated to complete closures and realignments by
the deadline imposed by the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990,
as amended. Applicable statutes (the BRAC Act of 1990 and annual appropriation
and authorization acts for DoD) do not address failure by the Department to complete a recommendation by the statutory deadline. The BRAC Act of 1990 authorizes
the Department to take such actions as may be necessary to close or realign approved military installations, and to use for such purposes funds in the Department
of Defense Base Closure Account 2005. The legal consequences of a failure to meet
the deadline on this authority and funding are not clear.
The Department fully intends to meet its legal obligation to close and realign all
installations by September 15, 2011, as required by the Defense Base Closure and
Realignment Act of 1990 as amended. As intended by Congress, the deadline ensures that the Department moves functions with minimal disruption and that DoD
transfers closed facilities to the community for reuse as expeditiously as possible.
The deadline keeps the Department focused on completing implementation and ensures that DoD closes installations expeditiously to allow communities to redevelop
the property. Specific adverse effects of failing to meet the deadline include:
Projects being stretched over many years as both internal (Military Department Comptrollers) and external (Congress) forces shift money away from
BRAC projects to other short-term priorities with the net result being increased in cost due to inflation and scope growth.
Breaking linkages between many recommendations that require careful
choreography of the recommendations that are dependent on functions moving
out of one location so another function can move in.
More opportunities for Congress to try to reverse or alter decisions.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00640
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
641
Delayed modernization of facilities provided by BRAC construction.
Personnel turmoil and uncertainty as relocations drag on.
Unwillingness of market to plan/invest in either redeveloping closing sites
or expanding development (including housing) at receiving locations
Question. In the four prior BRAC rounds, were any actions not completed by the
statutory deadline? If so, how was the issue resolved?
Answer. As required by the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990,
as amended, for each of the four previous BRAC rounds, the Department met its
legal obligation to close and realign all installations within 6 years of the date the
President transmitted that years Commission Report to Congress.
COBRA
Question. As you noted in your testimony, BRAC 2005 is the most complex BRAC
round ever. You also noted that previous BRAC rounds were undertaken during a
period of downsizing in the Armed Forces. Compared to previous rounds, the number of major closures in BRAC 2005 is slightly below average, while the number of
major realignments is 2.4 times the average of the previous four, and the number
of minor closures and realignments is more than triple that of all previous rounds
put together. Furthermore, as you also noted, military construction funding as a
percentage of total cost for this round is more than double that of previous rounds.
The COBRA model has been in use since the original 1988 round. While the Committee appreciates your point about COBRA being a, comparative tool, and not a
method of producing budget quality cost estimates, did the Department make any
efforts whatsoever to refine the COBRA model in order to account for the unique
nature of this BRAC round?
Answer. The COBRA model was used during the development of the BRAC recommendations, whereas the unique nature of this BRAC round was not apparent
until that process was completea point at which refinement of the COBRA model
would not have been useful. The Department did refine the COBRA model (before
it was used in this round) based on experience in three prior rounds. As stated in
the Government Accountability Office (GAO) review (Military Bases Analysis of
DoDs 2005 Selection Process and Recommendations for Base Closures and Realignments July 2005) of the Departments BRAC selection process DOD has used the
COBRA model in each of the previous BRAC rounds and, over time, has improved
upon its design to provide better estimating capability. In our past and current reviews of the COBRA model, we found it to be a generally reasonable estimator for
comparing potential costs and savings among various BRAC options. The Department agrees with GAO and stands by the use of the model to compare alternatives.
SAN ANTONIO MILITARY MEDICAL CENTER
Question. Construction on the new medical center at Fort Sam Houston began in
December 2008. According to the original 1391 submitted for this project, the construction timeline was three years and three months (assuming a start date of December 2007 and a completion date of March 2011). How will the Department ensure that this facility is completed and outfitted by the BRAC deadline?
Answer. The Department is watching all projects closely, especially those that are
complex and complete near the implementation deadline. This recommendation in
particular has been subject to focused oversight. At this point, the Department is
confident that all inpatient functions will be moved from Wilford Hall to Brook
Army Medical Center, those inpatient functions will cease at Wilford Hall, and the
new San Antonio Medical Center will be operational by September 15, 2011.
JOINT BASING
Question. According to GAO, Joint Basing will produce no net savings for the Department. What is your estimate of the net annual recurring cost required to support Joint Basing?
Answer. Based on the most current FY10 Presidents Budget data, the annual recurring savings from the Joint Basing recommendation, starting in FY2012, is estimated at $32M/year. As the Department gains more experience in financing joint
base operations, the Department will revise these estimates in future budget submissions.
EGLIN AFB-INITIAL JOINT TRAINING SITE
FOR THE
JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER
Question. As Deputy Assistant Secretary Ferguson stated, the noise profile of the
Joint Strike Fighter was unknown at the time of the BRAC recommendation for es-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00641
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
642
tablishing the Initial Joint Training Site (IJTS) at Eglin AFB. The Record of Decision of the IJTS demonstrated a significant noise impact issue and restricts the Department to only 59 of the 107 programmed aircraft, which would operate under restricted conditions. What is your plan of action if the restrictions on aircraft and
operations are upheld by the supplemental EIS?
Answer. Several alternatives are under review in the preplanning for the supplemental EIS to include other operational locations on the Eglin reservation, additional runway(s) and reorientation of runway(s). As the Air Force evaluates these
options and works toward a draft DOPAA, we anticipate some of these alternatives
will meet operational needs and potentially reduce noise impacts to warrant and be
analyzed fully in the supplement EIS.
Question. The Committee understands that the Navy variant of JSF will not be
available until September 2012. If this is the case, how can the Department comply
with the BRAC mandate?
Answer. The JSF aircraft acquisition is a programmatic decision and is not part
of the BRAC recommendation.
The BRAC recommendation requires that a JSF Initial Joint Training Site be
stood up at Eglin AFB. This includes appropriate manpower movements for maintenance and pilot instructors from all three Services; construction of a specialized JSF
Academic Training Center housing JSF training devices and JSF flight simulators
for all three aircraft variants; and other supporting facilities for aircraft maintenance and housing/feeding student personnel.
The manpower and facilities have been programmed and construction is underway
on a schedule to meet the BRAC timeline. The academic training facility with its
maintenance and flight simulators will provide the capability to train all Services
maintenance personnel and pilots by 15 Sep 2011. The JSF acquisition schedule
may vary with individual Service requirements and other programmatic decisions,
however the Initial Joint Training Site, with the capability to train JSF personnel
in all variants will standup prior to 15 Sept 2011 and be ready to align with the
JSF acquisition schedule.
Question. The Secretary of Defense announced on April 6, 2009 that the Department will increase the buy of Joint Strike Fighters. Will this have any impact on
the requirements for the joint training site at Eglin?
Answer. This announcement does not impact the requirements for the joint training site at Eglin.
EGLIN AFB-RELOCATION
OF
7TH SPECIAL FORCES GROUP
Question. It is the Committees understanding that the construction to support the

relocation of the 7th Special Forces Group from Fort Bragg to Eglin has been delayed and complicated by the issues associated with the training site for the JSF.
What projects has the Department currently identified for bedding down the 7th
SFG at Eglin, and what is the timeline for the award and construction of each
project?
Answer. There is one BRAC project, funded in two increments (FY09/FY10) that
has been identified to meet the BRAC requirement to relocate the 7th SFG to Eglin
AFB. One contract has been awarded for the first increment and another is scheduled for award this fiscal year. The award of this project was delayed because of
issues associated with the JSF that were identified in the Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS). Those issues have been resolved, the project is on schedule to meet
the BRAC deadline of 15 September 2011.
Question. The relocation of the 7th SFG involves Air Force, Army, and Special Operations Command. Eglin AFB, however, is not a Joint Basing site. Has the Department sorted out what each command will be responsible for in terms of MILCON
programming and execution?
Answer. The Army will be responsible for the MILCON programming and execution for the construction projects required by the 7th SFG.
Question. The Committee has information that there are about $106 million of unfunded construction requirements for the 7th SFG at Eglin. Have any 7th SFG
projects been identified which are not being funded by BRAC?
Answer. There is one BRAC project, funded in two increments (FY09/FY10) that
has been identified to meet the BRAC requirement to relocate the 7th SFG to Eglin
AFB. There have been projects identified that are not necessary to meet the BRAC
requirement but are part of the Military Construction (MILCON) program. These
projects have been identified, validated, and programmed for funding through the
MILCON program. The Army provided funding to the Air Force for child care, medical, and a gymnasium. If any other requirements are identified and are validated
they will compete for funding through the normal MILCON process.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00642
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
643
SAVINGS
AND
REDUCTION
IN
EXCESS INFRASTRUCTURE
Question. What is your current estimate of how much money BRAC 2005 will save
the Department, and how does this compare with the savings from the four prior
rounds?
Answer. The Department estimates that the BRAC 2005 recommendations will
save $4B annually, which compares with the four prior rounds as follows:
BRAC 88 $1B annually
BRAC 91 $2.4B annually
Question. What is the Departments estimate of the net reduction in acreage and
square footage that BRAC 2005 will produce?
Answer. As stated in the Secretarys letter to the BRAC Commission, the goal of
BRAC 2005 was to support force transformation; address new threats, strategies,
and force protection concerns; consolidate business-oriented support functions; promote joint- and multi-service basing; and provide the Department with significant
savings. As such reducing footprint was not a primary goal. The net change in acreage and square feet will not be known until all recommendations are implemented.
At this point the Department estimates it will return 49,138.75 acres to communities and other federal agencies.
Question. The Department cites savings derived from the costs associated with
service members or civilian personnel who are reassigned from a closed or realigned
installation. These savings are claimed from eliminating authorized positions, despite there being no corresponding decrease in overall personnel strength. This assumption generates nearly half of the BRAC 2005 savings claimed by the Department. Both the BRAC Commission and GAO have disputed the Departments claim
that these savings are real. What is the Departments specific rationale for claiming
these savings, and can you demonstrate any actual savings from such actions?
Answer. The issue regarding the treatment of military personnel savings represents a longstanding difference of opinion between DoD and GAO. The Department considers military personnel reductions as savings that are just as real as
monetary savings. While the Department is not reducing overall end-strength (and
is increasing end-strength for the Army and Marines), the reductions in military
personnel for each recommendation at a specific location are real. As is the case
with monetary savings, personnel reductions allow the Department to apply these
military personnel to generate new capabilities and to improve operational efficiencies. The fact that the Department has already decided how to spend those
savings (application to other priorities) does not change the fact that savings did
occur.
DEFENSE ACCESS ROADS
Question. As discussed in the hearing, certain transportation improvements have
been identified to support BRAC realignments at gaining installations, such as Bethesda and Fort Belvoir. Some of these improvements may be eligible for military
construction under the Defense Access Roads (DAR) program. If DAR projects in
support of BRAC are certified, will these projects be programmed into the BRAC
account, or will they be shifted to regular MILCON accounts?
Answer. Any such DAR projects, if certified and validated in DoDs planning, programming, budgeting, and execution system, will be programmed in the BRAC account.
FORT DETRICK
BRAC requires the relocation of the Naval Medical Research Centers Biological
Defense Research Directorate to Fort Detrick. The initial assumption was that the
Directorate would be housed in existing, renovated laboratory facilities. A new facility was programmed for AMRIID, but no space was made available for the Navys
Directorate. In June 2008, OSD determined that new $49 million laboratory construction project for the Navy was the only viable solution.
Question. Why did it take until June 2008 to make the determination that new
construction was needed?
Answer. As is the case in complex issues involving multiple organizations and
stakeholders, the Department pursued a variety of options to determine the best,
least cost alternative to building a separate facility. Arriving at this point required
a deliberate analysis of alternatives and achieving consensus among the various organizations. While this deliberate process was lengthy, it ensured that all organizations views were represented in the decision process. In the end, senior leadership
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00643
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
644
decided that a laboratory for the Navys directorate was the best approach to meet
the Navys unique mission requirements.
Question. When will new laboratory be fully outfitted and ready for occupancy?
Answer. The new laboratory is expected to be fully outfitted and ready for occupancy during fourth quarter of FY 2011.
COMMUNITY SUPPORT
AND
QUALITY
OF
LIFE PROJECTS
Question. Does the Department consider community support and quality of life
projectssuch as child development centers, chapels, commissaries, and fitness centersto be necessary for BRAC, and therefore appropriate for BRAC 2005 funding?
Answer. In general, the Department believes that community support and quality
of life projects that support personnel growth caused by BRAC actions to be eligible
for BRAC funding. The determination of whether specific projects are eligible is left
to the Military Departments controlling the installations.
Question. How does the Department determine whether a given project is appropriate for BRAC 2005 funding?
Answer. As indicated in the earlier question, the Military Departments determine
which projects are necessary to support incoming missions that arrive as a direct
result of a BRAC action. The specifics of the individual projects are developed based
on such factors as population growth and the type of mission coming to the base.
[CLERKS NOTE.Questions for the record submitted by Congress-
man Wamp.]
BRAC IMPLEMENTATION
According to the testimony, the Department continues to monitor BRAC implementation to ensure that we are meeting our legal obligation under the law.
Question. What is the Departments view on what it considers to be meeting the
legal obligation under the law?
Answer. The Department has a legal obligation to complete all closures and realignments no later than six years from the date the President transmits the Commissions report to the Congress. The Department defines completion as the point
in time at which all functions specified in the BRAC recommendation have been relocated to and are functioning at the receiving installation(s) identified in the recommendation. In the case of closures, caretaker and environmental operations may
continue at the closed location, as long as the functions have been relocated to and
are functioning at the specified receiving location.
Question. If and when the Department makes the determination that a BRAC action cannot be completed on time, what are some of the options that you are considering?
Answer. At this point in time, we are confident that all recommendations will be
completed on time. If later in the process, it appears that a recommendation may
not be completed on time, the Department will examine its options in detail to determine the best way forward.
Question. How many Joint Basing MOAs have been signed?
Answer. As of April 10, 2009, five joint basing Memorandum of Agreement
(MOAs) have been signed. Those MOAs are for Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall,
Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek-Story, Joint Base AndrewsNAF Washington, Joint Region Marianas (Naval Base GuamAndersen AFB), and Joint Base
McGuireDixLakehurst.
Question. Which ones?
Answer. Those MOAs have been signed for Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall,
Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek-Story, Joint Base AndrewsNAF Washington, Joint Region Marianas (Naval Base GuamAndersen AFB), and Joint Base
McGuireDixLakehurst.
Question. How many does the Department expect to have signed by the beginning
of FY10?
Answer. The Department expects to have signed MOAs for all 12 joint bases by
the beginning of FY10.
Question. When does the Department expect to have all MOAs signed?
Answer. The Department expects all MOAs to be signed by October 1, 2009.
MILAN ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT

Your testimony describes that the first major BRAC 2005 closure was completed
last December when the Kansas Army Ammo Plant was closed and production was
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00644
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
645
moved to McAlester (OK) Ammunition Plant, Crane (IN) Ammunition Plant, and
Milan Ammunition Plant in TN. Secretary Eastin, Im seeking clarification on a
number of issues related to the recently awarded facilities-use contract for both the
Milan Army Ammunition Plant (AAP) and the Iowa AAP. Both plants will now be
operated by a single contractor, with production work being concentrated in Iowa.
Question. A February 24, 2009 article in the Milan Mirror-Exchange cites a corrective action report (CAR) issued by the Army. The CAR reportedly highlights a
number of serious safety violations at Iowa AAP with instructions to report back
to the Army by January 29, 2009. Can you please provide me with a detailed response about the CAR issued by the Army?
Answer. Corrective Action Report cited in the newspaper article found deficiencies
in one of the operation areas with regard to storage and housekeeping of in-process
and scrap material. American Ordnance immediately shut down the business unit
where this occurred and put procedures in place to assure there will not be any future housekeeping and storage issues in any business unit at either Iowa Army Ammunition Plant or Milan Army Ammunition Plant.
Question. Have the violations at the Iowa AAP been completely addressed?
Answer. Yes. There is no indication that American Ordnance will experience any
safety shortcomings related to its plan to consolidate the bulk of its production at
Iowa, and Iowa can assume the increase in workload. Government staff will continue to monitor the area for which the Corrective Action Report was issued, as well
as all other areas at Iowa.
Question. I understand that some security concerns may have been highlighted,
so in light othese security concerns, is the Iowa AAP ready to assume significant
workload that is set to be transferred from Milan?
Answer. There is no indication that American Ordnance will experience any security shortcomings related to its plan.
Question. Will this production move mean that all large and medium caliber munitions are produced at one government-owned plant? If so, does such a concentration create a vulnerability in our national security?
Answer. Moving the large and medium caliber munitions production capability
from Milan to Iowa doesnt mean that the Army will be limited to a single source.
Several other sources exist within the National Technology and Industrial Base with
the capability to load, assemble, and pack mortar and artillery high-explosive cartridges, 40mm ammunition, and 105mm and 120mm tank rounds.
Question. There may be a significant cost to clean up sites at Milan if production
and testing are moved to Iowa AAP. Has the Army identified such environmental
costs? Were they taken into consideration during the contract evaluation?
Answer. The Army considered the potential environmental remediation costs that
could be involved at Milan during the contract evaluation. American Ordnance plans
to bring additional tenants to Milan to preclude the closure of any environmentally
managed areas. These managed areas include ammunition disposal areas, test
areas, or other operational areas or ranges that require special environmental permits for the activities or processes conducted there. The government will bear the
costs of environmental remediation at Milan regardless of when they are incurred.
Question. Under BRAC 2005, Milan was slated to become a Munitions Center of
Excellence and receive functions from Kansas AAP and Lone Star AAP. Does the
recent contract award comply with BRAC 2005?
Answer. The contract awarded to American Ordnance (AO) complies with BRAC
2005. Under BRAC, certain munitions production capacity and capability was directed to be relocated from Kansas Army Ammunition Plant and Lone Star Army
Ammunition Plant to Milan. However, BRAC did not preclude establishment of
similar capacity and capability elsewhere. To ensure BRAC compliance, none of the
production equipment that moved to Milan from Kansas and Lone Star will be
moved to Iowa. Instead, AO plans to create new production capability at Iowa, while
retaining at Milan the capacity and capability relocated from Kansas and Lone Star.
Question. How would this reorganization impact the number of jobs at the Milan
plant?
Answer. American Ordnance will determine how many of its jobs for work under
the contracts will move and when, and what number of jobs will be required for its
Milan operations.
DISCRETE BRAC ACTIONS

The Army has over 1,100 discrete actions that are required for the successful implementation of BRAC 2005.
Question. How many discrete actions have been completed to date?
Answer. The Army has completed 180 actions as of April 22, 2009.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00645
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
646
Question. How many do you expect to have completed by the end of fiscal year
2009?
Answer. The Army has 265 actions of which 180 are already completed that are
scheduled for completion by the end of fiscal year 2009.
Question. What is the cost to implement these 1,100 discrete actions?
Answer. The over 1,100 actions represent what the Army needs to complete to
meet the requirements of the BRAC Law. Therefore, the cost as of the Presidents
fiscal year 2009 budget submission is $17.3 billion.
Question. How much of that cost is military construction?
Answer. The military construction cost to complete the over 1,100 actions as of
the fiscal year 2009 Presidents Budget submission is $13.1 billion.
FY 09 ARMY BRAC 2005 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
Question. What is the total cost for the 96 BRAC construction projects that the
Army intends to award in FY 09? How many of the 96 BRAC construction projects
that the Army plans to award in FY 09 have been awarded to date?
Answer. The cost for the 96 BRAC construction projects scheduled for award in
fiscal year 2009 is $3.8 billion. As of April 22, 2009, the Army has awarded 26 of
those projects.
NAVY BUSINESS PLANS
Question. The Secretary has approved all 59 Navy-led BRAC 2005 business plans
along with 24 other service-led business plans with some Navy equity in them. Your
testimony points out that some significant challenges lie ahead. What specifically
are those challenges, and how are you managing the process to ensure that statutory requirements will be met?
Answer. Seven major construction projects at Naval Air Weapons Station China
Lake, CA and Naval Surface Warfare Center Indian Head, MD require complex site
approvals and certifications for operation from the Department of Defense Explosive
Safety Board. Additionally, Correctional Facilities require certification before occupancy. And finally, several complex move actions require close coordination with
other services and agencies. The Department of the Navy (DON) is closely managing
construction so that it completes in time to conduct the necessary certifications.
DON is also maintaining effective and continuous coordination with other services
and agencies for the interdependent moves to succeed.
[CLERKS
man Farr.]
NOTE.Questions
for the record submitted by Congress-
Question. I am concerned that conveyance of legacy bases continues to lag. The

longer these properties stay on the DOD books, the more they cost us to maintain
and secure. Andthey are not providing any economic activity for local communities. I would like your office to I provide me with the following statistics so we
can get a good handle on just where we are on getting these parcels off the DOD
books and into the hands of locals. Total number of disposed BRAC acres (not including Outgrant LIFOC acres). Total number of BRAC acres pending disposal by
year (including Outgrant LIFOC acres). Number of acres conveyed by Service by
property disposal type and to which type of grantee. Length of time for disposal of
BRAC acreage by disposal type.
Answer. Total number of disposed BRAC acres (not including Outgrant Lease In
Furtherance of Conveyance (LIFOC) acres) is provided in Table 1 of Enclosure 1.
Total number of BRAC acres pending disposal by year (including Outgrant LIFOC
acres) is provided in Table 2 of Enclosure 1.
Number of acres conveyed by Service, by property disposal type, and to which
type of grantee, is provided as Enclosures 2 and 3. Enclosure 2 also provides comments concerning apparent fluctuations in data from one year to the next, including
instances where the status of acreage may be reclassified from one year to the next.
Length of time for disposal of BRAC acreage by disposal type will be provided separately as soon as we are able to complete the necessary data search, validation,
and calculations with the Military Departments (MILDEPs).
The information provided reflects yearly disposal activity starting in 1999 when
the Department of Defense Office of Economic Adjustment began tracking this information. Prior to 1999, the MILDEPs had disposed of approximately 16% of the acreage to be disposed. This response provides a yearly disposal picture for the remaining 84% of the total property disposed under BRAC 88, 91, 93, 95, and 05, through
December 2007.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00646
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00647
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
647
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00648
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
648
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00649
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
649
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00650
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
650
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00651
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
651
652
Mr. FARR. Okay.

Mr. EASTIN. So, theis somewhatin San Francisco.
Mr. PENN. We will scrub that
Mr. EDWARDS. If there is some way we can work with you to
move that forward, please let us know.
Mr. FARR. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Wamp, any other
Mr. WAMP. Great hearing.
Mr. EDWARDS. I have no additional questions. Obviously, we will
have a number of written questions we will send to each of you.
But thank you for your service, and we appreciate you being here.
The committee will stand in recess. Thank you.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00652
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009.

TESTIMONY OF OUTSIDE WITNESSES
STATEMENT
OF THE
CHAIRMAN
Mr. FARR [presiding]. Good morning. The subcommittee will come

to order.
Before I begin, I want to mention that the chairman, Mr. Edwards, is going to be a little bit late. He is testifying before another
subcommittee, and he asked me to chair the hearing until he arrives.
We have about 16 witnesses today from various nongovernmental
organizations. And with that many witnesses, we are going to have
to go in a very timely order.
Because of those constraints, we ask each of you to limit your
testimony to no more than 5 minutes. We will have copies of all
your written testimony, and I will make sure that those are included in their entirety in the record.
At this point, I would like to ask Mr. Wamp if he has anything
to say, opening remarks.
STATEMENT
OF THE
Mr. WAMP. Just almost, Mr. Chairman, ditto what you say. This
is a learning experience for us to give everybody an opportunity to
appear. And the main thing, I think, is a takeaway from each one
of the outside witnesses.
The main thing is, if you can even just underscore my takeaway
for the day, things that we have to do or should do or the most important things, try to think about that ahead of time so that, no
matter what, we get whatever that message is before you walk out
the door.
And that way, we can listen, learn, help and lead, which is a
pretty good model for us to follow around here. It is not done
enough, but we are going to try. So thanks for being here.
Mr. FARR. Thank you, Mr. Wamp.
And I want to echo that. I read your testimony this morning, and
I was very impressed. There are a lot of suggested things like report language that we could include, but it is really for us to listen
to you and to take away, what are the priorities, needs of the various entities represented here?
We are going to go in the order this committee has set up, and
the first is the Friends of the V.A. Medical Care and Health Research.
Mr. Galen Toews, is he here today?
Galen is a V.A. physician scientist at Ann Arbor V.A. Medical
Center. He is also a professor of internal medicine at the Univer(653)
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00653
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
654
sity of Michigan Medical School. He is testifying on behalf of the
Friends of the V.A. Medical Care and Health Research.
Dr. TOEWS. Thank you.
Mr. FARR. Welcome to the committee.
FRIENDS OF VA MEDICAL CARE AND HEALTH
RESEARCH (FOVA)
WITNESS
GALEN B. TOEWS, MD
STATEMENT
OF
GALEN B. TOEWS
Dr. TOEWS. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, my name is Dr. Galen Toews. And as mentioned,
I am testifying on behalf of FOVA, a coalition of 80 veterans service and voluntary health and medical professional organizations
that work to support funding for veterans health programs.
We are especially committed to ensuring a strong V.A. medical
and prosthetic research program. And FOVA recommends the subcommittee provide $575 million for the V.A. medical and prosthetic
research program in fiscal year 2010.
We also, importantly, request an additional $142 million in the
V.A. minor construction budget to address the deteriorating state
of V.A. laboratory infrastructure.
Research really plays an essential role in the V.A. health system.
Research is the process by which hope is fulfilled, hope for less
pain, increased function, and independence, symptom-free days,
and in some instances hope for a cure, hope for leading, in short,
a normal life.
These are the kinds of hopes that veterans who come to the V.A.
are seeking. And the V.A. is dedicated to bringing these hopes to
fruition.
The V.A. is doing a good job. In 2008, the V.A. published the results of a landmark, 7-year diabetes trial, which found that intensive control of blood glucose in Type 2 diabetes does little to cut the
risk of heart disease compared with standard treatment.
In 2007, the V.A. unveiled the first powered ankle-foot prosthesis. The V.A. has also been involved in comparative effectiveness research for many years, a program that the president has
highlighted.
In 2008, the V.A. demonstrated in a large, multi-site clinical
trialsomething we do very wellthat more intensive treatment of
acute kidney injury, for instance, dialysis 6 times instead of 3 times
per week, did not produce any added benefit.
In 2007, the V.A. found that balloon angioplasty and stenting, an
invasive cardiovascular procedure, did little to improve outcome for
patients with stable coronary artery disease, who were also receiving optimal medical therapy.
In short, the V.A. is doing good research that is having a direct
impact on improving the lives of veterans.
There are some challenges. FOVA congratulates the V.A. for a
decision to raise the merit review cap from $125,000 per year to
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00654
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
655
$150,000. And this was done to recognize the increased costs of

doing research.
However, this welcome increase in grant size puts pressure on
the V.A. to reduce the overall number of grants awarded. We urge
the subcommittee to provide V.A. with the necessary resources to
maintain the new award size, while continuing to support a comparable number of merit review awards.
The second challenge is sustaining the good work that we have
started. The V.A. will need to increase its funding by at least $20
million in fiscal year 2010 to just keep up with current purchasing
power.
The third challenge is what I mentioned earlier, and that is the
state of V.A. laboratory infrastructure. State-of-the-art research requires state-of-the-art technology, equipment and facilities, in addition to highly qualified and committed scientists. In recent years,
the V.A. minor construction program has failed to provide the resources needed to maintain, upgrade and replace aging facilities.
FOVA recommends Congress provide at least $142 million for
V.A. laboratory renovations in fiscal year 2010 via this minor construction budget.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for listening.
[The prepared statement of Galen B. Toews follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00655
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00656
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
Insert offset folio 1508 here 50526C.001
656
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00657
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
657
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00658
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
658
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00659
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
659
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00660
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
660
661
Dr. TOEWS. I am happy to answer questions if you have any.
Mr. FARR. Any questions, Mr. Wamp?
I just have one quick one. DARPA came here and demonstrated
a lot of the prosthetics that they are developing. Are you working
closelyare these labs working closely with DARPA?
Dr. TOEWS. Yes, they are. They are working closely with a variety of laboratories. The prosthesis specifically mentioned was an
MIT and Brown collaboration. But the answer to your question is
yes.
Mr. FARR. Terrific. I am very excited about what you are doing
in that field.
Dr. TOEWS. Right. Right.
Dr. TOEWS. You are welcome.
Mr. FARR. Our next witness is Joel Streim? He is testifying on
behalf of the American Association of Geriatric Psychiatry. Dr.
Streim is the professor of psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvanias School of Medicine.
Welcome to our committee. And we will take your testimony in
full for the record, and if you could summarize it.
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY
WITNESS
JOEL E. STREIM, MD
STATEMENT
OF
JOEL STREIM
Dr. STREIM. Thank you. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I am Joel Streim, a past president of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry and a practicing geriatric psychiatrist.
AAGP is a professional membership organization dedicated to
promoting the mental health and well-being of older Americans
and improving the care of those with late-life mental disorders.
You have our written statement, which addresses a number of
concerns. I will focus my testimony today on just two issues: first,
the return on V.A. investments in geriatric mental health research
and services with benefits that are now accruing to veterans across
the lifespan; and, secondly, the need to safeguard funding to ensure
full implementation of the VHA comprehensive Mental Health
Strategic Plan and uniform mental health services handbook that
specifies requirements supporting that implementation.
The number of veterans 85 years of age or older has grown rapidly in recent years, and the V.A. predicts that this oldest group
will reach 1.2 million next year.
Providing health care for these veterans is challenging, as many
of them have co-occurring chronic medical conditions, psychiatric
illness, including cognitive disorders, and/or substance use disorders. For these patients, the interactions between their medical
and psychiatric illnesses often complicate their health and result in
poorer outcomes.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00661
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
662
To deal with these common interactions, geriatric specialists
have recognized that psychiatric treatment must be integrated and
highly coordinated with general medical care. Over the past decade, the V.A. made a historic investment in aging research and integrated service models, and now it is paying dividends not only in
better treatment for older veterans, but also in how we approach
complex conditions across the lifespan.
V.A. has played a leading role in developing the scientific evidence base for understanding and treating health problems that
are common in late life, such as cognitive impairment, musculoskeletal disorders, and chronic pain.
V.A. expertise in managing these interacting infirmities of aging
now is informing the approach to younger veterans with similar
problems. The cross-fertilization made possible by advances in geriatric mental health care will be especially important in working
with returning OEFOIF veterans who have polytrauma, which results in functional limitations due to combinations of cognitive impairment and physical disability.
A related concern is the previously recognized association in
older adults between head trauma and an increased risk of developing dementia, which raises the worrisome possibility of accelerated brain aging in these younger veterans with head injuries.
AAGP urges Congress to support the V.A. in monitoring and
managing the downstream effects of traumatic brain injury and its
associated cognitive and physical disabilities beyond the initial recovery period as these veterans continue to age.
A second successful V.A. investment in mental health services for
veterans across the lifespan must be continued and strengthened.
This is the mental health enhancement initiative, which has grown
from $100 million when the special purpose fund was created in
2005 to $557 million in 2009.
Through this important initiative, V.A. has ensured the availability of mental health staff to treat elderly veterans who receive
their general health care through home-based primary care programs and in community living centers, previously known as nursing home care units.
The integration of mental health services into primary care and
related settings has made it easier for older veterans to access
mental health care, and it has improved the coordination of care
for complex problems that I described in this population.
It has now been 5 years since the development of the VHA Comprehensive Mental Health Strategic Plan and 5 years since the
mental health enhancement initiative was made available to support that plan. We at AAGP look forward to the time when the
strategic plan is fully implemented according to the requirements
specified in the recent uniform mental health services handbook
that was published in June 2008.
However, it is anticipated that after 2009, the enhancement initiative will be rolled over into Veterans Equitable Resource Allocation, known as VERA. And while we believe V.A.s intent is to
maintain these enhancements of mental health care for older veterans, we have concerns about V.A.s ability to achieve full implementation of the strategic plan without sustained, dedicated funding.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00662
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
663
We therefore urge Congress to enact safeguards to prevent diffusion of the ongoing support that is required to reach this goal.
AAGP appreciates that there is an important existing safeguard in
appropriations language that requires no less than $3.8 billion to
be spent for mental health purposes.
However, further safeguards are really necessary to ensure continuation of funding specifically dedicated to full implementation of
this VHA Comprehensive Mental Health Strategic Plan.
I would like to thank the subcommittee for the opportunity to
testify today, and I would be pleased to answer any questions you
have.
[The prepared statement of Joel Streim follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00663
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00664
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
664
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00665
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
665
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00666
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
666
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00667
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
667
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00668
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
668
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00669
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
669
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00670
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
670
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00671
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
671
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00672
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
672
673
Mr. WAMP. So if there is a one-sentence takeaway, what would

it say?
Dr. STREIM. Try and figure out a safeguard to make sure that,
if funds are rolled over into VERA, that they are dedicated to make
sure that the strategic plan is actually implemented.
Actually, the GAO did a follow up in 2006 and published a report
showing that funds allocated under the mental health initiative
enhancement initiative actually didnt all get to mental health activities that were part of the intended implementation, according to
the handbook requirements.
And so it is down to follow the dollars and make sure they get
to where they are intended to go.
Dr. STREIM. The appropriations are there. We want them to continue. But we want to make sure they actually do
Mr. FARR. You want a firewall?
Dr. STREIM. Exactly. And I leave it up to you to craft that.
Mr. FARR. Let me ask you one question. You recommend a creation of a new line of mental health research funding for the development, testing and dissemination of an intervention to manage
the psychiatric and behavioral manifestations of Alzheimers disease and other related dementias.
Do the National Institutes of Health already have that?
Dr. STREIM. Yes, the NIH funds the large proportion of the Alzheimers research in the United States currently. The V.A. has actually also taken tremendous initiative in this area. There are geriatric research, education and clinical centers. There are mental illness research, education and clinical centers
Mr. FARR. Then why do we need a line item?
Dr. STREIM. Because we really believe that the Alzheimers research at this point is still underfunded. And the reason we are
particularly concerned now, as I said in my oral testimony, is, with
all the returning veterans from Afghanistan and Iraq theaters, we
are seeing head injuries, and we know that these young veterans
are at risk as they age for developing dementias of the Alzheimer
type. And we want to be as prepared as we can, as they get older,
to follow them up and make sure that the treatments are in place.
Alzheimers research is underway, but we have a long way to go.
Mr. FARR. Thank you. We appreciate your testimony.
Dr. STREIM. Thank you.
Mr. FARR. Moving on, Barbara Cohoon is the Deputy Director of
Government Relations for the National Military Family Association. She is a member of the Department of Defenses Uniform Formulary Beneficiary Advisory Panel. That is a mouthful. She has
been appointed to DODs Defense Health Boards TBI Family Caregivers Panel, Health Care Delivery Subcommittee, and the TBI
Subcommittee.
We look forward to your testimony.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00673
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
674
NATIONAL MILITARY FAMILY ASSOCIATION
WITNESS
BARBARA COHOON
STATEMENT
OF
BARBARA COHOON
Ms. COHOON. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the subcommittee,
the National Military Family Association would like to thank you
for the opportunity to present testimony on the quality of life of
military families, the nations families.
In this statement, our association will address issues of importance to military families, veterans, and survivors regarding family
readiness, family health, and family transition.
Our association is pleased with the attention this subcommittee
has paid to expanding childcare facilities. However, we continue to
hear more childcare services are needed to fill the ever-growing demand. Our association encourages increased funding for drop-in
childcare for medical appointments and restive care on DOD and
V.A. premisespartnerships with other organizations to provide
this valuable service.
Privatized housing is a welcome change for military families.
However, project delays negatively impact the quality of the life of
our families. A visit to Key West, Florida, found a contractor had
only renovated 32 homes out of 890, and no new construction
projects had been completed. We request an oversight hearing to
address these issues.
The V.A. needs to be cognizant of the ever-changing landscape
and needs of their veteran population and those who care for them.
The V.A. needs to offer alternative housing arrangements, which
allows for a diversified population to live together in harmony, fosters independent living, and maintains dignity for all involved. We
recommend V.A. funding for these housing initiatives.
The commissary is a key element of the total compensation package for our military families. Our association is concerned there
will not be enough commissaries to serve areas experiencing substantial growth because of BRAC. Additional flexible funding is
needed to ensure commissaries are built, expanded or renovated in
these areas.
Our association is concerned DOD and the V.A. health care system may not have all the resources it needs to provide access to
health care for all eligible beneficiaries. DOD and V.A.s health
care facilities must meet todays health care demands of the diversified population.
Congress must provide timely and accurate funding for worldclass facilities, offering state-of-the-art services supported by evidence-based research and design.
Family members are a key component of their veterans wellbeing. Our association is especially concerned with the scarcity of
services available to these families as they leave the military.
The V.A. and DOD need to think proactively as a team and as
one system to address issues early in the process and provide tran-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00674
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
675
sitional programs. And these services need to be adequately funded.

Interoperability is crucial. We need to create a seamless transfer
of medical record information, especially as we move toward more
joint facility operations and for our wounded, ill and injured who
frequently transfer between the two agencies health care systems.
We encourage Congress to adequately fund V.A. and DOD I.T.
interoperability.
Caregivers need to be recognized for the important role they play
in the care of their loved ones. Their daily involvement improves
the quality of life of the veteran and saves the V.A. money. In order
to perform their job well, caregivers need to be trained, certified,
and appropriately compensated for the care they provide.
Our association looks forward to discussing details of implementing such a plan with members of this subcommittee. We
would like to see the dependents educational assistance benefit
match the increase in Montgomery G.I. Bill benefits and adjust
proportionately whenever Congress raises servicemembers educational benefits.
Our association asks for dependency and indemnity compensation, DIC equity, with other federal survivor benefits and that it be
increased to 55 percent of V.A. disability compensation. We ask
Congress to make the additional $250 DIC family transitional payments paid by the V.A. retroactive through October 7, 2001, and
that this benefit be linked to COLA in the future.
BRAC and global rebasing are still occurring. For families remaining overseas, additional MILCON funding is needed to rebuild
and upgrade schools. To address these concerns, we urge Congress
to appropriate $100 million in MILCON funding for these schools.
Our association would like to thank you again for the opportunity to present testimony today on the quality of life of our military families. We thank you for your support of our
servicemembers, veterans, their families, and for the survivors who
made the greatest sacrifice.
Military families are our nations families. They serve with pride,
honor, and quiet dedication. We look forward to working with you
to improve the quality of life for all these families.
Thank you, and I await your questions.
[The prepared statement of Barbara Cohoon follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00675
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00676
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
676
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00677
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
677
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00678
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
678
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00679
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
679
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00680
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
680
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00681
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
681
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00682
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
682
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00683
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
683
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00684
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
684
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00685
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
685
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00686
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
686
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00687
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
687
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00688
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
688
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00689
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
689
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00690
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
690
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00691
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
691
692
Mr. FARR. Thank youcertainly, you did that in a timely way,
14 pages of testimony all single spaced. I think you had more requests than all the other witnesses of the day.
Do you have any questions?
Mr. WAMP. It is about the best summary of the quality-of-life
needs that I have actually heard, so whoever did that is very good.
This is a little off that path, though, and you may have to get
back with me on this, but General Casey, General Chiarelli, and
General Caseys wife have all told me personally that there are still
impediments in the law, statutory impediments to outside entities,
nonprofits, even for-profit entities, or individuals from assisting financially military families.
And I have actually got a new bill and old law right here that
I am reviewing, trying to figure out how to approach this. But if
your association can identify any impediments that exist today for
military families, I hear them say that a lot of our free enterprise
system wants to help military families and they cant, they are prohibited by law, by statute.
I need to know where, how, and what to change, because I want
to do that. I feel like that is a missing link. You all clearly make
your case to us on behalf of the taxpayers, but if there is this huge
potential out there of our free enterprise system, besides employers
in the Guard and Reserve, et cetera, people that want to help but
they cant, they are prohibited.
And some of it is gift rules. I am reading all this, but I dont
think it is just direct gifts, like I want to give you food or whatever.
I think it is support.
And that is a question that we need to address every hearing.
But if you all can glean that from your membership and ask, you
know, where have you seen them stopped from helpingpeople
they want to help? Lets say you want to give a van; I dont know.
I mean, just things like that.
So I am just throwing that at you, but I dont expect you to answer the question, but I would love to have you come to my office
and give me any feedback from your membership.
Ms. COHOON. Well, we certainly can do that. America Supports
You, which is a Web site set up by DOD, has a lot of nonprofit entities that provide services for families. And we direct them in that
direction on a regular basis.
Also, too, the military itself has institutions in place as far as to
help out financially, along with the different services on top of that,
too, for them to go to.
So there are organizations that have been giving out large sums
of money and have been givingyou know, fixing up homes and
things like that. So I will certainly go back and talk to members
within our association, as far as what they are hearing regarding
legal aspects that are preventing it from going on.
But we certainly tell people on a regular basis to go to America
Supports You. We also point them in otherbecause our association does not give out money. But we do steer them to organizations that do it on a regular basis and have not heard back that
the organization itself was unable to proceed.
Mr. WAMP. Quickly, because there are 13 others, but let me ask
you, how many of your families still have financial problems that
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00692
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
693
cause them to go to predatory lenders and borrow money that puts
them in a hole that they cant get out of?
And what about divorce? And are you seeing suicide rates go up,
many times from family members who have had financial problems
or divorce while they have been serving? And that pressure leads
to suicide, and some people think it is asymmetrical warfare and
head trauma and all that, which are in some cases, but in most
cases, it is just the pressure on the family. Is that what you see
with your membership?
Ms. COHOON. Well, we are hearing the financial aspect starting
to play out more and more. I was recently in Norfolk, and the special forces are starting to notice, especially foreclosures on homes.
And they themselves have set something up to help them financially with that particular piece.
Because their concern isand it is true across the serviceif you
are thinking about financial issues back home, it is difficult for you
to be able to serve in theater and do your job. And so they are looking at that particular piece.
Predatory lending is still an issue. There are some loopholes
which we can get back to you on that that we would like to see addressed.
But the services themselves, as far as the Navy-Marine Corps
Relief Society, those types of programs have made it so that it is
a little bit easier as far as their servicemembers to go and get
money.
The problem with the mental health issues is, there is a shortage
of providers out there. One of our things that we also had in our
testimony is we need to do a lot more outreach as far as teaching
our families, but also the communities in which they live, signs and
symptoms of mental health issues and then, also, the resources to
go to, because it may not necessarily be the spouse. It is mom or
dad, or it might be the coach that is picking up.
So there are a lot of different moving parts, but we can certainly
get back to you on the lending piece.
Mr. WAMP. Thank you, Barbara.
Mr. FARR. Thank you very much. That Web site is
AmericaSupportsYou.com?
Ms. COHOON. I think it is .gov. It is through DOD. It was set up
some years ago, and it is where all the nonprofits can actually register and that can provide services.
Mr. FARR. I will take a look at it. Thank you very much for your
testimony.
The next witness is Stephen Nolan. Stephen is testifying on behalf of the American Lung Association. In May 2006, he was elected to serve on the board of directors of the American Lung Association. This is the oldest nonprofit health agency in the country.
Welcome to our committee.
AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION
WITNESS
STEPHEN J. NOLAN
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00693
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
694
STATEMENT
OF
STEPHEN J. NOLAN
Mr. NOLAN. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee.

I am Steve Nolan. I am chair of the American Lung Association.
As the chair just indicated, we are the oldest voluntary health organization in the country with over 300,000 volunteers and over 5
million active donors.
I am an attorney in private practice in Baltimore, Maryland, and
have been a volunteer with the American Lung Association for over
10 years.
I am pleased today to be accompanied by our new American
Lung Association president and CEO, Chuck Connor, Captain
Charles Connor, I should say, U.S. Navy, retired. Captain Connor
served our nation in uniform for over 26 years.
First of all, we want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and the committee for increasing the investment in medical research at the
V.A. to $510 million for fiscal year 2009.
There is no doubt that our nation has an undying commitment
to all our veterans, especially the 40 percent of our veterans who
are over age 65. Chronic diseases are now the most prevalent in
the V.A. system. Now is the time to increase funding for research
at the V.A. to meet emerging needs and the existing disease burden.
The American Lung Association recommends and supports increasing V.A. medical and prosthetics research to $575 million.
Tobacco use and the chronic diseases caused and exacerbated by
tobacco take an enormous toll on veterans. We commend the work
of this committee and the Veterans Health Administration to increase smoking cessation.
While cigarette smoking continues to be a problem for veterans,
progress has been made. In 2007, a survey conducted of veterans
enrolled in the Veterans Administration showed that 22 percent of
the entire enrollee population currently smokes cigarettes. In contrast, the general population, the rate of smoking among the general adult population is 19.8 percent.
We recommend that the committee encourage the Department of
Veterans Affairs to work with the Department of Defense to increase effective efforts to prevent tobacco use and increase tobacco
cessation.
Lets try to stop tobacco addiction, end disease before it starts,
and prevent the enormous health toll on this nations veterans and
active-duty military.
Now, lets look at just one lung disease the American Lung Association is fighting. Chronic lung disease causes a large human and
financial cost within the V.A. system. Generally in this country,
lung disease is responsible for 1 out of 6 deaths. It is the thirdleading cause of death in this country.
And in particular, chronic pulmonary obstructive disease affects
approximately 16 percent of the veterans, according to the Department of Veterans Affairs health care.
Proven interventions are effective, and treatments have been
showed to improve quality of life. Chronic obstructive pulmonary
disease, or COPD, is a term referring to two lung diseases, chronic
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00694
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
695
bronchitis and emphysema. Both conditions cause obstruction of

the air flows that interfere with normal breathing.
Emphysema begins with destruction of the airways. As air sacs
are destroyed, the lungs are able to transfer less and less oxygen
to the bloodstream. The lungs also lose their capacity and elasticity, which results in a shortness of breath and difficulty exhaling.
Symptoms of emphysema include cough, shortness of breath, and
limited exercise tolerance. People with COPD may eventually require oxygen and supplemental mechanical respiratory assistance.
The other COPD that I mentioned is chronic bronchitis, and that
refers to inflammation and eventual scarring of the lining of the
lungs and the bronchial tubes.
The bronchial tubes then make an ideal breeding place for bacteria infections, infections which are a frequent reason for hospitalization and emergency visits of veterans and other people with
COPD.
Cigarette smoking is associated with a tenfold increase in the
risk of dying from chronic obstructive lung disease. About 80 percent to 90 percent of all deaths from chronic obstructive lung disease are attributable to cigarette smoking.
It is possible to reduce the burden of COPD and tobacco addiction in the V.A. system through using proven, effective measures,
summarized in national treating tobacco dependence guidelines.
Mr. FARR. Can you wrap it up?
Mr. NOLAN. Yes, your honor.
I would like to say just a few words regarding research
Mr. FARR. You have got about a half a minute.
Mr. NOLAN. Yes, sir. Again, the ALA supports increasing the investment to $575 million.
[The prepared statement of Stephen J. Nolan follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00695
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00696
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
696
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00697
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
697
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00698
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
698
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00699
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
699
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00700
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
700
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00701
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
701
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00702
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
702
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00703
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
703
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00704
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
704
705

Mr. NOLAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. Well, that is the takeaway, but what is the cost of
cigarette smoking to the United States of America each year?
Mr. NOLAN. In H.R. 1256, which was recently passed by the
House, the cost is tremendous. Cigarette companies alone spent
$13.5 billion in 2005 to keep Americans addicted to smoking and
to attract new smokers.
But, sir, I will provide the committee with the actual dollar cost,
the overall dollar cost to our health care system in a supplemental
submission.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00705
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00706
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
Insert graphic folio 1573 50526C.040
706
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00707
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
707
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00708
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
708
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00709
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
709
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00710
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
710
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00711
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
711
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00712
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
712
713
Mr. FARR. Thank you. I have one question. In your testimony,
you point out that the Department of Veterans Affairs estimates
that more than 50 percent of all the active-duty personnel stationed in Iraq smoke. Why?
Mr. NOLAN. Captain Connor.
Mr. FARR. That is 1 out of every 2. Are they smoking before they
go to Iraq or are they picking it up there?
Captain CONNOR. The indications are that they are nonsmokers
before they come into the Army and they pick it up during the
course of their service because some of their sergeants or their seniors smoke. And in theater, they pick this up
Mr. FARR. Are there any penalties for starting to smoke while
you are in the service?
Captain CONNOR. There are no administrative or disciplinary
penalties, but they are coming back from service 50 percent as
smokers when they werent a year or two before.
Mr. FARR. You need to look into that.
Thank you.
Mr. NOLAN. Thank you. I appreciate it.
Mr. FARR. Our next witness is Dr. Heather Kelly, Senior Legislative and Federal Affairs Officer in the Science-Government Relations office of the American Psychological Association, a scientific
and professional organization of more than 150,000 psychologists
and affiliates.
Welcome to our committee, and we look forward to your testimony. We have the testimony and will submit it for the record, so
if you could just summarize it.
AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION
WITNESS
HEATHER KELLY
STATEMENT
OF
HEATHER KELLY
Ms. KELLY. Yes, sir. Thank you.

Good morning, Mr. Vice Chairman, Ranking Member Wamp. As
was mentioned, I am Dr. Heather OBeirne Kelly with the American Psychological Association, APA, and we are a membership organization of more than 150,000 psychologists and affiliates across
the country, both scientific and clinicians focused.
Many of our psychologists work within the Department of Veterans Affairs as both research scientists and clinicians committed
to improving the lives of our nations veterans.
A strong V.A. psychology research program provides the scientific
foundation for high-quality care within the V.A. system. V.A. psychologists play a dual role in both providing care for veterans and
in conducting research in all areas of health, including high-priority areas especially relevant to veterans, such as mental health,
brain injury, substance use, aging-related disorders, and physical
and psychosocial rehabilitation.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00713
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
714
As you know, the current conflicts have presented new challenges for V.A. psychologists, as many veterans of PTSD have postconcussive symptoms extending from blast injury. In addition, V.A.
psychologists often receive special training in rehabilitation psychology and/or neuropsychology, which helps to improve assessment, treatment and research on the many conditions affecting veterans of the current conflicts, including PTSD, burns, amputations,
blindness, spinal cord injuries, and polytrauma.
Equally important are the positive impacts of psychological interventions on the care of veterans suffering from chronic and agingrelated illnesses, such as cancer, cardiovascular disease, HIV, and
pain. I should mention psychologists have a very strong program
within the V.A., in terms of substance abuse prevention and treatment, especially focusing on smoking these days in the current theaters.
Here are my two take-home points. First, APA joins the Friends
of V.A. Medical Care and Health Research, the FOVA coalition, in
urging Congress to provide $575 million in fiscal year 2010 for the
overall V.A. medical and prosthetic research accounts. This recommendation is echoed in the veterans Independent Budget and in
the Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs views and estimates.
We also urge the committee to make sure that our stellar V.A.
scientists have adequate technology, equipment and facilities for
their research. That is my second take-home point.
So within the V.A. minor construction program, which has not
provided the resources needed to adequately maintain, upgrade
and replace aging research facilities, we again join FOVA in urging
Congress to designate $142 million in fiscal year 2010 within the
minor construction budget specifically for renovation of research facilities.
This is not asking for luxury. I mean, it is true that some of
these facilities have research labs that are in worse shape than my
childrens elementary schools, and that should not be the case.
As a psychologist and also as the daughter and granddaughter
of career military officers, I feel very strongly, both personally and
professionally, about our responsibilities towards military personnel and veterans.
The care of veterans suffering psychological wounds as a result
of military service is at the heart of the V.A.s mandate to care for
him who shall have borne the battle. And with your support, V.A.
psychologists stand ready to respond with cutting-edge research
and treatment.
Thank you. And I am happy to take any of your questions.
[The prepared statement of Heather Kelly follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00714
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00715
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
Insert folio 1586 50526C.047
715
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00716
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
716
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00717
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
717
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00718
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
718
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00719
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
719
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00720
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
720
721
Mr. FARR. Thank you very much, less than 2 minutes. Well done.
Mr. WAMP. Thanks for your service and excellent testimony.
When the other witnesses said that we still dont have enough providers for psychological services, what is your association doing to
help us provide those providers through the V.A. in the field so
that we do have adequate mental health services for our returning
population?
Ms. KELLY. Yes. And I can get back to you with a much longer,
specific response, but we echo their concerns. Sometimes the issue
is not as much financial as making sure that theas a previous
witness mentioned, get to the right places so that the money can
be spent on the right things.
And you all have helped in the past couple of yearsdevoted a
lot more support toward mental health professionals. In some
cases, we have those professionals now, and we are waiting to get
them a desk, a computer. So there are a lot of issues around personnel that arent necessarily always pure numbers.
But we can certainly get back to you in terms of what the issues
are and how best we could address those.
Ms. KELLY. I had a nice meeting with your staff last week on
some of these issues. They have been very helpful.
Mr. FARR. In the office of the American Psychological Association, you represent all the professionals in the association, not
those just that are in the V.A.
Ms. KELLY. Correct.
Mr. FARR. or any government
Ms. KELLY. Yes.
Mr. FARR. And what we have been trying to do ismatch those
professionals with the patients in their hometown communities.
Ms. KELLY. We have had a lot of interest from our membership
across the country, both in terms of Reserve, V.A., and active
dutypsychologists who practice as clinicians who want to be of
service, of volunteer service to military and veteran personnel.
And we are tryingand as NMFA mentioned, we are trying to
find the best ways to hook up appropriate personnel with appropriate training in ways that they can be helpful to sort of augment
what the military and the V.A. population of mental health professionals can provide.
Mr. FARR. A very effective Web site you might look at is called
networkofcare.org. It tries to link up resources county by county in
the United States, so that you really know what all the network
of care in a given field, Alzheimers or mental health, or other
kinds of diseases, what kind of resources are there in the civilian
community, as well as the government.
Ms. KELLY. Thank you.
Mr. FARR. Well, thank you for your testimony.
Ms. KELLY. Thank you very much.
Mr. FARR. Next witness is with the American Thoracic Society,
Jesse Roman-Rodriguez, who is testifying on behalf of the American Thoracic Society, a medical professional organization of over
15,000 members dedicated to the prevention, treatment, research,
and cure of respiratory disease.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00721
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
722
Dr. Roman-Rodriguez is a professor of medicine at the Emory
University School of Medicine and is also staff physician at the
Emory Clinic and the Atlanta Veterans Affairs Medical Center.
Welcome to our committee.
AMERICAN THORACIC SOCIETY
WITNESS
JESSE ROMAN-RODRIGUEZ, MD
STATEMENT
OF
JESSE ROMAN-RODRIGUEZ
Dr. ROMAN-RODRIGUEZ. Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.
My name is Jesse Roman-Rodriguez, as you heard. I serve at the
Atlanta V.A. Medical Center, and I am here to talk to you about
the good things that V.A. provides, but also to request that you
provide funding for its infrastructure.
I am excited to be here because of the many things the V.A. medical research and prosthetic research program provides. I know I
have only a few minutes, so I am going to focus on a couple of
things that I believe are truly outstanding about this program.
As you mentioned, I testify on behalf to the American Thoracic
Society. It is a 15,000-member medical professional society dedicated to the research, prevention, treatment and cure of respiratory
disorders. Like me, there are many ATS members that serve in
V.A. facilities all across the country.
This organization is especially committed to ensuring the continuation of strong V.A. medical and prosthetic research program.
And it is grateful that, in the past year, there has been increases
in the V.A. funding, and we request the subcommittee to provide
$575 million for the V.A. research program in 2010.
Now, why support the V.A.? And you have heard other witnesses
describe that. Let me give you my version of it.
First, the V.A. research program attracts many bright, young
physicians to serve our nations veterans. You have the best physicians. You also have the best trainees. And that is a crucial component with what the V.A. does, and these are people devoted to taking care of veterans.
I came to the V.A. because of its research program. I trained in
the V.A. in San Juan. Later on, I went to the St. Louis V.A. I have
been 17 years at the Atlanta V.A., and I am moving on to Kentucky
to the Louisville V.A. And it is a program that I would not leave.
Based on my experience, and the experience of my colleagues and
many others, I am convinced that the V.A. research program keeps
high-quality doctors within the system. The grants, the mentorship
opportunities that are there really attract these people who are actually devoted to the care of patients. And, therefore, being able to
maintain a clinical research career there is highly attractive for
these physicians.
The second point that I want to make is the V.A. research program excels in clinical research. It is great to perform research in
tissue culture and Petri dishes and so forth, but we have got to
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00722
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
723
translate that research to the human condition and the care of patients. That is something the V.A. researchers do and do extremely
well.
In my own place, research performed by my colleagues has improved dramatically the care of critically ill veterans and veterans
with tobacco-related diseases, diabetes, hypertension, and so forth.
The third point is that the V.A. research produces really outstanding science. These findings can be found in the top journals,
New England Journal of Medicine, Journal of the American Medical Society, and so forth.
I will give you one example at my own V.A. I have a group that
is involved in alcohol-related research and its relationship with the
lung. Until the mid-1990s, there was no known association between
those two. Now, because of this group, we know that chronic alcohol abuse increases susceptibility to acute lung injury, which kills
about 50 percent of the people who develop it.
This group, over the past decade, has found the mechanism by
which this happens, has found a receptor that affectsthat relates
to alcohol in the lung, and is looking very carefully into potential
therapeutic targets to treat that. So whether it is alcohol abuse,
lung cancer, heart disease, Parkinsons, V.A.s researchers are looking into that.
And, lastly, the V.A. research program is good for veterans. Its
program is devoted to taking care of diseases that haveor that affect the veteran population.
What is the problem? Well, one of the problemsone of the dark
spots here is the infrastructure in the V.A. aging facilities. The
V.A. research labs are woefully out of date. The sub-par research
facilities are making it increasingly hard to recruit and retain topflight physician researchers into the V.A.
The ATS greatly appreciates this subcommittee bringing attention to this area by supporting and developing a report that will
look at the V.A. infrastructure. Unfortunately, the funds are really
needed now so that we dont continue to neglect V.A. research labs.
Funds to refurbish V.A. research are desperately needed in 2010.
ATS strongly recommends that $142 million be provided to rehabilitate the existing laboratory space.
So, Mr. Chairman, I think it is clear that V.A. research provides
a lot of good things to a lot of good people for a little money. I hope
you will continue to support the nations veterans to provide $575
million for the V.A. research program and $172 million to improve
its infrastructure and space rehabilitation for 2010.
Thank you. And I will answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Jesse Roman-Rodriguez follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00723
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00724
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
724
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00725
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
725
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00726
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
726
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00727
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
727
728
Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. No questions. Thank you.
Mr. FARR. How many research facilities are there?
Dr. ROMAN-RODRIGUEZ. Around 52 or so, one or two per state.
Mr. FARR. And $142 million will take care of that, huh?
Dr. ROMAN-RODRIGUEZ. It will go a long way to improving the research laboratory structure, yes, sir.
Mr. FARR. Okay, thank you very much. We appreciate your testimony, Doctor.
Dr. ROMAN-RODRIGUEZ. Thank you.
Mr. FARR. Next witness is Joe Barnes, who is the Fleet Reserve
Associations national executive director. He is also a senior lobbyist and chairman of the associations National Committee on Legislative Service.
Thank you for being here today.
FLEET RESERVE ASSOCIATION
WITNESS
JOE BARNES, USN, RET.
STATEMENT
OF
JOSEPH L. BARNES
Mr. BARNES. Thank you, Congressman, Ranking Member Wamp.

It is a pleasure to be here.
Thank you for the opportunity to present FRAs legislative goals.
My name is Joe Barnes. I am the FRAs national executive director.
And with me today is Gerald Brice, a constituent of Representative
Wamps, and FRAs southeast region vice president from Chattanooga, Tennessee.
Mr. FARR. Thank you for coming.
Mr. BARNES. He is here to participate in FRAs Hill business day,
in conjunction with our national board of directors meeting tomorrow and Saturday.
A continuing concern for FRA is ensuring that wounded troops,
their families, and the survivors of those killed in action are cared
for a grateful nation. This includes adequate and sustained funding
to ensure quality health care, support and benefits, medical and
prosthetic research, and a smooth, seamless transition for veterans
transitioning from DOD to the V.A. for care.
There is progress towards these goals, and FRA sincerely appreciates the strong support from this distinguished subcommittee in
achieving this. FRA appreciates and firmly supports the administrations plan to submit a 2010 V.A. budget of $113 billion, which
is $15 billion higher than this years budget.
Much of the significant increase in discretionary funding will go
to V.A. medical care. And FRA notes that the proposal exceeds the
Independent Budget recommendations by $1.3 billion.
FRA also supports legislation to authorize advanced appropriations for V.A. medical care and, if approved, urges adequate appropriations to support this initiative.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00728
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
729
FRA also supports the timely enactmentor appreciates the
timely enactment of the 2009 V.A. budget, which was the first time
in 15 years that this legislation was passed on time.
The association also supports increased funding to support improvements to the Veterans Benefits Administration paperless system and to expand access to additional Priority Group 8 veterans
seeking care in the V.A. health care facilities.
The administrations budget outline also references the importance of further expanding the concurrent receipt of disability compensation and retirement pay for those medically retired from service.
Full concurrent receipt for all disabled military retirees is a longstanding FRA priority, and the association strongly supports adequate appropriations to support this initiative.
FRA continues its strong opposition to enrollment fees for lower
priority group veterans seeking care in the V.A. health care system. There are approximately 1.3 million veterans in Priority
Groups 7 and 8, and the association supports adequate appropriations to prevent shifting costs to them for care they are earned in
service to our nation.
Although not under the jurisdiction of this subcommittee, FRA
also continues its opposition to TRICARE fee increases for military
retirees and believes there are other cost-saving options which
must be implemented to help address funding challenges.
The association salutes Chairman Edwards for his leadership on
this issue and strongly supports the Military Retirees Health Care
Protection Act, H.R. 816, which, along with adequate V.A. health
care funding, is being addressed by our associations leadership
during nearly 40 visits to various members of Congress today. We
also appreciate Ranking Member Wamps co-sponsorship for this
legislation.
FRA strongly supports adequate funding to support medical and
prosthetic research and to reform the antiquated Veterans Benefits
Administration paper claims system to help address the chronic
claims backlog.
Regarding military construction and quality-of-life programs,
FRA appreciates the tradition of inviting senior enlisted leaders to
testify before this distinguished subcommittee each year. This is
the only opportunity for these leaders to testify on Capitol Hill regarding important quality-of-life programs.
As noted by MCPON Rick West and Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps Carlton Kent, family housing and barracks construction
and childcare facilities are top concerns and directly relate to the
morale of our servicemembers and to ensuring family readiness.
FRA strongly supports funding for these important programs,
which includes the Navys home port ashore and other housing and
barracks projects, and the expansion of childcare centers.
In closing, allow me to again express the sincere appreciation of
the associations leadership for all that you and members of this
distinguished subcommittee and your respective staffs do for our
nations servicemembers and those who served in the past.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Joseph L. Barnes follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00729
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00730
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
730
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00731
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
731
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00732
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
732
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00733
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
733
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00734
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
734
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00735
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
735
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00736
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
736
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00737
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
737
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00738
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
738
739
Mr. FARR. Thank you, Mr. Barnes.

Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. Real quickly, I want to thank Mr. Barnes, but mostly
Gerald Brice back there. Every one of us has somebody in our district that is a true veteran advocate that you hear from all the time
and follows all the issues, who beats the drum, who wears you out,
and that is him.
So I am honored that you are here in this room today. So thank
you for coming today and supporting Mr. Barnes excellent testimony.
I think the issues that you bring to us, this subcommittee is fully
committed to. We just need to keep working together to push the
ball further down the field.
So thank you for your presentation.
Mr. BARNES. Thank you.
Mr. FARR. Perhaps you could give the committee your input on
TRICARE fees. There is strong opposition to TRICARE fee increases from military retirees and there are other cost-saving options which must be implemented.
Could you give some examples of those cost-savings?
Mr. BARNES. Well, yes, Congressman. The drastic proposal to increase TRICARE fees has been proposed for the past 3 years by the
Department of Defense. We firmly believe there are other cost-saving options, such as expanding use of the more cost-effective mailorder pharmacy, wellness programs, which are addressed in this
years defense authorization bill, federal pricing, for example,
which is being implemented, results in significant savings, and
there are other options.
I can get a more complete list
Mr. FARR. Yes, I would likehelpful, as we do this whole, big
health care bill, we are going to have to find those cost-saving options. And your recommendations would be very helpful.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00739
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00740
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
740
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00741
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
741
742
Mr. BARNES. Thank you, sir.
Mr. FARR. Thank you very much. We really appreciate your testimony.
Mr. BARNES. Thank you.
Mr. FARR. The next witness is from the National Association for
Uniformed Services, Rick Jones. Mr. Jones joined the National Association for Uniformed Services as its legislative director in 2005.
Before this position, he served 5 years as the national legislative
director for AMVETS. He is an Army veteran who served as a medical specialist during the Vietnam War.
Welcome back.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR UNIFORMED SERVICES
WITNESS
RICK JONES
STATEMENT
OF
RICK JONES
Mr. JONES. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Vice Chairman Farr. Appreciate being here.
Thank you, Ranking Member Wamp.
We want to, first of all, express our deep gratitude to you, Vice
Chairman, and Chairman Edwards, and Ranking Member Wamp,
and all of the members of this subcommittee for your deep concern
and your expressed interest in assuring that veterans were a number-one priority over the past 3 years.
You have done a superb job of marking up the bill and providing
the funds that are needed to care for our men and women who
serve this country and defend our cherished freedoms. Thank you
so very much.
Mr. FARR. And we will continue to do so.
Mr. JONES. I was pleased also to hear your interest in sustaining
TRICARE. As Mr. Barnes presented, I know that is not an issue
that is before you, but we are very pleased to hear your interest.
It is a very important earned benefit for those who serve more than
20 years in the military and the uniformed services. Your attention
is deeply appreciated.
On military constructionand we strongly recommend that you
continue to develop BRAC realignment accounts, which included
housing and barracks, medical facilities, childcare, training facilities, make sure they are in place, please, for our returning troops.
If facilities are not ready, as you know, and funding construction
will be delayed or deficient, there will be insufficient housing, insufficient barracks. Childcare will go wanting. So these are needed
when they are needed, and we trust that you will understand this,
as you have in the past provided adequate funding in these accounts. There are more that need to be done. There is more that
needs to be done.
While we havent yet received the full budget from the administration regarding the Department of Veterans Affairs, we cant
really build on the comments and recommendations of the president, but we can, however, and do endorse the Independent Budget
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00742
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
743
document, which has been formulated by four of the major veteran

service organizations and vets, Disabled American Veterans, Paralyzed Veterans of America, and Veterans of Foreign Wars, which
you will hear from later today in this hearing for public witnesses.
At a minimum, we recommend that you increase the Department
of Veterans Affairs budget approximately to $54.6 billion. That is
an increase of $4.3 billion over current funding, about as much is
being requested by the Independent Budget.
I recognize that the administrations initial outline of this budget
increases the funding an additional billion dollars. We are yet to
see those details. And what details we have seen to this date have
been somewhat suspect. One of those details was the third-party
funding for war-injured wounded veterans, which we are thankful
has been taken off the table, so we have been informed.
We also support research initiatives in the areas that have directly benefited not only veterans, but the public at large. And we
also support lifting the ban on access to V.A. health care for our
Priority 8 veterans. And denying access really only devalues the
service of those who seek care.
And we do recognize and are pleased to see the additional funding that has been provided for some 550,000 Priority 8 veterans
over the next 3 years, but more can be done. There are many priority veteransPriority 8 veterans who cant identify private or
public health insurance. And we would like to see that insurance
brought into the system. We think that is one way to bolster funding for the care of these Priority 8 veterans.
We urge this subcommittee to take action to honor our obligation
to these men and women and not force V.A. to ration, deny or delay
care.
At the close of March, regarding disability claims benefits, VBA
had more than 697 claims pending. That is a 30,000 claim increase
over this time last year. We recognize that there are problems over
there, and there are deep problems. We recognize that you have
provided funding, and additional claims adjudicators are in process
to deal with these claims.
But yet we need to pay attention to that and not fall backward
on the advances that you have made already to date in providing
the funding that is necessary to upgrade the benefit claims process.
Seamless transition. The president has made himself very clear
on this issue. We are very pleased to see the president and yourselves in line regarding the electronic health record. You know, this
goes back to Chuck Percy, a senator from Ohio, who in 1982, directed the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of
Defense to come together and provide this sort of electronic health
record.
The stove piping in the Department of Defense has been a very
serious problem and one that hopefully you will take care of.
Again, I thank you so very much for giving us the opportunity
to testify today. We deeply appreciate your care of the men and
women who serve this country.
[The prepared statement of Rick Jones follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00743
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00744
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
744
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00745
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
745
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00746
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
746
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00747
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
747
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00748
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
748
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00749
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
749
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00750
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
750
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00751
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
751
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00752
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
752
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00753
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
753
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00754
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
754
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00755
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
755
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00756
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
756
757
Mr. Wamp.
Thank you for your service. I wanted to ask one question that
was very comprehensive. In my district, we have 28,000 veterans.
And we have a great veterans clinic. We also have over 6,000 men
and women in uniform. We are trying to do a joint DOD-veterans
clinic. And a lot of the recommendations in here, I think, were very
helpful to try to do that.
One thing I would recommend that you look at is that with the
bases that are growing, the new bases in the realignment, you put
in your testimony about childcare and medical facilities and barracks, but it is also schools that are going to be needed.
Mr. JONES. Yes, sir. Thank you.
Mr. FARR. You need funding sources for that, this committee is
learning.
Mr. JONES. Yes, sir. The marriage rate is way up, and that
means children. And your understanding of that is wonderful to
hear.
Mr. FARR. Thank you very much. Thank you for your testimony.
Mr. JONES. Thank you, sir.
Mr. FARR. I would like to now welcome back John Maupin, who
is president of the Morehouse School of Medicine and is testifying
on behalf of the Association of Minority Health Professions Schools.
Welcome back, and thank you very much. We have your testimony for the record. And if you could just summarize it, we would
appreciate it.
ASSOCIATION OF MINORITY HEALTH PROFESSIONS
SCHOOLS, INC.
WITNESS
JOHN E. MAUPIN, JR., DDS, MBA
STATEMENT
OF
JOHN E. MAUPIN
Mr. MAUPIN [continuing]. I have provided a corrected copy. And

I will give you a quick summary.
First, let me say thank you to the committee as a whole and to
yourself, Congressman Farr, and to, of course, my friend, Congressman Zach Wamp. Your involvement and engagement with the V.A.
and encouraging them to have greater collaboration with the minority medical schools, specifically our AMHPS schools, has really
gone a long way in terms of progress in our endeavors for full integration into the V.A. system.
Their recent report provides, as you asked, provides an overview
of activities. While it does provide an overview of activities, it
doesnt quite hit on some of the issues that still remain, if we are
going to have an optimal relationship within the V.A. system.
In fact, I would just highlight for a moment, in one of their reports, on their report ontable one, they talk about all of the historically black colleges and universities where students and residents receive V.A. clinical training.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00757
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
758
That report, quite frankly, is a list of all the historically black
colleges that are located in a V.A. city, but that does not mean that
all these schools have relationships with V.A.
So it is a little misleading and a little disconcerting that they
would make that inclusion, as if there is a greater level of activity
when it is not. So that shows that we still have a lot to learn about
each other.
My comments today are really to provide you with some very
specific recommendations that we believe will go a long ways to fostering a greater involvement of our institutions within the V.A. system.
We believe that the national V.A. should extend its efforts beyond the division level to the hospital relations level, to the hospital leadership level in each of these areas.
We know, for example, that without strong advocacy and sustained involvement of V.A. leadership at both the V.A. and the
medical center level, normal competitive tensions between schools,
where one institution has a longstanding relationship, the V.A. personnel often have difficulty in engaging in new collaborative relationships.
Where there have been successes, it has clearly been at both the
V.A.at the division level and at the hospital leadership level, as
well.
We want to continue to encourage an increase in the number of
residency positions and to ensure greater integration of our schools
into core residency programs, such as medicine and surgery, and
other procedural services.
We have had great involvement in primary care areas, in the
out-patient areas, but very little involvement still in the in-patient
areas, in particular surgery and internal medicine. We have in-patient psychiatry, for example, at Meharry, but not involvement in
in-patient surgery.
There are plans for in-patient surgery, but that has been slow,
in-patient medicine, that has been slow, butand we have had
very little, if at all, discussions about in-patient surgery. There is
still a lot of pushback of our integration in those key areas, from
an in-patient perspective.
We would also like to encourage that there be appropriate funding for attending physicians within the V.A. so that we could have
both full- and part-time individuals. Right now, we have residents
that are engaged in the V.A., but they are under the supervision
of the existing pool of faculty. And so we believe that there ought
to be an opening up of the opportunity for us to also have faculty
that are a part of the V.A.
There has also been a restriction in part-time faculty use in the
past by the V.A. I think it is an opportunity to expand without the
full cost of full-time faculty. And so we would encourage the committee to encourage the V.A. to reconsider its restrictions on parttime faculty.
In addition, we hope that we will be able to play a leadership
role in the new initiatives that the V.A. has been involved in. We
are encouraged that the V.A. has made progress, for example, in
womens health, and they have involved Meharry Medical College
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00758
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
759
and the leadership of the established men and womens health program there in the Nashville area.
But we also know that there are other opportunities that we are
uniquely suited for and have national leaders in the various disciplines, that if given the opportunity, we would love to be involved
in opening up new initiatives in those areas.
We also hope that we are able to facilitate the full participation
and the expansion of subspecialty services. One of the things we
ran into was an additional restriction. Our schools are primarycare focused, and we have generalist training.
But even in the generalist training, we have subspecialists that
are on our faculty that can provide services. There is a restriction
that you cannot be involved in those areas unless you have a subspecialty training program. We think that restriction is not in the
best interests of providing care and does not particularly help us,
in terms of the recruitment of new faculty.
There are other areas which are in my document, and I would
love to take questions from you. We have made progress. We have
a lot more to do. Your involvement has meant a lot to what has
happened. We need the V.A. national, division, and the local to be
engaged and fully understand that this is something that must
occur, in terms of full integration of our schools into the V.A. system.
[The prepared statement of John E. Maupin follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00759
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00760
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
Insert graphic folio 1650 here 50526C.081
760
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00761
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
761
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00762
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
762
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00763
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
763
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00764
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
764
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00765
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
765
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00766
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
766
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00767
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
767
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00768
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
768
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00769
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
769
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00770
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
770
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00771
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
771
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00772
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
772
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00773
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
773
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00774
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
774
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00775
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
775
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00776
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
776
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00777
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
777
778
Mr. FARR. Thank you very much. Appreciate you coming back
this year. And, again, your testimony is very helpful.
Mr. WAMP. All I would say is that I support Dr. Maupins request. As a matter of fact, it is on my Web site, a written request
for the coming years that these things are honored by this committee and that everyone is encouraged to do exactly what he just
testified.
Mr. FARR. Okay, thank you. We will put your revised copy in the
record.
Mr. Edwards has arrived, so he will chair his committee.
Mr. EDWARDS [presiding]. Let me first thank Mr. Farr and Mr.
Wamp for keeping this subcommittee in good hands. I was working
on a project that has been 68,000 years in the making. A lot of
mammoths had to die in my district nearly 70,000 years ago, and
we are trying to protect that with the National Park Service.
I am very glad to be back. But thank you for conducting the
hearing this morning.
We are honored to have Patrick Campbell with the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. Appreciate very much your service
to our country and your continued service speaking out on behalf
of Americas veterans.
And I would like to recognize you for 5 minutes at this point.
IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN VETERANS OF AMERICA
WITNESS
PATRICK CAMPBELL
STATEMENT
OF
PATRICK CAMPBELL
Mr. CAMPBELL. Well, thank you.

This is a new thing for me. I have never been down here before.
I feel
Mr. EDWARDS. It is much more comfortable
Mr. CAMPBELL [continuing]. Much more comfortable
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Than the other
Mr. CAMPBELL. Actually, it is a little more intimate, a little more
intimate than the other hearingwell, if I am here to say anythingI read a lot of the testimony; you have probably about 500
pages worth of paper to read after all thisand that is to say
thank you.
You know, the people that I represent are men and women who
are currently serving in Iraq and Afghanistan who are thinking
about what it is going to be like when they come home. And for
the last 7 years, we have been fighting a war, but this country
hasnt been prepared to deal with those people coming home.
And 2 years ago, this Congress said we are going to make a commitment to veterans. And you started fully funding the V.A. for the
first time in 77 years. And I just want to say thank you for that
commitment, because that commitment is making all the difference.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00778
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
779
Unfortunately, it was just the beginning. I mean, right now, as
you know, we surged into Iraq, and we are surging into Afghanistan, but soon that soldier is going to be coming home. And what
that foundation that you have built over the past 2 years of fully
funding the V.A. is just building a baseline.
This is not the end point. We need it to keep growing and keep
building, because we have one opportunity to get in front of these
veterans and give them an opportunity to transition into, you
know, a good future.
As you know, I served in Iraq in 20042005. And even to this
day, I am still suffering from some of the issues that I dealt with
over there. It has a profound effect on my work and an even more
profound effect on my relationships.
And I utilize the V.A. I utilize the veterans centers as an opportunity for me to transition back into the world that I left.
The soldier that is coming home, we have one opportunity to get
ahead on traumatic brain injury. We need to develop through the
centers of excellence an effective screen before and after so that we
have an idea, when someone like myself drops a tank hatch on my
headI didnt tell you I was the smartest person everwhen I
drop a tank hatch on my head and I knock myself out for a minute,
that I dont find out that, you know, through some random test
that I take on later that I am suffering from severe short-term
memory loss.
I should be finding that through the V.A. When I go access the
V.A., they should be testing me, saying, Did you have any explosions? When I was in Iraq, we got blown up 13 times. I was in
five car accidents, and I dropped a tank hatch on my head and
knocked myself out, but I have never once been screened by the
V.A. for the traumatic brain injury. I think that is a problem.
It took members of the House Veterans Affairs Committee staff
to convince me to go get counseling. I think that is a problem. And
we are not creating a problem where the V.A. is actually reaching
out and getting veterans and bringing them into the system. The
V.A. is still a passive system, sitting and waiting.
The V.A. has started to put its toe into the waters of doing outreach. You might have seen the bus ads that they had around here,
but it is still kind of almost an afterthought.
And if I could ask any one thing about this committee that you
havent already been paying attention to is that we need to have
a direct line item for outreach, and it needs to be a part of everything that we do, where the V.A. is aggressively marketing the
benefits that already exist.
The other thing that we need to work onand this is something
I know this committee is getting into the jurisdiction of is we will
start giving the V.A. the resources and the opportunity to spend
those resources effectively.
And I know, Mr. Chairman, you and I have talked about advance
appropriations before, and I think that this is the way in which you
help veterans like veteran Marine Ray Real in southwest Texas,
who has to drive 6 hours to go to his PTSD appointment.
When Ray wants to set up an appointment, he has to call like
a U2 concert ticket on the first day of every month to sign up from
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00779
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
780
the 2 days a week that they have PTSD counseling, and he has to
drive 6 hours once he actually does get that appointment.
And if he misses out on that appointment, if he doesnt get that
appointment then, he has to wait a whole other month.
Nowall of a sudden make sure he gets it, but that might mean
they will have one more day. They will be able to use their dollars,
stretch them a little bit wider and maybe provide one more day of
services for someone like Ray Real.
And to take this even farther, Rayhe tried to get an appointment recently. And he was denied, because they didnt have space.
And recently he got in a fight, and, unfortunately, killed the person
he was dealing with, and is now spending the rest of his lifetime
in jail. This is someone who reached out for help and was turned
away at the door.
So this is something that, if we dont deal with it now, we are
going to lose these veterans as we go along.
We need to make sure that we are taking care of our female vets,
which was something that is new to this generation. Eleven percent of Iraq and Afghanistan vets are female, and we need to make
sure that they have the facilities they need.
And, obviously, I care a little bit about the G.I. Bill. We need to
make sure that the G.I. Bill is done right. I know that the actual
benefits itself are not done through this committee, but giving
them the resources they need to implement it is done through this
committee.
And thank you very much for the opportunity to be here.
[The prepared statement of Patrick Campbell follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00780
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00781
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
781
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00782
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
782
783
Mr. EDWARDS. Patrick, thank you for your testimony and, obviously, we will do a lot of follow up to the points you have made.
I just want to say you complimented this committee. The accomplishments we have had over the last several years, you and your
organization have certainly been a critical part of that. So thank
you for the difference you are making.
And I was under the impression now that V.A. did screen every
veteran coming in, for whatever reason they are coming in to the
V.A. hospitals, that they are being screened for TBI and PTSD.
Mr. CAMPBELL. Only if you go to a V.A. medical center, and it
is a paper screen. This gets back to, we have not developed an appropriate screen that actually effectively detects. But if you go to
a vet center, you dont do that screen. And so, you know, lots of
people are usingI call the vet centers the gateway toyou know,
into the V.A. And, you know, we need to be expanding those programs for the vet center.
Mr. EDWARDS. We will follow up on that.
Any questions, Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. Gratitude for Patrick and all the people he represents. No questions. Thank you for your testimony.
Mr. CAMPBELL. Thank you.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you. You have been a great spokesman for
our veterans.
Any questions?
Mr. FARR. Yes, one. Thank you. Your testimony and your list
here is very helpful. We certainly will implement it.
I would like to follow up on why we cant get that veteran PTSD
services in his hometown.
Mr. CAMPBELL. I agree.
Mr. FARR. There is no reason you have to go that far to our clinical psychologist who can provide that service.
Mr. CAMPBELL. All it takes is a standard. And right now, the
V.A.it is individually based that says, you know, each regional officer gets to make a decision on whether or not that is too far to
drive. And when you make it individually based, you know, people
are going to do what they can to save money.
Andif you drive over 70 miles to get counseling, that is too far.
You know, I am not going to say something that is going to cause
everyone herewe need to privatize health care, but what we do
need is we need a clear, bright-line standard: This is too far to
drive. This is too far to go.
And then give them the discretion for anything that is closer.
And that will help answer, so everyone will know what is appropriate and what isnt.
Mr. FARR. It is a good suggestion. Thank you very much.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony.
We would now like to call Dr. Stanley Appel with the ALS Therapy Development Institute.
Dr. Appel, thank you for being here today. I would like to recognize you for 5 minutes.
And I think it has been said, assuming everyone was here and
heard it, that your full testimony will be made part of the record.
And then we ask each witness to limit their comments to 5 minutes.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00783
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
784
Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Appel.
ALS THERAPY DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE
WITNESS
STANLEY APPEL, MD
STATEMENT
OF
STANLEY APPEL
Dr. APPEL. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I would like to
thank you and the subcommittee for allowing me to talk about one
of the scourges of our servicemen coming back from their service,
namely Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, Lou Gehrigs disease.
I also want to acknowledge the support of several of your colleagues, Congressman Capuano, who has been tireless in championing a therapy program for ALS, Congressman Brown of the
Veterans Affairs Committee, Chairman Spratt have also recognized
the value of a targeted therapy program, and they are both friends
of General Mikolajcik of South Carolina who, unfortunately, has
ALS and couldnt be here today.
And I would also like to acknowledge that Congressman Patrick
Kennedy sits in the Appropriations Committee with you and has a
personal interest in ALS.
Let me make several points. One is, the importance of ALS to the
military. It turns out that, if you served in the first Gulf War, you
have twice the chance of developing ALS than if you served any
place else, an incredible statistic.
If, in fact, you serve in the military, you have an increased likelihood, a 60 percent likelihood of developing ALS than if you didnt
serve in the military.
Now, what is ALS? ALS is the most horrific, devastating disease.
I happen to have been chairman of neurology at Duke University
and Baylor College of Medicine for 27 years. I chair the department
of neurology at Methodist Hospital in Houston now. And I will tell
you, of all the diseases we take care of, nothing matches ALS with
the devastation.
You cant walk, so you are in a wheelchair. Then you cant use
your arms. Then you cant talk. Then you cant swallow. Then you
cant breathe and you die in 3 to 5 years.
And we have no cure for this disease, and it is over-represented
in our military, and that is the major point that I want to address
to your subcommittee, because it is key and critical that we have
a comprehensive approach.
It doesnt mean that, in my laboratory, which is basic science and
applied, that we arent doing individual things as goes on and my
colleagues at Hopkins, at Harvard, et cetera, but it does mean that
there is no comprehensive approach to the development of therapies. There is no comprehensive approach.
So ALS Therapy Development Institute in Boston is a nonprofit,
almost biotech-like company in developing therapy development approaches. It is a group of 30 scientists who are culled from pharmaceutical companies who have a passion and motivation to solve
this.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00784
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
785
Pharmaceutical companies arent interested in this. This is an

orphan disease. They are not particularly interested whether it affects more military people than anyone else, but they themselves
hopefully will be able to get some of the developments that go on
at places like ALS TDI to our patients, because, once you have got
a drug or a good drug, then they will spend $100 million or $200
million that is necessary to take it there.
But we absolutely need to declare war on ALS. And that is somethingNIH hasnt declared war on ALS. But because it is overrepresented in the military population, I really urge you all to consider that.
We have a lot of servicemen coming back from Iraq, Afghanistan,
the Gulf War, and many of them will develop ALS, and we have
very little to offer them. So I urge you to consider a comprehensive
program like this.
I am not here to ask for funding for ALS TDI. What I am here
to do is to ask you all to develop a comprehensive program. ALS
TDI does it, but there are other ways. But it is most critical that
you focus on this very needy population of our veterans coming
back.
They have been in the battle. Many of them have won the battles. They are losing this.
ALS is not an incurable disease. It is an underfunded disease.
These folks coming back are, in fact, in a war, and they dont have
the tools, they dont have the ammunition to get the enemy, namely ALS.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Stanley Appel follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00785
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00786
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
786
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00787
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
787
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00788
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
788
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00789
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
789
790
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Dr. Appel. Could I ask you, is there
speculation or has research indicated why men and women serving
in the military would have such a higher percentage of having ALS
than those who have not served?
Dr. APPEL. It is absolutely key and critical that there are environmental factors that are triggering this. I would like to tell you
from all our investigation, epidemiologically or through the V.A.
registry, that we have identified those.
We have identified some of them, maybe the toxins that our servicemen were exposed to in the Gulf War, but it is not clear that
that is the sole environmental factor. So it is key that they are encountering environmental factors.
And the second issue, obviously, there is some susceptibility. And
we have recognized. We have done genome-widewhat we call
SNP, single-nucleotide polymorphism, looking for this. And we
have identified 50 or 100 genes, but it is not at a point where we
can apply it through our V.A. to our servicemen to identify that.
So it is a complex mixture, and yet it is factual.
But you dont need to identify the cause. Penicillin has cured an
awful lot of people before we understood how it worked. We need
to have a comprehensive program that will target therapy development, and that is what we dont have in the United States, and we
dont have in our V.A. system.
Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. Well, just briefly, if you take the numbers of veterans
that we have and you assume that there is some similar outcome
with the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as you had with
Desert Storm, what kind of population are you expecting to end up
with ALS, based on our current warfighting strength?
Dr. APPEL. I dont have the specific answer to that, because that
is a great question that requires a specific number based on this.
But if you look in the United States, there are 40,000 patients living with ALS.
This disease everyone thinks is a rare orphan disease. It is not.
It is because the patients die so quickly that, when you sample the
populations, you dont see them. But we will try and get those
numbers for you, because I think that is important information.
Your question is somewhat difficult to answer, as the reasons for the increased
incidence rate of ALS in military veterans are not understood. For now, I can tell
you that the lowest possible number of future ALS diagnoses of those who have
served in the War on Terror would be about 100. That number clearly understates
the potential magnitude of the problem. We do not yet know what is causing this
increase in incidence, and we do not know the time interval between the exposure
and the development of first symptoms. That latency could be as much as several
decades. As a result, the figure will be considerably higher since exposures in this
particular region, or factors of contemporary warfare may have more of an effect on
these soldiers than we presently realize. In the 2008 Report of the Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans Illnesses, the panel expressed its great concern that the full impact of this disease on Gulf War veterans might not be known
for decades. When you consider that the incidence around the world is 12 cases
per 100,000 individuals, I am certain you can appreciate that even 100 cases represents an extremely large cohort. To put this range into perspective it is important
to note that during this same period there have been roughly 1,000 amputations resulting from combat.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00790
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
791
I ask you to remember, too, that research has also found that ALS is striking veterans at considerably younger ages than the national average.

Dr. APPEL. Thank you, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Sam.
Mr. FARR. Just one question.
Dr. APPEL. Yes, sir.
Mr. FARR. In the comprehensive strategy that you are urging, is
there another modality, another disease where we do have that
comprehensive strategy?
Dr. APPEL. There are a number of diseases where it is financially
profitable for the pharmaceutical company to invest the kind of resources that would do it. Heart disease, stroke, hypertension,
hyperlipidemia, but not in a disease like this, where those arent
the risk factors and where hundreds and hundreds of millions of
dollars are not being invested
Mr. FARR. A comprehensive strategy?
Dr. APPEL. Well, we are talking about $100 million program at
a minimum, in terms of doing it. And yet the benefit for our servicemen is they will have a disease-free future. And that is something that I think all our servicemen should be promised.
Thank you, Dr. Appel.
We are very honored to have a city council member from Vicenza,
Italy, Ms. Cinzia Bottene. Help me with the pronunciations, and
forgive me for any mispronunciations.
But we know that your community has been a partner with the
United States in defending Europe, fighting for security throughout
the world, and we are honored to have you here.
CITY COUNCIL MEMBER, VICENZA, ITALY
WITNESS
CINZIA BOTTENE
STATEMENT OF CINZIA BOTTENE
Ms. BOTTENE. Thank you, Chairman and members of the committee.

My name is Cinzia Bottene, and I am a city council member, and
I am here representing the citizens opposed to the new U.S. military base in Vicenza, Italy.
Since I dont speak English very well, Stephanie Westbrook will
read my testimony and help with any questions.
We welcome this occasion to illustrate the concerns of the citizens, meeting with members of the Congress over what we think
is a serious mistake.
We ask you not to make this mistake, because Vicenza is a city
of 120,000 people. It is a UNESCO World Heritage Site and showcase of architect Andrea Palladio, whose work inspired icons of
American democracy, such as the Capitol building.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00791
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
792
The site of the new base is located in a residual area, completely
surrounded by houses, and just one mile from the historical city
center, with 35 Palladian buildings. The area is the last remaining
open space in our city, and this alone is reason for it to be protected and reserved for public use.
We ask the members to try to imagine building a military base
in Central Park or right here on the mall. One look at the photo
included with our testimony should be enough to understand just
one of the many reasons for the opposition to the base.
We ask you not to make this mistake, because the site also lies
just a few feet above one of the three most important groundwater
sources in Europe. The project for the new base includes thousands
of pylons that will go over 80 feet into the ground, as you can see
in the photos included, and this poses a serious risk to our water
source.
We ask you not to make this mistake because the location of the
base is in violation of a number of European Community directives
on protected natural habitats, and cases are currently pending before the European Community.
Despite having been formally requested several times by the
mayor, and by the citizens of Vicenza, an Environmental Impact
Assessment has been continually denied.
The initial negotiation for the new base dates back to 2001,
though the citizens and most city council members were kept in the
dark until May 2006. The information concerned together with this
lack of transparency led ordinary citizens of all ages and from
across political, social and cultural boundaries to mobilize in opposition, which has continued for 3 years now.
There has been an endless succession of nonviolent demonstrations, bringing as many as 150,000 people to the street. Citizens
have been back on lobbying trips to Rome, to European Parliament
in Brussels, and twice before to Washington, D.C.
The widespread opposition to the new base also led to a political
shift in Vicenza. In April 2008, after decades of governing the city,
the ruling coalition was voted out. The new administration ran on
a platform opposing the base, promising a vote in city council and
a local referendum.
In July 2008, city council voted with 25 opposed to the base and
2 in favor. The local referendum was 13 October, 2008. Over 95
percent voted against the base.
We ask you not to make this mistake, because Vicenza already
has seven U.S. military installations, including Camp Ederle, dating back to 1955.
Numerous Defense Department publications highlight the importance of maintaining good host nation relations, but how can you
possibly think to maintain good relations knowing that the new
base has already caused a deep divide between the Vicenza community and the U.S. military?
Imposing this decision will do nothing but create an inhospitable
climate. How can you proceed knowing that the base will be built
in a protected natural habitat directly above an important groundwater source and without any environmental impact assessment?
We ask members of this committee to respect our city and territory, to respect the wishes of local residents, to respect our chil-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00792
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
793
drens future. We ask that Vicenza be treated with the same respect as any city in your country where a similar project would be
unthinkable.
After 3 years of investing more time and energy than you can
imagine in opposing this base, I am more convinced than ever the
people of Vicenza will simply never accept it. Even yesterday and
today, people in Vicenza are demonstrating against the base, even
now, while we are sitting here in front of you.
We strongly ask this committee to block funding for the new
base, to reconsider the entire project, and find an alternative solution that takes the concerns of the local population into account.
On behalf of the citizens of Vicenza, I thank you, Mr. Chairman
and committee members, for the opportunity to appear before you
today. And I will be happy to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Cinzia Bottene follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00793
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00794
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
794
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00795
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
795
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00796
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
796
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00797
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
797
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00798
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
798
799
Mr. EDWARDS. Let me first thank you for coming and for the excellent testimony.
The fact that you have come this far to make this statement certainly is an expression of the strength of your feelings. And I know
those feelings must obviously represent many citizens in your community.
Ms. BOTTENE. Can I tell
Mr. EDWARDS. Please.
Ms. BOTTENE. Thank you.
We thank you that we have been able to express deeply how serious the problem is in our town. The photo we enclose and the
water source that you can see in the enclosed photo can express
very well which is the product of the problem.
And there is another photo very important which shows how
closethis is Basilica Palladiana, and this less than one mile from
the city center.
Mr. EDWARDS. How far away are our present military installations in the Vicenza area?
Ms. BOTTENE. Six miles.
Mr. EDWARDS. Six miles?
Ms. BOTTENE. Yes, but there is no Air Force there.
Mr. EDWARDS. Is the local community support the present military installation there?
Ms. BOTTENE. Yes. Camp Ederle is there fromsince 1955. And
the relations between the community and the military have always
been perfect, but now, since we know that thisthere will be another military base and so close to Vicenza, to citizens, and on the
water source, of course, citizens are moved in another direction.
Mr. EDWARDS. Has there been any sort of agreement signed between our two federal governments?
Ms. BOTTENE. Yes, surely some. But the first step was between
the Bush administration and the Berlusconi administration. Then
in Italy, we had Prodi administration, the other side. And in that
moment, they told us that there would be a sort of reconsideration
of this problem.
So the Parisi, the defense minister, spoke to Spogli, which was
the ambassador of United States in Rome. And after that, Spogli
gave a sort of ultimatum to Vicenza to say yes or no. And in 9
days, we had to give an answer, and the answer to agree, because
it is difficult, you can imagine, for our country to say no to United
States.
Mr. EDWARDS. Let me ask Walter, can you update us before we
address any other questions, any other members of the committee,
can you update us on your understanding of this installation,
where we are in the process? So the project is underway? Okay.
Well, let me see if Mr. Wamp or other members of the committee
would like to ask any questions.
Mr. Farr.
Mr. FARR. No, I had the opportunity to have them in my office.
We spent over an hour and got very concerned about this.
I thought it was going to be used as an air base, but it is a housing base. And it is very difficult but I share their concerns.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00799
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
800
One question I have, though, in the architecture. Does the city
get to approve the architecture? Do you have any involvement in
that so that it
Ms. BOTTENE. You mean in the project?
Mr. FARR. Yes.
Ms. BOTTENE. It is not a problem of project of architecture. It is
a problem of sight and of being so close to the city center. It doesnt
matter what is the architecture.
Mr. FARR. But these are houses. These are houses around here,
are they not? It is for housing.
Ms. BOTTENE. Yes, only
Mr. FARR. The base will be used only for housing.
Ms. BOTTENE. That is not true. We have some numbers here.
Mr. EDWARDS. What other purposes would the base be used for?
Would it be used for military exercises or as an airport
Ms. BOTTENE. It is an old Air Force base that is beingit is
abandoned airport. It is being revitalized for housing.
Wewe have left, you can see there arethe new basing
140,000 square metersfacilities complete with approximately
860,000 square meters of parking and more than 1,000 heavy vehicles. In addition, the projects comprises two multi-story parking garage with a capacity of more than 1,600 vehicles.
Mr. EDWARDS. You know
Ms. BOTTENE. And there is also a space for plane.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Ms. BOTTENE. Yes.
Mr. EDWARDS. I dont know what the probabilities are of changing the decision, given that this project initially received local approval and construction has begun.
But I was not aware of the local opposition, and perhaps other
members of Congress were not. We will be happy, out of respect of
the partnership your community and our country have had for
many years, to ask the leadership at the Pentagon about this.
Ms. BOTTENE. The leadership?
Mr. EDWARDS. The leadership of the Pentagon, key people, key
people at the Pentagon
Ms. BOTTENE. Yes.
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Whether they took into account local
opposition. We will ask the Pentagon whether it is being reconsidered or if they are moving ahead.
But we ought to treat each other with respect. And we will certainly make a good-faith effort to try to get answers.
Ms. BOTTENE. So you areI am sorry. I say it back to you to be
sure I have understood. You are trying to ask the Pentagon people
to reconsider the project and
Mr. EDWARDS. No, I dont have enough information today to
make a recommendation yes or no on the project. But out of respect
to your visit here
Mr. EDWARDS. And the fact that you represent your constituents
as we represent our constituents, we will ask the Pentagon how far
along this project is. Have they taken into account the local opposition to the project? And is it possible to stop or are they committed
to moving ahead?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00800
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
801
So we will raise questions. I dont know if we can change the outcome, but we will ask questions and then communicate back with
you.
We thank you very much. And we hope that intelligence also
allow to understand when a mistake is committed. So this could
leave room and place for discussion for reconsidering everything
and, most of all, for listening to what local people are definitely
saying in the last 3 years.
Mr. EDWARDS. Well, thank you for speaking up on behalf of your
citizens. Thank you. It is an honor to have you here. Thank you.
Thank you for your excellent presentation.
I would now like to recognize Mr. Michael Houlemard, who is
president of the Association of Defense Communities. He is also executive officer of the Fort Ord Reuse Authority, guiding the planning, implementation, and financing of the redevelopment of the
former Fort Ord military reservation, an issue of great interest to
Mr. Farr.
Mr. FARR. I think this committee knows about everything there
is to know about Fort Ord, but you havent heard what it is like
for a community, as Mr. Houlemard represents the association of
space reuse communities.
ASSOCIATION OF DEFENSE COMMUNITIES
WITNESS
MICHAEL HOULEMARD
STATEMENT
OF
MICHAEL HOULEMARD
Mr. HOULEMARD. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

Chairman Edwards, Vice Chairman Farr, Ranking Member
Wamp, Congressman Berry, thank you very much for the opportunity to speak today. I very much appreciate this opportunity, because the key issues that are facing the defense communities of
this nation are severely impacted by the economic downturn that
the nation is experiencing right now, and communities across the
country have asked that we, on their behalf, speak up loudly and
succinctly about what their problems are.
First of all, a little bit about the association. We have 1,200
members. And those members provide a home to our nations
troops, their families, the veterans, and the others that are the civilian support network for our military.
We are the nations premier organization supporting those communities with active, growing, and closed installations, especially
about mission enhancement, realignment, community installation
partnerships, all the private partnerships that are going on across
the nation. We have been doing that for over 30 years.
The testimony I am going to give today is going to focus on three
areas that I think are of particular interest to us at this time.
Firstand I think the subcommittee is well aware of this from
other testimony it has received and what other colleagues have
said earlier todaythe BRAC 2005 round, as it is the largest and
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00801
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
802
most complex round of base closures and realignments, is very important to the nation.
Now, we are reading a recent Government Accountability Office
report. And in that GAO report, they describe several significant
challenges which will adversely impact the departments ability to
complete the 2005 round of closure, especially by the September
15th deadline.
In particular, we are concerned that, to ensure the services can
accomplish the deadline that ADC recommends, that they get full
funding for the programs included in the BRAC 2005 account.
What I am particularly concerned about and what we received a
lot of comment about has to do with growth communities and the
potential massive local infrastructure requirements, especially for
schools, that will be required as part of realignments and reassignments in the 2005 closure and with soldiers coming back from Iraq
and Afghanistan.
Second, the Department of Defense has estimated it has about a
$3.5 billion backlog in environmental remediation work that has to
be done for properties across the nation. Local communities have
been working on redeveloping these lands, working closely with the
Navy, the Air Force, the Army, the Corps of Engineers, and the
Marine Corps on how that environmental restoration is going to
take place.
Certainly, the militarys use of those properties were at a military time, but they are now potentially proposed for civilian reuse,
requiring a significant amount of activityand I will call it restoration activityfor them to be used for productive purposes for our
communities.
I am particularly concerned that those environmental remediation activities focus on the safety of the adjacent communities.
Those communities have existing veterans and ongoing experiences
with facilities that are still supporting the militarys work, and our
children are still exposed to remnant hazards, including munitions
and explosives.
It is important that the full environmental requirement be funded for these properties to be transferred to local communities. The
House of Representatives recommended $300 million in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. That funding did not survive
the joint committees recommendations, and so therefore it was not
included.
That $300 million is only a small part, but that $300 million
needs to be restored, and our members would suggest that it
should be carried forward in the 2010 budget. If the House can do
that and this subcommittee could recommend, we would appreciate
it.
My third point promotes the expeditious transfer of closed military installations to federally recognized local redevelopment authorities with an emphasis on using the no-cost economic development conveyance mechanism available in law. We are asking that
it be emphasized more than just be a part of multiple opportunities
for transfers.
As a little bit of background, the BRAC commission was created
to consolidate and increase efficiency in DOD facilities. Part of that
commitment to Congress was that the BRAC process would help
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00802
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
803
closed bases transition in a quick way so that they would be available for local reuse.
Over five rounds of BRAC have occurred, and hundreds of military installations have been decommissioned or downsized with the
expectation that these properties would be available to local communities for economic recovery and economic development.
However, despite reports to the contrary, recent evidence continues to support our 1999 testimony that the inconsistent and uneven and time-consuming transfer process by the military department still leaves thousands of acres of former installation property
unused, with fallow acreage hampering many other community economic redevelopment activities.
In fact
Mr. EDWARDS. Could I ask that you take about 30 seconds to finalize? And I apologize for
Mr. HOULEMARD. I certainly can. On this particular point, Chairman, we have a very distinct philosophical difference with the Department of Defense, because they are emphasizing market-rate
sales, and we are emphasizing local economic recovery and job creation. We have to have the land to be able to do that, and that is
our emphasis.
I would like to say, on behalf of all of ADC in the nation, we really want to thank this subcommittee for its continuing work and
support for veterans, for the soldiers, and for their families. Defense communities are at the core of what our program does. And
you have heard others say what we need done in both BRAC and
in the investment in environmental restoration.
So I appreciate the time, sir.
[The prepared statement of Michael Houlemard follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00803
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00804
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
804
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00805
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
805
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00806
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
806
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00807
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
807
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00808
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
808
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00809
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
809
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00810
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
810
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00811
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
811
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00812
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
812
813
Mr. EDWARDS. Well, thank you. And as someone who represented

Fort Hood for 14 years, I have seen firsthand the importance of our
defense communities. And thank you for leading them, for what
you do. Thank you for sending Sam Farr to Congress. He has been
a great spokesman for our communities on this issue and the issue
of transfers.
I have a feeling this is going to be an issue we are going to do
a lot more talking about.
Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. Well, we spent all morning on BRAC yesterday, and
he is exactly right. And I think we are going to follow through on
all of it, so I thank you for your testimony.
Mr. HOULEMARD. Appreciate the time, sir.
Mr. Farr.
Mr. FARR. Yes, what is the one thing you think that DOD could
do to ease the growth pains? And is one service better than the
other at transferring property?
Mr. HOULEMARD. I am biased because I work mostly with the
United States Army, but I think all of the services will show you
models of success. All services can also show you areas where they
would have wanted to do better.
So I cant say that I would point to anyone better than the other,
but I will say this: With respect to growth communities, sir, there
is current authority under law that the Department of Defense
could provide support for communities for the front-end infrastructure and schools needs that would help.
When soldiers return and their young children need to find
places in classrooms to be in and other facilities to get back
Mr. FARR. So Mr. Bishop was here yesterday. And his problem
is that he has a growth community. There is no funding for schools.
The Department of Defense says, Well, thats taken care of in the
local infrastructure funding. Many of us on this committee disagree.
And you say there is a tool that DOD can use to up front this
Mr. HOULEMARD. There remains authority in law for the Office
of Economic Adjustment to provide for capital needs. This was done
before. It was created when the Trident submarine program many
years ago, I think both in the state of Washington and the state
of Georgia where that was deployed, and that authority still exists
today.
So this is always a question of priorities, sir, but I cant imagine
a better priority than for the communities now left to provide educational services for soldiers, families, as they return from overseas.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you very much for your testimony.
Now I would like to recognize Mr. Ben Redmond, with the National Association of OEW Contractors.
Mr. Redmond, welcome. And I would like to recognize you for 5
minutes.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00813
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
814
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF OEW CONTRACTORS
WITNESS
BEN REDMOND
STATEMENT
OF
BEN REDMOND
Mr. REDMOND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and committee members.

I am honored to be here today to represent the National Association of Ordnance and Explosive Waste Contractors, commonly
known as NAOC. NAOC is a trade association for firms involved
in the detection and cleanup of unexploded ordnance on active military bases, formerly used defense sites, and base realignment and
closure sites.
It includes 65 member companies, employing more than 250,000
people in every state of the union. Our member companies participate in the entire spectrum of cleanup, from development of detection technologies to the actual cleanup of UXO sites.
I am here today to speak about the environmental restoration
and cleanup on BRAC sites. According to the 2007 defense environmental programs annual report to Congress, over the past 10
years, Congress has provided $5.8 billion for environmental activities at BRAC installations.
Annual appropriations for cleanup of BRAC sites have remained
consistent. However, the total amount for environmental cleanup
on BRAC sites is only approximately $60 million per year for military munitions cleanup. This is a rough number, as there is no requirement to report funding or expenditures for munitions cleanup
separately from traditional hazardous waste cleanup.
This funding, however consistent, is woefully inadequate to address the problem. Currently, there are 92 legacy BRAC sites, and
there are 37 current BRAC 2005 military munitions response sites,
with a total cost to complete of almost $1 billion. A detailed list is
included as an attachment to my testimony.
The backlog on cleanup of legacy BRAC sites is a problem that
has been addressed by this body itself. The problem was specifically addressed in a Senate report and House report, which accompanied the fiscal year 2009 Military Construction and Veteran Affairs Appropriations bill.
When installations are closed, the local economy has little chance
to recover until these sites have been transferred to allow safe use
for their intended purpose. Limited funding delays that require
cleanup, which delays the transfer of this land from the Department of Defense to private entities and municipalities for nonmilitary use and tax-generating economic activities.
With a weakening economy and a possible prolonged recession,
the timely cleanup of transferred and transferring sites which protect the public and provide for economic development is extremely
important.
Though some BRAC sites have been transferred, previous reports
from the Government Accountability Office have noticed that environmental cleanup requirements present the primary challenge to
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00814
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
815
transferring the properties. A good example is the BRAC installation that has remaining sites to be cleaned up is Fort Ord, which
is one of the most beautiful sites in the country, with high-value
real estate ripe for redevelopment.
Fort Ord was closed in BRAC 1991, with expectation to clean up
and turn over the site within a few years. This has not happened.
Other high-value sites that need additional funding which could
be redeveloped and bring new jobs and increase the tax base include sites in Colorado, Washington, Alaska, Tennessee, Texas,
Louisiana, and many other states.
An area of concern that NAOC has identified is there is not a detailed aggregation of data on BRAC sites. Currently, site data is
not collected and reported at a precise enough level to allow for
proper budget formulation and cataloging of sites.
We believe this has hampered funding, privatization, and contributes to an underestimation of the remediation required in associated backlog. NAOC recommends that DOD be required to collect
data in smaller data sets, such as a county or the individual states
equivalent of a county for all MRP sites.
In summary, it is in our national interest to appropriate funds
for the timely, complete cleanup of unexploded ordnance on BRAC
sites for both legacy BRAC and for BRAC 2005.
I am grateful for this opportunity to speak with you on behalf of
NAOC about this important issue. I want to thank Chairman Edwards for his leadership and for holding this hearing.
I would also like to thank Ranking Member Wamp for his service
on the committee.
In addition, I would like to thank Congressman Farr for championing these issues.
Thank you, sir.
[The prepared statement of Michael Houleward follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00815
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00816
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
816
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00817
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
817
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00818
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
818
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00819
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
819
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00820
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
820
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00821
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
821
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00822
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
822
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00823
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
823
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00824
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
824
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00825
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
825
826
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Redmond, thank you very much for your testimony and also for what you and the members of NAOC do, the important work that you do.
Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. No questions, thank you.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Farr.
Mr. FARR. You know, I have one. Mr. Redmond, yesterday we
heard from DOD that you cant absorb any more funding, that they
are moving as fast as you can possibly clean up, and that there is
no need to put more money into it because it cant go any faster
than it already is.
Can you comment on this?
Mr. REDMOND. Yes, sir, I can.
Secretary Beale over at OSDhe has since moved onbut he
asked NAOC 3 years ago, how much additional funding could we
absorb with the personnel we currently have? With the slowdown
of operations in Iraq, that number is over $2 billion a year. The
current funding is around $500 million a year. So NAOC does not
agree with the Department of Defense
Mr. FARR. Would you get us some specifics on that?
Mr. REDMOND. Certainly.
Mr. FARR. I really appreciate it. We have got to get that into the
record. I mean, it is too bad they are not here today to respond.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00826
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00827
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
827
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00828
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
828
829
Mr. REDMOND. Yes.
Mr. FARR. But they were adamant that, We are just doing as
fastyou know, I dont believe that. It is the same thing we heard
with public works, is that we couldnt fundno more building of
roads because there werent enough tractors and personnel out
there to do it. But it seems to me there is capacity and the government is underestimating that capacity.
Mr. REDMOND. Well, I think the stimulus program is currently
showing with the construction of new roads, there is capacity that
is unused. And certainly within NAOC, there is capacity which
could be applied immediately, if the funding was available.
Mr. FARR. And that is job-intensive.
Mr. REDMOND. It is labor-intensive, yes, sir. It creates jobs. And
it is a small investment for the return, because when these lands
were returned to the communities, they can be redeveloped for industrial use in bringing even more jobs and increase the tax base.
It is a good deal.
Mr. REDMOND. Yes, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Redmond. Appreciate it.
I would like to now call forward Steve Robertson with the American Legion.
Steve, welcome back.
Mr. ROBERTSON. It is good to be back.
Mr. EDWARDS. Did somebody twist you too hard?
Mr. ROBERTSON. I wish I could say I did something glamorous,
but it was pure clumsy during a visit of a college. I missed a step
and landed on all fours.
Mr. EDWARDS. That elderly lady that you saved from falling
down those steps
Mr. ROBERTSON. That is nowI will swear to that, if you will.
Mr. EDWARDS. Welcome back to the committee, and thanks for
all your work and the Legions work with our committee in the 2
years that I have had the privilege of chairing the committee. And
I would like to recognize you now for your opening statement.
THE AMERICAN LEGION
WITNESS
STEVE ROBERTSON
STATEMENT
OF
STEVE ROBERTSON
Mr. ROBERTSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like my full

testimony to be submitted for the record.
Mr. EDWARDS. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. ROBERTSON. I wanted to start with thanking the committee
for the funding that we got last year. And the most important part
was that we got it on time. I cant begin to tell you how much we
appreciate that. The entire veterans community, I think I can
speak for them, to say that we greatly appreciate having it on time
to give us the full year to be able to spend the resources.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00829
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
830
We also appreciate the supplemental that brought in money to

the V.A. for a lot of the work that needs to be done throughout the
system.
Now, as you are well aware, we have a team that goes around
the country visiting V.A. medical facilities and on-site inspections
to kind of get a feel for what areas are working well and what
areas need improving.
And I can tell you that we are in the middle of following up to
see how the money is being spent. We are trying to follow up on
non-recurring maintenance issues to make sure that those are
being addressed in a timely manner.
We are also still concerned about CARES, the projects that we
were supposed to have underway, seeing what kind of progress
were being made on that.
We are also visiting the regional offices to see what kind of
progress is being made in the claims adjudication area. I can tell
you, from a couple of visits that I have made personally, that they
are hiring the new claims folks. Again, it is going to be the process
of getting them trained up to where they can take on the more
challenging cases.
So the morale is improving at a lot of the regional offices, just
the fact that they know that they have got the folks online. The
problem is, is you are replacing guys and gals with 30 years experience, and you just cant replace that experience that quickly.
Again, we are once again asking about the issue of advanced appropriations. We appreciate having it on time this time, but we
would like to have it 2 years in a row. We see a big difference in
the veterans world. And if it is possible to advance the idea of an
advanced appropriations for the medical care, we would greatly appreciate that. We are going to continue to ask for that throughout
the year.
I am going to cut this short, so if there are any questions that
you all would like to ask, I will be more than happy to try to answer them.
[The prepared statement of Steve Robertson follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00830
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00831
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
831
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00832
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
832
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00833
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
833
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00834
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
834
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00835
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
835
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00836
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
836
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00837
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
837
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00838
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
838
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00839
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
839
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00840
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
840
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00841
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
841
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00842
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
842
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00843
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
843
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00844
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
844
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00845
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
845
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00846
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
846
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00847
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
847
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00848
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
848
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00849
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
849
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00850
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
850
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00851
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
851
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00852
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
852
853
Mr. EDWARDS. Thanks for your testimony. And thanks for your
oversight.
You know, I said I wanted three goals to pursue when I became
chairman. One is to provide more funding for the V.A.; two, exercise more oversight; and, three, encourage innovation. And you are
a partner in all three of those, but particularly in oversight.
While we have plused up significantly the inspector generals office, they cant compete with millions of veterans out there every
day that are seeing what is going on firsthand in the hospitals. So
thank you.
Mr. ROBERTSON. With the number of volunteers, that is the other
area that we get a lot of input. We have so many people that work
as volunteers day in and day out. A lot of times, they will tell us
when there has been a position that has been held open for a long
period of time without being filled or a problem with one of the facilities that they know needs to be replaced or equipment that is
on backlog.
So we have a lot of assistance out there.
Mr. EDWARDS. And let me just say, in regard to advanced appropriations, that decision hasnt been made yet, but I know that, because of the interest and the priority shown on this issue among
our veteran service organizations, including the Legion, there are
a lot of serious discussions going on about seeing how that could
be put into place.
So the concerns expressed repeatedly by our VSOs have been
heard and are being, as we speak, being considered.
Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. Total respect for the American Legion. Appreciate
Steve, as well. You are a great advocate, and thanks for the testimony. And we will be with you.
I understand the desire to sometimes take us out of this picture,
but I do think that Chairman Edwards leadership has proven that
we can annually allocate these resources in an effective way and
get the money to you on time and use this process to make the V.A.
more accountable. And I know that forward funding sounds good,
but to me, it will make the V.A. less accountable.
I dont want to get in that fight today, but I do see the pressure
from these hearings, from this process helping right now. So I totally understand where you are coming from with the constant flow
of dollars, but I also think if they dont have to come here, the pressure is off.
I have seen it in other directions, other agencies. There are other
agenciesfrankly, like the Tennessee Valley Authority that used to
receive federal appropriations. And I guarantee you, they are less
accountable today to the taxpayer, the rate payer, and the Congress because they dont receive appropriations than when they did
annually.
And that is just one example. There are many.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Wamp. Thank you for your leadership and partnership.
And, Sam, we did get a bill passed on time last year, and we are
going to make every effort to do so this year.
Mr. Farr.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00853
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
854
Mr. FARR. No questions, just thank you. Longest testimony we
have, and thank you for doing it within a short period of time.
Mr. ROBERTSON. Thank you, sir.
Mr. FARR. You are doing a good job, Steve. Really appreciate it.
Mr. EDWARDS. If you would sit there and let the Independent
Budget group come up. And then we will have you back to the
table if there are any questions and answers after the Independent
Budget presentation.
Could I now ask those of you that are here with Independent
Budget, Ray Kelley with AMVETS, Kerry Baker with DAV, Carl
Blake with Paralyzed Veterans of America, and Christopher Needham with Veterans of Foreign Wars.
Thank you all. Thank you again for the incredible partnership
that you have been an important part of over the last several
years. We have passed historic and unprecedented increases in
V.A. funding. You have been a terribly important part of that successful effort, and we thank you for that. And thanks for being
here.
I would like to recognize you in whatever order you would care
to.
Mr. BLAKE. Well, Mr. Chairman, I guess sort of the way we have
normally done it is, we speak on the health care piece. PVA has
responsibility for that. And then I will defer to DAV on the benefits.
Mr. EDWARDS. And, Carl, for the transcription, if you would
justas you begin your speech, if you would say who you are and
what you are representing.
THE INDEPENDENT BUDGET AND PARALYZED
VETERANS OF AMERICA
WITNESS
CARL BLAKE
STATEMENT
OF
CARL BLAKE
Mr. BLAKE. Yes, sir.

Chairman Edwards, Ranking Member Wamp, Mr. Farr, I would
like to thank you again for the opportunity to testify today on behalf of the Independent Budget on the fiscal year 2010 budgetary
needs of the Department of Veterans Affairs health care system.
I am Carl Blake with Paralyzed Veterans of America. I want to
echo the sentiments of Steve from the Legion. We certainly appreciate everything the subcommittee has accomplished in the last 2
years. I dont think we would be where we are at without your
leadership and, really, the support of the full subcommittee. So we
certainly appreciate that.
We were pleased to see that the initial information from the administration suggests what will probably be a significant increase
in the budget once again. It really will be a truly historic budget,
if we get what has been proposed by the administration.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00854
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
855
We will withhold any final judgment on that until we have much
more details. I think we are anxiously awaiting it, just like I am
sure you and your staff are, as well.
For fiscal year 2010, the Independent Budget does recommend
approximately $46.6 billion for total medical care, which is an increase of about $3.6 billion over the fiscal year 2009 operating
budget level.
Our medical services recommendation includes approximately
$36.6 billion, which includes $34.6 billion for current services,
$1.17 billion for an increase in patient workload, and $790 million
for policy initiatives.
I wont go into great detail about our breakdown for the increase
in patient workload, but it is explained in some detail in my written statement, and it is also explained in more detail in the full
Independent Budget, which I believe your committee staff has received already.
Our policy initiatives include about $250 million to continue to
expand the mental health services within the V.A., approximately
$440 million to close the capacity gap for long-term care services
that currently exist between what is mandated by the millennium
health care bill, which is Public Law 106117, and what the V.A.
currently maintains, and then $100 million for prosthetics.
For medical support and compliance, the Independent Budget
recommends approximately $4.6 billion and, for medical facilities,
approximately $5.4 billion. This includes an additional $150 million
for non-recurring maintenance.
The PVA, along with the Independent Budget, would like to
thank you for your work on the stimulus bill and the funding that
was included in that.
We recognize that that bill included a significant amount of
money directed towards non-recurring maintenance, which I think
we have identified in recent years as being one of the major problems in the V.A. funding stream because of the lack of funding and
because that, in the past, was always one of the accounts that was
cannibalized when transfers were needed and funding was needed
to come up with in shortfall years.
But, again, we thank the subcommittee for the work on the stimulus bill and the money that was provided. We were disappointed
that there wasnt some funding directed towards major and minor
construction, but we look forward to seeing what the administration proposes to add funding to those accounts for fiscal year 2010.
And, finally, Mr. Chairman, as you know, we all support H.R.
1016, the Veterans Health Care Budget Reform and Transparency
Act. I wont go into any details about our position other than you
know where we stand, and we would appreciate hearing what you
have to say about the consideration being given to it.
As you probably know, the president did reaffirm his commitment to it about 2 weeks ago in a press conference where he had
all the veteran service organizations there, so that has just
emboldened us a little more, I believe.
And so we are going to continue to work on that issue, and we
look forward to having more in-depth discussions about that alone
with everyone on the subcommittee, if you would like, at a later
time. We will be testifying on this issue and, I guess, broader fund-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00855
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
856
ing reform issues before the House Committee on Veterans Affairs

next week.
So I would encourage you to take note of that and listen in to
see what we have to say, as well.
So, again, Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you and the subcommittee for all of your work. And I would be happy to answer
any questions.
[The prepared statement of Carl Blake follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00856
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00857
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
857
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00858
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
858
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00859
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
859
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00860
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
860
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00861
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
861
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00862
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
862
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00863
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
863
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00864
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
864
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00865
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
865
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00866
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
866
867
Mr. EDWARDS. I dont have a question, but let me just suggest
something. I think one of the things I would recommend that you
consider presenting to the subcommittee is how the subcommittee,
if we went to 2-year funding for the V.A., how we would maintain
not only the same level, but an increased level of oversight, what
the pluses and minuses are.
I think the questions raised by Mr. Wamp are very legitimate.
We all want to keep the hammer over the V.A. to see they are
spending every dollar wisely.
Mr. BLAKE. Sure.
Mr. EDWARDS. Which is why you need timely funding, but address the questionnot right now, but if you would in the weeks
ahead. We will talk some more about that.
Mr. BLAKE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay, go ahead. Who is next?
THE INDEPENDENT BUDGET AND AMVETS
WITNESS
RAY KELLEY
STATEMENT
OF
RAYMOND C. KELLEY
Mr. KELLEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Ranking Member Wamp, Mr. Farr.
I am Ray Kelley from AMVETS, and I will be discussing the
NCA issues, as it appears in the Independent Budget.
In fiscal year 2008, $195 million was appropriated for NCA. That
was $28.2 million more than the administrations request, so I
thank the committee for that.
Something to note out of that is only $220,000 was carry over in
that budget. So they spent their moneythey awarded 39 of the 42
minor contracts that they had planned to award and granted $37.3
million of the $39.5 million in the state grants program.
They also, out of that budget, used $25 million to invest in the
national shrine commitment that we have advocated for the last
several years to increase to $50 million a year for a 5-year period.
NCA has also almost hit the mark on the percentage of veterans
who fall within the 170,000 veterans 75-mile radius for burial benefits, make sure that they have access to burial benefits. And the
Independent Budget is requesting that that model be changed, be
reduced from 170,000 veterans down to 110,000 veterans.
The reason is, is that, over the next several years, there will be
no other areas in the United States that will qualify for a national
cemetery under this current policy. Reducing it will immediately
open it up to, I think, five or six different areas that have a need
already, that almost meet that 170,000 veteran qualifier.
Again, our total number will be $291.5 million, and that includes
the $50 million for the shrine initiative. And I want to thank you
for the $50 million in the stimulus package that will go towards
the shrine initiative.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00867
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
868
And talking to NCA, they have it on good authority that they

will spend that within the fiscal year 2009, so I will stick to continue to need $50 million in the 2010 budget for that.
Mr. Akaka has introduced a billit is S. 728which will provide
a supplemental burial and memorial benefit to veterans. And it
matches what the Independent Budget had asked for in the past
with the increased plot allowance and burial benefit allowance.
And it comes really close to matching what past I.B.s have recommended, but it is a supplemental. And it is predicated on appropriations. So I support the bill. It will provide a substantial increase to veterans to help them in their final resting place.
And thank you again for holding this hearing. I am happy to answer any questions you have at this time.
[The prepared statement of Raymond C. Kelley follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00868
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00869
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
869
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00870
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
870
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00871
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
871
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00872
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
872
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00873
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
873
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00874
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
874
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00875
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
875
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00876
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
876
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00877
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
877
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00878
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
878
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00879
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
879
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00880
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
880
881
Mr. EDWARDS. All right, thank you and AMVETS for all you do
on behalf of veterans. Thank you for being here today.
THE INDEPENDENT BUDGET AND VETERANS OF
FOREIGN WARS
WITNESS
CHRISTOPHER M. NEEDHAM
STATEMENT
OF
CHRISTOPHER NEEDHAM
Mr. NEEDHAM. Mr. Chairman, my name is Chris Needham. I am

with the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and I would like to thank you
for the opportunity to testify today.
We handle the construction portion of the Independent Budget,
so I will limit my remarks to that.
Our major concern with respect to major construction is the
growing backlog of projects. Because V.A.s projects are funded on
a multistage basis, there are a large number of projects that have
opened that have not received full funding. That total backlog is
about $2 billion.
So as V.A. moves forward, that represents a challenge, that these
projects need to be funded before we can necessarily move on to
some of these other projects and other priorities that V.A. needs
filled.
Overall, we look at the construction budget in terms of recapitalization, that major-minor maintenance, they all sort of tie together
to provide the overall capital budget. Now, the standard for that
that industries use is about 5 percent to 8 percent of plant replacement value.
V.A.s most recent estimated plant replacement value is about
$85 billion. So, accordingly, that means that the total capital budget should be in the range of $4 billion to $4.25 billion, a little above
that, perhaps.
In the last fiscal year, the administrations request was about
$3.6 billion. And the increase that this committee helped push
through brought V.A. to in line with what the recommendations
are. We sincerely appreciate your efforts on that.
The other issue is with respect to minor construction. And that
is another issue where you guys have really done a great job to increase funding.
Now, minor construction has sort of grown in importance, because a lot of minor construction goes to helping non-recurring
maintenance issues. And those are the simple things, sort of the
one-time issues that need to be fixed to help maintain facilities and
keep them running.
It could be something as simple as maybe changing the flooring
or repairing walls, but it is also important safety issues such as,
you know, fire and sprinkler systems, elevators, just those one-time
things that help make sure that these buildings last as long as we
need them to. So the increases in minor construction help take care
of non-recurring maintenance.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00881
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
882
And as Carl spoke of earlier, we definitely appreciate the stimulus bill and the $1 billion included in that for non-recurring maintenance. It really does help, because V.A.s estimates are of about
it is about a $4 billion backlog in maintenance issues.
And that $1 billion goes a long way towards fixing that backlog,
but it also attests to the need that we need to continue to address
these projects and these priorities.
One other small issue I will get to, with respect to minor construction, is medical research. Medical research projects right now
have to compete with direct health care projects, in terms of
prioritization. And as a result, often medical research falls far
below some of these other priorities.
The Draft National CARES Plan identified about $142 million in
laboratory improvements. And we would like to see these funded.
Now, these are important, you know, mostly fornot just for
safety and health concerns, but also for recruitment and retention,
that if you are showing a doctor around, you know, somebody you
are trying to hire, and he sees a laboratory from the 1960s, you
know, he might run in terror.
But what we need to do is we need to have high-quality, firstclass, modern research facilities, both for recruitment, but also so
that V.A. can continue to do its wonderful research.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Christopher Needham follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00882
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00883
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
883
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00884
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
884
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00885
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
885
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00886
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
886
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00887
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
887
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00888
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
888
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00889
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
889
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00890
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
890
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00891
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
891
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00892
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
892
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00893
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
893
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00894
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
894
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00895
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
895
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00896
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
896
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00897
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
897
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00898
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
898
899
THE INDEPENDENT BUDGET AND DISABLED AMERICAN
VETERANS
WITNESS
KERRY BAKER
STATEMENT
OF
KERRY BAKER
Mr. BAKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Kerry Baker.

I am with the DAV. And today I will focus on issues affecting the
Veterans Benefits Administration.
On behalf of the VBA, we have come before you for many years
requesting additional funding to reverse its chronic history of
understaffing. You have answered that call. In just the past few
years, V.A. has hired approximately 3,000 additional claims processors. In fact, the V.A. is still hiring additional personnel because
the monies allocated during the past couple of years.
Congressional actions to increase staffing have provided VBA a
major tool in stopping the chronic increases in claims processing
and, we hope, a tool for regaining some control over the backlog.
Nonetheless, the claims backlog struggle is nowhere near its end.
V.A. received approximately 888,000 rating claims in fiscal year
2008, or 88,000 more than they had anticipated.
It estimates they will decide over 942,000 claims in 2009. However, it may actually received nearly 1 million claims in 2009.
Because of the unknown long-term impact of VBAs increased
staffing, we are not prepared to seek additional staffing and subsequent funding, other than cost-of-living increases for VBA at this
time.
However, to help improve the claims process, the Congress must
do more to upgrade V.A.s I.T. infrastructure. It must also be given
more flexibility to manage those improvements.
Despite problems in the claims process, Congress has reduced
funding for I.T. initiatives over the past several years. In fiscal
year 2001, Congress provided $82 million for I.T. initiatives. And
by 2006, that funding had fallen to $23 million.
Congress has, however, noticed the disconnect between the I.T.
and improvements in the claims process. Section 227 of the Veterans Benefits Improvement Act of 2008 places new requirements
on the V.A. to examine all uses of current I.T. and comparable outside I.T. systems with respect to claims processing.
V.A. must then develop a new plan to use these and other relevant technologies to reduce subjectivity, avoid remands, reduce
in regional office rating decisions.
All I.T. initiatives are now being funded through V.A.s I.T. appropriation and tightly controlled by the CIO. However, VBA initiatives include expansion of Web-based technology and deliverables
such as Web portal and training and performance support systems,
virtual V.A. paperless processing, and enhanced veterans service
and access to benefits, status, delivery, and data integration across
business lines.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00899
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
900
The I.B. VSOs believe a conservative increase of at least 5 percent annually in I.T. initiatives is warranted. V.A. should give the
highest priority to the review required by the Benefits Improvement Act of 2008 and double its efforts to ensure these ongoing initiatives are fully funded and accomplish their goals.
Further, the impact of I.T.s centralization under the CIO should
be examined and, if warranted, shift appropriate responsibility for
their management from the CIO to the undersecretary for benefits.
Another area of concern is Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment. A cornerstone of several new initiatives is VR&Es fivetrack employment process, which aims to advance employment opportunities for disabled veterans.
Also, increasing numbers of severely disabled veterans from ongoing conflicts have benefited from VR&Es independent living program. Independent living specialists provide services that empower
service-disabled veterans to the greatest extent possible, to live
independently in the community.
VR&E needs approximately 200 additional full-time employment
coordinators and independent living specialists to provide these
services to eligible veterans.
Furthermore, the I.B. VSOs believe VR&E needs approximately
50 additional FTE dedicated to management and oversight of its
increasing reliance on contract counselors and service providers, as
well as for program oversight and support. The additional FTE
would support national initiatives recommended by the VR&E task
force and would provide support to decrease the growing caseload
and allow for more intensive services to be provided to severely disabled veterans.
V.A.s fiscal year 2008 estimate for total FTE in VR&E has reported in its fiscal year 2009 budget submission is 1,185. However,
the total FTE for 2009 has been decreased to 1,179, which is even
a decrease from 2007 figures.
This decrease in FTE for such a vital program is inexplicable,
considering the increased need for VR&E due to the ongoing combat operations. Therefore, the I.B. VSOs recommend that the fiscal
year 2008 total of 1,179 FTE for VR&E be increased by 250 to a
total of 1,429 FTE.
And that concludes my statement. It has been an honor to testify
before you today.
[The prepared statement of Kerry Baker follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00900
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00901
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
901
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00902
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
902
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00903
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
903
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00904
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
904
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00905
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
905
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00906
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
906
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00907
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
907
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00908
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
908
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00909
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
909
910
Mr. EDWARDS. Great, thank you. Thank you very much for all
that the DAV does every day on behalf of Americas veterans.
Let me ask one question. In relation to the Independent Budget
for fiscal year 2009, where does President Obamas request for the
V.A. compare? Is it the same? Is it above it? Is it below it?
Mr. BLAKE. The presidents budget request compared to this current yearsor this current years request versus the I.B. was actually over the I.B. request by about $1.3 billion, I believe.
As best as we can tell, the administration assumed about $3.4
billion in collections initially in that number, and the I.B.s recommendation turned back to what the 2009 number was, so it was
about $2.6 billion. So there is some of the gap there.
Honestly, I couldnt tell you why there is a difference. We are
certainly pleased that it is above the I.B. I mean, we make no
bones about saying that we are the standard. I would be interested
in seeing the details and figuring out where they may have made
some plus-ups.
I would honestly say that I can identify at least a couple places
where we were probably conservative. One example would be in the
education service, in the veterans benefits side, or in GOE.
We didnt recommend any increase in FTE, and yet everyone always asks us why not, given the new G.I. Bill coming online and
that. And I think it is partly because we werent really sure how
the V.A. was proceeding at this point, and we didnt feel really
comfortable in recommending an additional FTE level for that, so
there is some loss there.
So there are some areas I could identify even within the I.B. that
we were probably conservative on. But the short answer to the
question is, they are above the I.B.
Mr. EDWARDS. Steve, let me ask you to come up.
And, Tom, come on up, too. We would love to have you here. You
have been a great partner in this.
And as I do that, I am going to have to ask your understanding.
The Fleet Reserve Association was to give me an award because of
the great work that Mr. Wamp and Mr. Farr and this staff and
committee have done, but they chose me, I guess, to get the award.
So thank you all for making me look better than
Mr. WAMP. You can accept it on our behalf.
Mr. EDWARDS. Obviously, we are going to have a number of conversations as we go through this appropriations process. So today
was primarily focused on what you put into the formal record, your
highest priorities, concerns, questions, and comments.
I am going to turn the gavel back over to Mr. Farr for whatever
time he and Mr. Wamp would like to address questions. But thank
you. Please see it as no sign of disrespect. I dont want to disrespect
the Fleet Reserve Association by not being there when they offer
that award.
Mr. Farr, the gavel is yours. Thank you for doing this today.
Mr. Wamp, thank you
Mr. FARR. Mr. Wamp just wants to have a picture taken with
that award that you
Mr. EDWARDS. He deserves it, and so do you.
Mr. FARR [presiding]. Well, congratulations. Thank you very
much.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00910
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
911
I guess it is just opening up for questions now.
Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. Well, I dont really have any questions. Either I am
getting old or veteran group activists and representatives are getting younger. So, I mean, I look at you all, and I think, Gosh, you
all are a young group of people, including you, Steve.
Mr. ROBERTSON. After 21 years, sir, I take that as a compliment.
Mr. WAMP. I know you have been at it a while, and you do a
really good job.
The only question I would have is, in the post-9/11 world, I have
followed this closely and watched it, especially over the last couple
of years. It seems like the Independent Budget, while there used
to be almost a rub between the Independent Budget, the authorizers, the appropriators, and OMB, is like a four-corner, you know,
conflict.
It looks to me like everybody is growing together as the Congress
and the administration make more commitments to veterans. Is
that just the general perception, that there is not the kind of competing interest with the Independent Budget that we used to have?
You are sitting here having a conversation with the chairman
about the presidents budget exceeding the Independent Budget,
which used to just be almost the other way around all the time,
correct?
Mr. BLAKE. Absolutely. Yes, sir.
Mr. ROBERTSON. Mr. ChairmanSteve Robertson with the American Legion for the reportersI think one of the big differences is
the quality of care. The V.A. has definitely taken a turn in the time
period I have been in Washingtonwhen we moved from a hospital-based system to more of an integrated health care delivery
package, and with the communityeverything else
Mr. WAMP. Right.
Mr. ROBERTSON [continuing]. I think even OMBand I never
thought I would compliment OMB on anythingbut I think even
OMB realizes that they are getting the best bang for the buck and,
if the rest of the health care industry would take a lot of the initiatives that the veterans community has taken, I think they would
realize a lot of savings, as well.
So I really think that a lot of the things we have been advocating
have become a reality. For example, we never had enrollment of
the V.A. until 1996, 1997
Mr. WAMP. Yes.
Mr. ROBERTSON [continuing]. Before we actually knew what population we were going to be taking care of. We werent having people make payments into the system and bringing their health care
dollars with them, which was something that was new.
And just the fact that we are delivering better care, we are able
to compete with the rest of the world and attracting a lot of our
veterans to the system who may have never used it before.
But the rest of the health care industry is changing, as well. And
we are being the health care of choice, by a lot of the veterans that
have other options.
Mr. BLAKE. Mr. Wamp, what I would say is, where you have
really started to see togethergrow together is that the administrations have come more towardsor the administration has come
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00911
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
912
more towards where I thought Congress and the veterans community was more closely aligned, mainly because I feel like, between
the pressure from the committees and the folks on the Hill and the
veterans community, we have managed to get a lot of the gimmicky
stuff that used to be part of the budgets and a lot of the things that
covered up true needs have been removed.
And, I mean, you really sort of get to a truth in budgeting point.
And I think that is where we are starting to kind of come to that
point now, where, you know, we are close enough that we all recognize that theyou cant really fudge the needs in the end. And so
we are getting to that point now.
Mr. BAKER. I would like to add something on the benefits administration. I know that, you know, we have probably come before
this committee and a lot of others year after year after year about
the claims backlog and how there wasnt enough benefits processors to get that backlog worked out.
And I believe, if my memory serves me correctly, Chairman Edwards asked last year, if you get thatstill going to ask for more
people. Well, we got what we asked for.
And so the fact that it takes 2 or 3 years sometimes to get those
claims processors up to speed, sure enough, this year, we are not
asking for any new claims processors. We understand the presidents budget may actually contain that.
I think that we indicated to the chairman last year that, if we
could get enough, we could focus on policy within VBA to try to get
the claims process a little smoother. But you can never do it until
you have enough people to work within the system.
Now that you doand that is what we have focused on this year
in the I.B.is try to improve some policies so that those people
could be used to the best advantage.
So I think you are 100 percent correct when you say those corners are coming together.
Mr. WAMP. And I thinkwe have had 20 witnesses. I cant remember who mentioned the CARES. You still had some questions
about CARES. Steve, that may have been you.
And I am just wondering, because, obviously CBOC, Super CBOC
centers have all helped tremendously, but then I am still wondering, too, about some of the CARES recommendations, as to
whether or not they are going to be implemented, whether they are
just kind of dead, and things go in a different direction.
I thought when CARES was first proposed that there might be
a movement of some of the facility strength from the upper east,
where veterans have fled, to the southeast, in my area, where veterans have heavily populated. The rivers and the streams and the
cost of living is lower, and they have moved towards the sun, also.
But CARES hasnt really done much about closing facilities or realigning things as much as V.A. health care has tried to take the
health care services to the point of need where the veterans are
more.
Mr. ROBERTSON. Well, I think CARES was really a blueprint, because we had some concerns because of the lack of study on the
long-term care and mental health issues, a lot of the recommendations on facilities to be closed were places where we had mental
health services being provided in a great demand.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00912
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
913
So I think it was supposed to serve more as a blueprint, and we
were supposed to develop it more as we went along. Well, Katrina
kind of took care of a couple of issues for us. They wiped out basically two facilities that are still in the process of being built.
The Denver project has been going on now for almost a decade,
of replacing that facility. Las Vegas, they are finally making some
headway on that. So, you know, the major construction that the
CARES talked about, I think, are still moving in the right direction. It was a lot of the minor construction consolidation things
that had to be looked closely.
And if I am not mistaken, the Veterans Affairs Committee is
scheduling a hearing in the near future on CARES to see where we
are and what adjustments need to be made.
But the veterans community was pretty much concerned because
of the lack of information on long-term care and the mental health
issues. We werent really sure that the CARES had adequately
taken that into consideration with some of the recommendations,
Waco being a classic example of one of them that was supposed to
be closed. And that is probably one of our best mental health facilities in the whole system.
Mr. NEEDHAM. One of the strengths, I think, of the CARES process is, is it sort of made, I guess, V.A.s approach to construction
management much more professional, in that it sort of forced them
to identify models and identify procedures and identify the process.
It is not to say it is a perfect process. I mean, as we have seen
with, like, Denver, that has been, you know, 10 years in the making, and we are at about, you know, version number six of which
kind of hospital we want. So, I mean, there are always certainly
heartaches.
But if you look at the totality of the projects that have been done
and how many of them were involved in the original CARES process, it is actually much more sizable than it would seem in initial
glance.
But, also, as Steve was saying, in terms of, you know, the minor
issues it is identified, you know, we talked about, you know, the
need for minor construction, but also the research, and those were
all things identified and brought forward by the CARES project. So
in that aspect, it was valuable.
Mr. ROBERTSON. And the rural health care is still a major issue.
And I think that most of the veterans community knows that the
secretary has the authority to contract out services in areas where
it is not feasible to build a facility, and we strongly advocated that
over the years.
This is the American Legion, Steve with American Legion. We
have concerns over the voucher system. We think that is a disasterto happen for a number of reasons.
Mr. BLAKE. And I think, to be fair, when CARES was conducted,
rural health careI feel like rural health care has really become
a front-and-center issue that it wasnt during the CARES process.
And it sort of changed the dynamic beyond what CARES looked at.
And so I think the V.A. has been thrown a new challenge, and
it is sort of balancing what the needs were identified under CARES
with a whole new aspect on how the care can be delivered, particularly with the Guard and Reserve in rural settings. So
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00913
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
914
Mr. ROBERTSON. The war, with the activation of Guard and Reserve units, brought more National Guard and reservists into the
health care window than before
Mr. FARR. Well, keep pushing, because it isnt going to happen
without you. I mean, I think what we represent civilian, military,
veterans, the whole community. And the best kind of care is quality care delivered close as possible.
I think there is going to be with health care reform a need for
us to find a lot of savings, which is probably going to be at the administrative level. And it seems to me that we have got all these
silos of health care that, if we had a better job of integrating, we
could get a better bang for the buck and we could move those savings into providing higher-quality care in the rural areas.
But we are going to have to fight every inch of it. And the veterans are way ahead, because, you know, everybody is moving in
the direction the Department of Veterans Affairs is going.
Mr. ROBERTSON. Well, the telemedicineI mean, there are a lot
of things that V.A. is doing
Mr. FARR. Yes, it is fantastic.
Mr. ROBERTSON [continuing]. That is on the leading edge that we
would like to see the rest of the health care industry try to emulate.
Mr. FARR. I have one question, Mr. Kelley. I appreciate your testimony on veteran cemeteries. I agree with all your recommendations. I have been fighting this for 15 years. We had a military
base close. We have land set aside, for a veteran cemetery, but because we are within 70 miles of an existing cemetery, we have a
problem. It is really moreit is only 70 miles as the crow flies, not
as one drives.
So nobody wants to get buried in the existing cemetery. It is in
the middle of the San Joaquin Valley. And so we went the state
route, but the state of California is saying, We are not going to
do cemeteries. They have refused to do it.
So we invented a third way using state legislation to create essentially a private investment that would then guarantee the
states role. And the state will apply for it. I mean, we are not inventing a new application process, but we are indemnifying the
state.
And so we have this land all set up for the feasibility study, and
it is about 105 acres, and it is on Monterey Bay. The idea was to
put a civilian cemetery next to a veteran cemetery. The profits are
made off the civilian cemetery and can be used to maintain the veterans cemetery.
Mr. KELLEY. Right.
Mr. FARR. So we are looking for a developer. If you have anybody
that wants to go and have a place on the Monterey peninsula to
help us build a first-class veteran cemetery, where the federal part
is all reimbursable.
I would love to try to change all the law, but it is probably going
to be easier to get this thing built this way than it is to be able
to get Congress to waive the 70 miles and do all that other stuff.
Mr. KELLEY. It looks likewhat I have is an evaluation of the
burial benefits. And they did a very in-depth study of how to
change this. And that is where my recommendations came from, is
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00914
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
915
pooling some of their recommendations. And to serve the most veterans, it was to reduce the veteran population.
Mr. FARR. Where did you get a copy? Did that just come out?
Mr. KELLEY. It came out in August of 2008. And
Mr. FARR. Do we have that? Can we work with you to get that?
Mr. KELLEY. Sure. And to serve the most veterans, it seemed
more feasible to leave the 75-mile radius, but reduce the number
of veterans in that area. It would immediately open access. I dont
think it will help you.
Mr. FARR. No, it wont help us.
Mr. KELLEY. But there were studies that
Mr. FARR. But, see, what they are doing in California, the department has decided to go up through the San Joaquin Valley.
But if you put a cemetery in Bakersfield, and put one up in Santa
Nella, and you put one up by Sacramento, 70-mile radius goes from
Nevada out into the ocean.
Mr. KELLEY. Right.
Mr. FARR. Now, the problem is, there is no support facility. None
of these communities or areas have ever had any history of military
presence.
Mr. KELLEY. Right.
Mr. FARR. So you are going to have a burial without anything
military anything, whereas in our community, we have the longest,
oldest military base in the United States, still operational. And we
have got seven military footprints there. I mean, it is a closed military base.
No matter what the merits are to this project, you cant get over
the 70-mile rule. So, I mean, I am just asking if you know anybody
who is interested financially, there is an ideal piece of real estate
for development.
Mr. KELLEY. I will look into it for you, sir.
Okay, thank you. I dont have any more questions. If anybody
has the last shot, you want toyes, sir?
Mr. ZAMPIERI. Can I get the last shot
Mr. FARR. You can have the last shot.
Mr. ZAMPIERI [continuing]. Director of government relations, and
I appreciate it. In the Independent Budget, in other VSOs that testify, I just wanted to draw your attention to that the NDAA included in 2008 and 2009 thatthey create various centers of excellence.
And you probably know where I am going. For TBI, PTSD, vision
loss, hearing loss, and orthopedic, sort of the five centers, and
there has been some significant challenges, is the term that I keep
getting told, in implementing all of those centers.
If you were to diagram the chart and look atfunding and program operations of those centers, you would be astonished, I think,
at the lack of
Mr. FARR. What do you want?
Mr. ZAMPIERI. The vision centers of excellence and the hearing
and the orthopedic centers, I think if you could work with the Defense Appropriations Committee on ensuring that DOD is implementing all of those and working in cooperation with the V.A., because there has been some problems.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00915
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
916
The House V.A. Oversight Subcommittee had a hearing on

March 17th. And they uncovered some big problems there.
Hopefully, again, I think if you can just check with the Defense
Appropriations Committee, it was Mr. Young and Mr. Murtha. And
in the course of having DOD witnesses coming over and testifyingcenters, make sure they are explaining what they are doing
and
Mr. FARR. Okay.
Mr. ZAMPIERI. They have admitted under oath, for example, they
have spent a total of $7,500 on the vision centers of excellence
that is sort of unconscionable.
Mr. FARR. We will have our staffs check with those other committee staff and see if we can address that.
All right? Thank you very much. Thank you for your time. All
of you, thank you for your service and for being here today. We appreciate it.
The meeting is adjourned.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00916
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2

RELATED AGENCIES
WITNESSES
CHIEF JUDGE WILLIAM P. GREENE, JR., U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR
VETERANS CLAIMS
GENERAL JOHN W. NICHOLSON, U.S.A., RETIRED, SECRETARY, AMERICAN BATTLE MONUMENTS COMMISSIONS
TERRENCE C. SALT, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR
THE ARMY (CIVIL WORKS), ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY
TIMOTHY C. COX, ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME
STATEMENT
OF THE
CHAIRMAN
Mr. EDWARDS [presiding]. I would like to call the subcommittee

to order.
Chief Judge Greene, welcome back to the committee.
Chief Judge GREENE. Thank you, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. And thank you for your work on behalf of Americas veterans.
I am going to be very brief in my opening statement. Our first
panel is the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.
The budget request for fiscal year 2010 is $27,115,000, of which
$1.8 million is for the pro bono program.
The request is a net decrease of $3.86 million when compared to
the fiscal year 2009 appropriation, which included a onetime appropriation associated with GSA expenses for a new judicial center.
And, Judge Greene, we have introduced you many times so I
wont go through your whole bio, but thank you for your distinguished career in the Army and your continued service to our country at the court now.
Chief Judge GREENE. Thank you.
Mr. EDWARDS. I would like to recognize Mr. Wamp for any opening comments
STATEMENT
OF THE
Mr. WAMP. Just to thank you, Chairman, for the way you run
this committee, the way we got our work done on time, the joint
commitment to doing that again this year and these witnesses this
afternoon.
This hearing is important, and I know you want to move along
so that we dont hold them any longer than we can.
And with that, I will just yield back and get started.
Judge Greene.
(917)
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00917
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
918
STATEMENT
OF THE
HONORABLE WILLIAM P. GREENE, JR.
Chief Judge GREENE. My turn?

Chairman Edwards and Ranking Member Wamp, I certainly am
very pleased to be here again with you to talk about the budget for
the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.
I think you pretty much have capsulized the budget for fiscal
year 2010. We are in the unique position this year of asking for
less money than we were appropriated last year thanks to your
great support and putting the money in motion to kick start the
project for the courthouse for our veterans.
There are, however, some increases in the budget if you take
away that $7 million that I need to bring to your attention. With
the addition of the pro bono representation program budget, they
are requesting an extra $120,000 over last years budget.
Our increase can be focused essentially on $1.5 million to anticipate the incurred costs of taking care of two additional judges that
have been authorized by Congress to assist us in this mission. And
if Congress confirms and the president appoints these individuals
after December of 2009, then three-quarters of the year will require
us to be able to adequately financially support two judges and the
accompanying staff.
The other part associated with that is the fact that because of
our growth with the two additional judges and because of the conditions that we are in now, we will need to expand spaceavailable
spaceand that would be moving some employees out to another
location and leasing space there.
And so the cost associated with that, plus the build-out and the
other moving expenses, will be about another $2 million to cover
that cost.
Other than that, we have the regular increases that are associated with financial services and security and the like.
I just need to say that the court is very grateful, again, for the
demonstrated support that you have provided reference to the
courthouse. We have transferred that $7 million to GSA to get the
ball rolling.
We have identified a site on 49 L Street SE, but there are issues
that have to be addressed and answered before we can firmly commit to requesting the specific funding requirement other than the
$7 million. There are soil contamination issues, the ability to acquire an additional adjacent lot, setback issues for the building,
and then whether or not there is sufficient overall size for putting
a courthouse on that location.
Mr. EDWARDS. It is never easy, is it?
Chief Judge GREENE. It is never easy. And if this doesnt work,
then we will have to go to other alternatives.
But you can rest assured that as soon as those answers are given
that I will diligently move forward to providing you a very fullyfunded request.
[The prepared statement of the Honorable William P. Greene,
Jr., follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00918
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00919
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
919
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00920
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
920
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00921
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
921
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00922
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
922
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00923
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
923
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00924
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
924
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00925
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
925
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00926
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
926
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00927
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
927
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00928
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
928
929
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Great. Thank you, Judge Greene.
And obviously your full testimony will be submitted for the
record.
I think we have a minute or two left on one vote with one more
vote to follow. So this shouldnt take long.
RENOVATING AN EXISTING BUILDING
Judge Greene, let me ask if there is any possibility with the market turning down and a lot of real estate developments really in a
cash bind, is there any option that there might be a building that
is already built that becomes available that could be renovated in
Washington? Or does GSA keep its eyes open for those kind of opportunities?
Chief Judge GREENE. Yes, sir. GSA is identifying sites like that
and, of course, we are helping them identify sites as well. Quite
frankly, I have looked at the National Building Museum because
that is the old Pension Building. And you walk in there and you
see nothing but things associated with veterans coming in there to
receive their pensions for their service. There is plenty of space in
there. Certainly that is a very attractive option in the absence of
having your own independent courthouse like the other courts
have.
The Arts and Industries Building run by the Smithsonian was
part of the feasibility study. The problem there, of course, is it is
going to take probably $200 million to just rehab it. Then you have
got to retrofit it to a courthouse.
Mr. EDWARDS. Sometimes renovations can be more expensive
then building from scratch.
Chief Judge GREENE. And, of course, the feasibility study was
really directed at us staying in the current commercial office building that we are leasing.
The kick there was that to turn that into the courthouse, you
would have to displace two other federal tenants. There are associated costs with moving them out and finding them another place
and then retrofitting the rest of the space in Indiana Avenue for
the court.
Mr. EDWARDS. Well, are you satisfied that the planning for the
site that they are looking at is moving ahead? I know there are
hurdles and potential roadblocks, but they are moving expeditiously.
Chief Judge GREENE. I am, sir. And from, at least from my Army
experience, I would like to have many, many options going at one
time, alternatives.
One thing that might have delayed it was that when the feasibility study was submitted we had identified, quite frankly, property on the Capitol complex that was used for Senate parking, and
we wanted to mirror the project that had been used for the
Thurgood Marshall Building, which would have provided more
parking for Senate staff and what have you. It would have been an
ideal location as supported by many of the veterans organizations.
But I am informed that that is not available. So we then divert
to the other options that GSA has identified.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00929
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
930
DECREASE IN CASE FILINGS
Mr. EDWARDS. My last question is, you had a decrease of case filings of about 43 per month in 2008 versus fiscal year 2007. Do you
see that as a trend or was that just a onetime
Chief Judge GREENE. A decrease? Yes, it has been a decrease. We
certainly are still looking at 4,000 to 5,000 a year, though. I think
we received for instance, starting for fiscal year 2008October
2008 to March 31, 2009, we have received 2,200 cases already and
have terminated 2,000. We are at half year so we are still on that
trend.
Mr. Wamp.
INCREASE IN JUDGES
Mr. WAMP. Well, did you say, and I missed it, why the increase
in judges that you have added are temporary and not permanent?
Chief Judge GREENE. I did not say. That, I think, quite frankly,
was a legislative compromise. That is not an unusual thing. In Article III courts sometimes Congress will temporarily increase the
number of Article III judges for a particular jurisdiction.
The idea is that apparently after 2013 there would not be any
authority to increase the court beyond the seven. And that 13 is
probably gauged towards anticipated retirements like my own.
So I dont think it appreciates that in 2013 you could be receiving
6,000 cases.
Mr. WAMP. That is all I have. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
I have some additional questions I will submit in writing. But
those are all the questions I have. But thank you. Please keep us
informed how the planning is
Chief Judge GREENE. Oh, absolutely. You will be the first to
know. [Laughter.]
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Judge. Good to see you.
We now have the American Battle Monuments Commission, and
representing the commission are Brigadier General John Nicholson, U.S. Army, retired. He is the executive secretary of ABMC,
and he also has with him, accompanying him, Brigadier General,
retired, William Leszcyznski, the executive director and chief operating officer.
And I am going to forego introductions because the two of you
have been before this committee several times. In the interest of
time, I want to give you an opportunity to jump into your testimony.
So, General Nicholson, if you would like to proceed, I will recognize you for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT
OF
JOHN W. NICHOLSON
General NICHOLSON. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman

General NICHOLSON [continuing]. And members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you
today.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00930
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
931
Since the administration has not cleared me to discuss the detailed fiscal year 2010 appropriation request, I can only talk about
the work that is ongoing within the commission.
The commission has served as a guardian of Americas overseas
commemorative cemeteries and memorials since 1923. Our mission
is to preserve for future generations the 24 cemeteries and the 25
monuments, memorials, and markers that we maintain around the
world to honor Americas war dead. Those missing in action and
those who fought at their side.
The Fiscal 2009 appropriation of $59.5 million for salaries and
expenses allows us to execute our mission and supports our requirements for compensation and benefits, rent and utilities, maintenance, infrastructure, and capital improvements, contracting for
services, procurement of supplies and materials, and replacement
of equipment.
To support this level of effort, our staffing requirement is 409
full-time equivalent positions.
The fiscal year 2009 appropriation of $17.1 million into our foreign currency fluctuation account has brought that balance up sufficiently to defray losses resulting from the changes in the value of
foreign currencies against the dollar and allows us to maintain purchasing power in an uncertain financial environment, a critical factor when 80 percent of our annual appropriation is spent overseas
using foreign currencies.
Last year, you wrote language into our appropriation for this account that reads, such sums as may be necessary. We thank you
for your visionary leadership in making this fundamental change
in how this critical account is managed. We have always taken our
stewardship responsibilities seriously, and the such sums language does not lessen that responsibility. It does, however, reduce
the risk to our operations, ensuring access to the funding we need
when we need it, to maintain buying power if the U.S. dollar becomes weaker than originally estimated, and for that, we are very
grateful.
As you have seen on your visits, our overseas cemeteries and memorials are tangible representations of American values and our
own nations willingness in two world wars to come to the defense
of our own freedoms and the freedoms of others. These magnificent
national treasures instill patriotism, evoke gratitude, and teach important lessons of history to all who visit.
ABMCs first chairman, General of the Armies John J. Pershing,
promised that time will not dim the glory of their deeds. To fulfill
that vision, we have a responsibility beyond simply maintaining
beautiful and inspirational commemorative sites. We also must
perpetuate the stories of confidence, courage, and sacrifice, that
those we honor can no longer tell for themselves.
We reported to you last year on the opening of the Normandy
Visitor Center. Following completion of that project, the commission recognized that the war dead at Normandy are not the only
American war dead buried overseas that deserve to have their stories told. In that spirit, we plan to adapt the interpretive techniques used so effectively at Normandy to our other visitor buildings around the world.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00931
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
932
But we do not intend to build new facilities like at Normandy.

Instead, we will renovate existing visitor buildings to accommodate
the types of exhibits and visitor services that have been so well received at Normandy. We have recently conducted site surveys of
five prototype cemeteries to help us determine how best to do this
and where to start.
We are well into exhibit design for Pointe du Hoc where the emphasis will be on low-profile panels placed along a self-guided walking tour of the battleground, which appears much as it did when
the rangers captured the Pointe on June 4, 1944. Minimal displays
and interactive programs will be placed in the small French-owned
visitor building near the Pointe.
Concurrently, the Pointe du Hoc restoration project is advancing
well. The French government made a public announcement of the
project on March 3 and emphasized support from the French and
American governments. On April 15, we submitted the required environmental impact study and contingent permit request to the
French, which will begin the official permit process.
By French standards, this project is moving very quickly, and we
continue to enjoy enthusiastic support from French officials. We
will keep you and your staff apprised of our progress.
In concert with these important initiatives, we continue to work
diligently to attract many more American and foreign visitors to
personally experience these inspirational and educational commemorative sites. As always, we welcome and encourage your visits
to see for yourselves the manner in which we use the resources you
provide to us and to experience firsthand the pride of living in a
nation that so honors those whose service and sacrifice have kept
us free.
I would like to close my remarks by introducing the members of
my staff that accompanied me here today. As you mentioned, Brigadier General Bill Leszczynski, U.S. Army, retired, the executive
director and chief operating officer of the ABMC; Tom Sole, director
of engineering and maintenance; Mike Conley, director of public affairs; Alan Gregory, director of finance; and Matthew Beck, the
budget officer.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This concludes my prepared statement. I would be pleased to respond to your questions.
[The prepared statement of John W. Nicholson follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00932
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00933
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
933
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00934
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
934
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00935
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
935
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00936
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
936
937
Mr. EDWARDS. General Nicholson, thank you. And let me say at
the outset, I know this is far more than a job and a position to each
of you. It is a passion and a labor of love, and I thank you for that.
You are the stewards of some of the most hallowed and sacred
grounds anywhere in the world, and we are grateful to you and to
your dedication, and I saywhen I say to you, I mean to you, General Leszczynski, and to all of you.
NORMANDY VISITOR CENTER
General NICHOLSON. Thank you, sir.

Mr. EDWARDS. Let me ask you about the Normandy Visitor Center. How many people do we estimate visit that a year? Any broad
estimate?
General LESZCZYNSKI. About 500,000 right now is the number of
people that are actually going through that center a year, sir.
POINTE DU HOC
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Secondly, in terms of the effort that you

have made, this subcommittee has funded to prevent Pointe du Hoc
from literally falling in the ocean, which, to me, would be akin to
allowing the Statue of Liberty to fall into New York Harbor. How
is that going? Are you now confident that that historic site, meaningful site, hallowed ground can be protected?
General NICHOLSON. Yes.
Mr. EDWARDS. So the technology is there. Now you are working
and I know you have been working very closely with the French
which you reference in your testimony. But thethe engineering,
the technology is there. It is feasible. We have the cooperation, the
partnership, and the resources. It can be done.
General NICHOLSON. Well, I would say yes, but I would like to
defer to the engineer who is really hands on that issue.
Mr. SOLE. Sir, as you know, Texas A&M
Mr. EDWARDS. For the record, could you identify yourself?
Mr. SOLE. Yes, sir. Tom Sole, director of engineering and maintenance for the American Battle Monuments Commission.
Mr. EDWARDS. Tom, why dont you come up here a little closer
to the microphone?
Mr. SOLE. Sir, as you know, Texas A&M spent a couple of years
doing a very in-depth study of that site to examine the causes of
the instability. Now all of their work has been reviewed by two
French technical organizations to validate their work. And they
have basically concluded that their work is sound, and so that has
given us great confidence that, indeed, we are on the right path.
And I think it has also given the French great confidence, and that
is why they support it so strongly.
I think the work is important not only because of the stability,
but it also protects the historical nature of the site, as well as its
environmental aspects, because it is an environmentally protected
site for the French. So I think Texas A&M did a great study. They
gave us great insights. And I think that right now the solution that
they kind of laid out in their study is the one that we are pursuing,
although we are going to go out to contractors soon to see what the
contractors can actually do to give us the final solution. But we are
confident that we will be able to remediate much of that
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00937
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
938
Mr. EDWARDS. Great, great.
And I also salute you on your interpretive programs. I think you
are right in referencing them as public diplomacy efforts. It is a
way of reminding the world when they come visit our cemeteries
overseas of the sacrifices Americans have made on behalf of the
world.
Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. Well, two questions.
General Nicholson, you look to me like you are thinner this year
than you were last year, and my first question is did you mean to
do that. [Laughter.]
General NICHOLSON. You are very observant. Four pounds slimmer.
Mr. WAMP. That is all?
General NICHOLSON. Yes, I gave up whiskey for Lent. [Laughter.]
Mr. WAMP. Well, being from Tennessee, I am not going to tell
you what to do. [Laughter.]
General NICHOLSON. Lent is over.
Mr. WAMP. In the legislature in Tennessee about a month ago,
they declared milk as the official drink for the State of Tennessee.
And so, as I was traveling the state for 17 days, I made several
points to tell folks that I didnt realize they started putting George
Dickel and Jack Daniels in milk
[Laughter.]
Mr. WAMP [continuing]. And it is the only way I could explain
what they did, the legislature.
INTERPRETIVE TECHNIQUES
You talked about interpretive techniques, and I have been at

Pointe du Hoc, and I have been at Normandy, and it was one of
the most moving experiences of my life. And, you know, I came
back after seeing Theodore Roosevelts cross at Normandy, and
then I was at the Pentagon for the Medal of Honor recognition of
both the father and the son, and that is just an extraordinary
thing, tying our sacrifices together.
But you talk about interpretive techniques, and I am interested
because you talked about some of the things you are doing at
Pointe du Hoc with the walkway and the panels. Are there other
measures that you are going to do? What have you done at Normandy that is different for the visitor that is an experience that
you might use in other places? Is it interactive? Are there kiosks?
What is it? Because I havent been back. I wish I could go a lot.
But what interpretive techniques under your testimony are different?
General NICHOLSON. Well, that is a good question, and I will ask
Mike to give you the detail, but we are doing several things that
you did mention on a different scale, not as intensively as at Normandy.
Mike, you have been
Mr. CONLEY. Mike Conley, director of public affairs, American
Battle Monuments Commission.
Sir, in answer to the question, Normandy is the first of a kind
for us. We have visitor buildings at all 24 of our cemeteries. If you
have been to the cemeteries, you know that they are really
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00938
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
939
throwbacks to the eras when the cemeteries were built. They are
more like receiving rooms in a funeral parlor, and when you consider that the first visitors were the mothers and fathers and
spouses of the war dead, that made a lot of sense. But as we start
transitioning away from those generations, and trying to attract
younger generations, trying to incorporate more modern techniques.
When you go to the visitor center in Normandy, you will find
very powerful films that tell the story. You will find campaign
interactions where you can actually follow the flow of the divisions
through the Normandy operation, the landing, then the ensuing operations, and then, the standard exhibit with text.
But what we really tried to do is focus on individuals. You will
find a series of vignettes on individuals buried in the cemetery or
who served alongside of them and survived to try to allow people
to make that personal connection. And what we are really trying
to dobefore we did the visitor center, clearly, going to Normandy
was a moving, inspirational experience, but what we are now able
to do is to provide the historical context for why that cemetery
came to be put there, how and why those individuals buried there
died, and for what they died, so that you really understand the context of that sacrifice.
As the secretary said, we dont intend to build anything on that
scale because, quite frankly, the visitorship at the other cemeteries
wouldnt warrant that. But using the films, using the interactives,
using the database searches, and using the personal anecdotal stories, we can still tell the story at all of our facilities, and that is
the direction we are moving.
Mr. WAMP. Without taking anything away from the raw and
awesome simplicity of the site itself. I mean, that, to me, is the
most overwhelming thing about Normandy, is just the crosses.
Mr. CONLEY. Absolutely.
General NICHOLSON. They dont take anything away from it.
Mr. WAMP. Dont take anything away from that.
Mr. CONLEY. In fact, the facility itself was intentionally designed
to be set off by itself, low profile, so it did not in any way,
architecturally, detract from the solemnity of the cemetery. And we
know we get a millionabout a million visitors to the cemetery.
The executive director talked about half of those maybe going
through the visitor center. That is okay. The destination is the
cemetery, not the visitor center. The visitor center provides context
for the visit to the cemetery.
Mr. WAMP. That is great.
Mr. Farr.
Mr. FARR. Well, I just visited your cemetery in Manila. I was just
overwhelmed. It is on the most beautiful piece of real estate in all
of the Philippines, and it is probably now the most valuable piece
of real estate in the country. It is on a beautiful hill surrounded
by cities.
And I mean, I dont have any questions. I just want to tell you
that it wasI loved the way all the battles of the South Pacific
were displayed in art and tile, and it was fascinating. And then to
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00939
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
940
look for your family names of ancestors you never knew that may
have been related. I found it very touching and very, very powerful.
I just wish we could get a cemetery built in my own district.
Mr. EDWARDS. Does anyone else have a question or observation?
Mr. FARR. General Nicholson always looks young, Mr. Wamp.
Mr. EDWARDS. Absolutely.
General NICHOLSON. Thank you.
Mr. EDWARDS. Well, I dont have any additional oral questions.
We may have some follow-up written questions, and, obviously,
once you have officially released the 2010 administration budget for
ABMC, then please come back and lets sit down and talk with our
staff and figure out what that budget implies and whether we need
to adopt it or whether we need to add to it or do some fine-tuning.
FOREIGN CURRENCY FLUCTUATION ACCOUNT
Mr. FARR. I do have one question.

I was reading your testimony about the foreign currency fluctuation account. I was very interested in trying to help the Peace
Corps out because we had to cut all the positions because of their
costs overseas, with the valuation of the dollar. We never got that
money in.
It was about $17 million for the whole program, and we failed
to get it in last year, and they had to cut a bunch of volunteers
and then eliminate some programs. And I notice we did fund your
account. Is that account a permanent account that just deals with
fluctuation of the dollar?
General NICHOLSON. Yes, but the chief financial officer can give
you a real detailed explanation of that, but the answer is yes.
Mr. FARR. Does it earn interest or anything? Is it a fenced account? I knew nothing about it, though. I just read the testimony.
Mr. GREGORY. Alan Gregory, the chief financial officer.
Funding for our Foreign Currency Fluctuation Account is appropriated every year, and it has been for the last 4 or 5 years. It was
established by Congress in 1988 and seeded with $3 million, but
up until that time, there wasnt much fluctuation, much need for
use of a premium to operate overseas.
As General Nicholson said in his testimony, about 80 percent of
our funding is spent overseas. We operate with a premium that
costs, right now, 30 percent extra spend for goods and services and
contracts overseas. So that the account stabilizes our cost requirements.
Andbut the way that the account works, we can move money
from the foreign currency account to our Salaries and Expenses account. And if we ever needed to move it back, which we dont, we
could move it back to the foreign currency account. The account
doesnt draw interest. Our statute limits us from obligating directly
from that account.
Mr. FARR. So you just draw from the account. You have a maximum amount of money that you can draw.
Mr. GREGORY. That is correct.
Mr. EDWARDS. Any additional questions?
If not, thank you both. Thanks to the entire staff and all your
representatives for the work you do. Thank you.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00940
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
941
General NICHOLSON. Thank you, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. See you, General.
General NICHOLSON. You bet.
Mr. EDWARDS. Take care.
Members, we are now going to review the Department of the
Armys Civil Works Program for Cemeterial Expenses. Our witness
today is Secretary Terrence Salt, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works.
Mr. SALT. Sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Secretary, it is good to have you here. And accompanying him, as we know before this subcommittee, Mr. John
Metzler, the second generation of his family as superintendents of
Arlington National Cemetery. We are grateful you are both here.
And Mr. Secretary, I would like to recognize you for 5 minutes
of opening comments and we will certainly put your entire statement in the record.
STATEMENT
OF
TERRENCE C. SALT
Mr. SALT. Thank you, sir. I would alsowith me today also are
Ms. Claudia Tornblom of our staff at the Army, Mr. John Parez,
also from my staff and other staff from Arlington National Cemetery.
Sir, since the administration has not yet released a detailed
budget for fiscal year 2010, my testimony is limited to providing an
update of our various ongoing projects and activities.
Mr. EDWARDS. Oh, come on, you can tell us. [Laughter.]
Mr. SALT. You have to ask me first.
Mr. EDWARDS. We wont put you in an uncomfortable position. I
understand.
Mr. SALT. Sir, there are two items that are of particular significance that I would like to highlight for the subcommittee. The first
is the Millennium Project which consists of the development of 36
acres of land into gravesite areas, roads, utilities and columbarium
walls; actually approximatly 14,000 additional gravesites and
22,000 niches will be provided when this development is complete.
In the long term, this project is very important to extend the useful life of Arlington Cemetery. In the short term, it will alleviate
crowding at funeral services that is occurring in concentrated areas
of the cemetery.
The subcommittee staff recently visited the cemetery to get a
first-hand look at this project. I certainly would extend an invitation to the entire subcommittee for an on-site briefing.
As I made my trip the other day, there were 32 funerals going
on and they are all concentrated in this one area. It is just a very
concentrated part of the cemetery.
The second item that we are considering is the development of
a new master plan for Arlington Cemetery. The current master
plan was published in 1998. Due to post9/11 force protection
issues regarding Fort Myer and other considerations, a new master
plan is being considered to evaluate a full array of options to address the management of the cemetery in the future.
The options would include capital development, land management, burial eligibility and consideration of another burial site.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00941
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
942
This master plan would be developed in a transparent process with

the public and with full consultation with the Congress.
In conclusion, I would like to thank the subcommittee for its
strong support to maintain Arlington National Cemetery and the
Soldiers and Airmens Home National Cemetery, to provide services for our many visitors, make capital investments needed to accommodate burials and most importantly, to preserve the dignity,
serenity and traditions of the cemeteries for the nation.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to testify on behalf of these cemeteries. We will be pleased to respond to your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Terrence C. Salt follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00942
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00943
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
943
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00944
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
944
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00945
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
945
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00946
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
946
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00947
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
947
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00948
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
948
949
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. And Mr. Metzler,

again, thank you for you and your fathers labor of love in Arlington Cemetery. What a legacy in life to be a steward in the most
hallowed of hallowed grounds in our nation.
I would like to begin by bringing up an issue that I know Secretary Geren has raised with each of you. And I would like to ask
unanimous consent to have entered into the record two notes; one
is a memorandum for the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil
Works, subject Niche Wall at Arlington National Cemetery, from
Secretary Geren and then the other is a letter to me from Secretary
Geren on this issue.
If there is no objection, we will enter that into the record. I
would like to read part of the letter because frankly it reflects my
thinking on this and then we will go from there.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00949
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00950
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
950
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00951
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
951
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00952
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
952
953
Mr. EDWARDS. Secretary Gerens letter in part says that Arlington National Cemetery is a treasure that is a final resting place of
legions of our nations most cherished sons and daughters. It is
their final resting place, but it is that and more.
It is our nations most sacred memorial. A memorial to those
who, but for their service and sacrifice, there would be no nation.
In our stewardship of ANC we must do justice to both missions:
honor the fallen and comfort their families, and maintain the memorial that is ANC so that it will forever speak to future generations of the debt we owe to those who have borne the battle for us.
Pending the development of the new master plan, I have directed
that any cemetery construction along the perimeter be accomplished in such a manner that the existing viewscapes must not be
compromised further. I have done this to ensure that we properly
consider and weigh both missions of Arlington, burial and memorial.
Let me just say for now that I do not know all of the facts involved in the process of deciding to build the niche walls. I dont
know all of the future plans. I intend to go out and visit in person
sometime soon to go over that.
I always, on any issue, maintain an open mind to hear all points
of view and all facts before making any conclusions. But let me say,
long before I spoke to Secretary Geren I have made it the habit for
the last 5 years that every day when I drive to the Capitol rather
than coming down George Washington Parkway, McLean to the
14th Street Bridge, I purposely exit at Memorial Bridge because I
am inspired every single morning by the sight of that hallowed
ground and those who hallow it.
Long after I am gone, I want to be sure that tens and tens and
tens of thousands of people who drive that road daily, many of
them men and women who have served in the military and continuing to serve at the Pentagon, are not prohibited from being inspired as I feel inspired every single morning when I drive by the
cemetery.
And I just want to say and I am just speaking for myself here
that I feel very, very strongly and we may consider putting this
into our appropriation bill, too, but just what Secretary Geren has
done that I would like to see no additional encumbrance of visual
access to that hallowed ground from the publics point of view until
we have had further discussions on it.
And I know there is always a balance. I know there are sometimes competing needs, but I wouldnt want a wall built around Arlington Cemetery anymore than I would want a wall built around
the Lincoln Memorial or the Jefferson Memorial or the U.S. Capitol. And frankly, of the four sites I consider Arlington Cemetery
more hallowed than all the others.
MILLENNIUM PROJECT
Having expressed for the record my strong and passionate views

on this, I would welcome any insights you might have. But I would
like to specifically ask you whether there is any intention in any
way in the months ahead to move ahead with any additional construction other than that which has already been completed?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00953
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
954
Mr. SALT. At the present time, we have one project that is being
worked on and that is the Millennium Project. Now the Millennium
Project is adjacent to Fort Myer, inside of Arlington Cemetery to
develop the last 36 acres of property that we have on the western
side of the cemetery.
That does call for a niche wall to be placed onto that boundary
as well.
Mr. EDWARDS. Do you have a map for the cemetery with you?
Mr. SALT. I have mapscertainly.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00954
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00955
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
955
956
Mr. FARR. What do you mean by niche wall?
Mr. SALT. A traditional stone wall and on the inside has columbarium features so that you would be able to place remains at
that location at the same time.
Mr. FARR. But this is not a force protection wall?
Mr. SALT. No. These are not force protection walls. If you go to
the top of the map where you see the blue dots, number two, Fort
Myer, that is the area that we are referring to. And that hash
mark right below the blue dots, is the Millennium Project. Now
this is a combination of three pieces of land, the old picnic area on
Fort Myer, our old warehouse and then part of the National Park
Service property which was transferred to us a few years ago.
So this particular area has been designed. It has not been fully
funded yet so we are working on that with our budget submissions
to the committee. The rest of the cemetery as you look around it,
these are all proposed areas and as you look where the solid red
lines are we would not be able to put additional niche walls there.
The existing wall would stay or it would be improved if you will.
These are all very old walls. So only where you see the blue dots
are potential areas for additional niche walls.
Mr. EDWARDS. So significant areas. How high would that niche
wall be in the Fort Myer area?
Mr. SALT. Approximately six feet from the road and then when
you go on the inside, it is a different height than it is on the outside.
Mr. EDWARDS. Which is part of the problem. Some of the roads
depending on which side of the cemetery you are on, a six-foot wall
might as well be a sixty-foot wall in terms of you know tens and
tens if not hundreds of thousands of people a day having an opportunity to see this hallowed ground.
Do you interpret, Mr. Metzler, or Mr. Secretary, do you interpret
Secretary Gerens memorandum as a prohibition on the building of
this niche wall until
Mr. METZLER. I think we obviously need to revisit the issue.
Mr. SALT. Sir, I spoke to the Secretary this morning on this. I
received his memo last night. To me it is very clear that my guidance and my direction to Jack will be that we build no niche walls
that interfere with the viewscape.
And so we will go back and we will re-look at all of our plans
for niche walls and we will ensure that there are places where the
road is, the terrain is such that you dont have a view of the cemetery anyway. And there are places where it would be appropriate
to have a wall there with a niche wall.
There are other places where the cemetery is lower, and a niche
wall would interfere with the view that you were talking about.
And that is what the secretary is talking about, right?
Mr. EDWARDS. So your interpretation is the secretarydoes the
secretarys memorandum have policy effect?
Mr. SALT. What, sir?
Mr. EDWARDS. Or is it just seen as just a recommendation or is
it seen as a policy that Secretary
Mr. SALT. No, this is direction; this is the policy direction.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00956
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
957
Mr. EDWARDS. So to be clear that means that as you interpret
that directive of the secretary, this niche wall could not be built unless there is a change in the policy?
Mr. SALT. Could not be builtonly that part could be built that
would not affect the existing viewscape. That would not affect, the
point that you made earlier
Mr. EDWARDS. What would be the earliest possible time if you
didnt have Secretary Gerens directive in place? Mr. Metzler, what
would be the earliest possible time that the niche wall along the
Fort Myer area would be built?
Mr. METZLER. Well at the present time, there is a need for an
additional $35 million to move forward with this project. So until
that funding is in place, nothing would be done.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Mr. METZLER. It has been designed but no construction has been
done.
Mr. EDWARDS. Now am I correct in understanding that $35 million would come from this subcommittee
Mr. METZLER. Yes, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Or do you have any other source of
funding that would pay for that?
Mr. METZLER. It would come from this committee.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Mr. SALT. And just in context, the funds for this year are largely
for earthwork on the site and so I dont know what the schedule
would be when you get to the wall, but it is in the out years which
havent been identified for funding yet, sir.
Mr. METZLER. Sir, we are not going to put a wall up there.
Mr. EDWARDS. I want to spend a lot of time on this but in the
meantime until this full subcommittee has had a chance to carefully review this and listen to all perspectives and interests, I
would like to see nothing further done. You know for example, this
area along 110 to me that is one of the most moving areas of the
cemetery to see. And I see that is a proposed wall there.
Would that be proposed at six feet?
Mr. SALT. It would be. I mean if we were to build any niche
walls, the only height would be a six-foot height. That is the standard if you will for this type of development.
Mr. EDWARDS. And the purpose of niche walls is to be able to
place cremated remains there?
Mr. SALT. That is correct, and to continue the life of the cemetery
for burial.
Mr. EDWARDS. Well that is the intended purpose. The intended
or unintended result is to block visual access to this hallowed
grounds for an awful lot of Americans.
Mr. SALT. Well, the Secretarys guidance says we are not to do
that and so we are not going toand there are two parts of it.
There is the initial part of dontwe are instructed, we are directed not to build any walls that would interfere with that view.
And number two, as I mentioned in my testimony or my oral statement about the master plan, that we will be looking at options in
the master plan that would also try and address that.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. And I hope again I know you areI am so
grateful to both of you for your dedicated stewardship over Arling-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00957
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
958
ton National Cemetery. And I know, as you know, one goal is to
provide as much possible space for as many possible burials.
But I hope in the master planning, I hope part of the process
takes into account that important value of this hallowed ground is
to be a cherished memorial for Americans and an awful lot of them,
tourists and otherwise. People working at the Pentagon drive by
that every day. And add me to that list. They are inspired every
single day.
But anyway I think you answered my question. I appreciate that
and I look forward to sitting down with you and talking about it.
Mr. Wamp.
Mr. WAMP. Well I had also talked to Secretary Geren, Mr. Chairman, and your words, your sentiment and your inquiry were exactly mine. So I have really nothing else to add except that everything you said was exactly where I was going, exactly what I was
going to say.
But I also feel like there is a keen awareness of the sensitivity
of this for everyone, but I do think we all play a role to make sure
that the right thing is done over time. And I think you said it extremely well and I stand with you 100 percent.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Wamp. Mr. Farr.
Mr. FARR. Thank you. In this master plan, do you have to adjust
anything for force protection requirements?
Mr. SALT. I will start and then I will let Mr. Metzler finish. The
existing master plan included some assumptions for land acquisition at Fort Myer that had been affected by BRAC decisions and
force protection requirements at Fort Myer. And so that is one of
the key reasons for the initiation of a new master plan to deal with
that change.
Mr. FARR. There is one type that call for force protection. As we
get others, it is sort of risk analysis and they are fortressing in the
middle of my town.
Mr. SALT. Sir, this is more of a consolidation of joint
Mr. FARR. So it is all dealing with you having to comply with all
of the security
Mr. SALT. Sir, it is mainly facilities required as a result of the
BRAC process and the consolidation of facilities at Fort Myer and
to operational requirements that are needed for those facilities.
Now
Mr. FARR. That is not additional security.
Mr. SALT. If I may, sir? Inside the cemetery we are not dealing
with force protection issues. We are not hardening the cemetery.
Mr. FARR. Okay.
Mr. SALT. It is the result of Fort Myer and what they are concerned about is they are our neighbor and we share a fence line.
So what Fort Myer does has an effect on us. Some of the lands that
we may have looked at in the previous master plan that may have
been potential expansion areas now are being used as setback
areas and they dont want to develop that land because of their
needs for force protection.
It has nothing to do with Arlington Cemetery
Mr. FARR. But they are not going to use that land, right? They
are just going to leave it as a setback.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00958
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
959
Mr. SALT. Part of it is they are going to use as their mission on
Fort Myer is changing since the master plan was developed in 1998
and part of it is that they
Mr. FARR. But do you still have to then or you have to access the
cemetery through Fort Myer.
Mr. SALT. We do. We have a checkpoint
Mr. FARR. So if they make it more difficult to get into Fort Myer,
it is going to make it more difficult to get into the cemetery.
Mr. SALT. As Fort Myer improves its force protection, the people
who are entering the cemetery through Fort Myer have to go
through whatever Fort Myer sets up to get to the cemetery.
Mr. FARR. And as I read here, you expect in fiscal year 2009 an
estimated 4,170 interments. And you dont do those on weekends,
do you?
Mr. METZLER. No, sir. We are averaging about 27 funerals a day.
Mr. FARR. Yes. And you are going to have, you know between 17
and 27 a day assuming you do it every single day of the week
Mr. METZLER. Yes, sir.
Mr. FARR [continuing]. For a year. And all of those targets as I
have had to do have been at two funerals out there. I mean isnt
there another way to get into the cemetery. Isnt there a better way
to get the families and parties into the cemetery?
Mr. METZLER. The challenge is when you use Fort Myer for your
funeral at the chapel or for your reception after the funeral, you
have gotMr. FARR. (OFF MIKE)
Mr. METZLER. Right. And you are forced to go onto the Fort Myer
property, and then do whatever force protection issues they have.
If you stay in the cemetery or if you only just go to the chapel and
dont go back to Fort Myer, then it is much easier to go in through
the cemetery and you dont have to go through the vehicle inspection and all the things Fort Myer makes you do.
Mr. FARR. I know I have heard various officials tell me what they
think. I think the purpose of the master plan is to flush all of that
out and to come back to the committee to have a public process to
go through these very issues. And our part of it is the cemetery
master plan process. Some of the issues you are raising are concerning.
Okay. The security that the base is going through is one-size-fitsall and it just doesnt make sense. To require these people and families to come in to go through the military checkpointI mean it
wasnt very hard for us but I had a congressional flight.
I hope in the master plan you will think about that access and
egress. Maybe the chapel ought to be in your domain and not in
the force domain.
Mr. METZLER. Well it was the reception afterwards back at the
officers club or back to the community center. That presents its
own unique problem because then you are trying to get back to the
cemetery
Mr. FARR. Why dont we build one for you?
Mr. METZLER. Sir, whatever your directionI mean that typically is not what we do. That is typically not our mission to have
receptions and such at the cemetery.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00959
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
960
Mr. FARR. But it is also awkward there. You have got a club. It
has, you know, it has got a bunch of rooms in it and there are other
parties going on.
Mr. METZLER. I guess the overall challenge, too, is we have very
limited space left in the cemetery, and our focus has been to try
to maintain the open space that you have for burial and not get
distracted from other things that would take away from it.
Mr. FARR. I guess it is a good thing we are going to do a master
plan.
Mr. METZLER. Sir.
Mr. FARR. Thank you
Mr. METZLER. Thank you.
Mr. EDWARDS. Can I ask, who will be on the master plan committee? Do you actually have names of members of that committee
now?
Mr. SALT. I dont know that we do.
Mr. METZLER. We dont. What the normal process would be is
that we would hire the Baltimore Corps of Engineers to develop a
master plan. In turn, they would hire engineers, landscape architects, the right team. They would put a team together, issue them
a contract and then we would go through a set of specifications
where we would address the various issues that this master plan
should address.
Mr. EDWARDS. And will there be military retirees on this? Will
there be
Mr. METZLER. It will be stakeholders. We wouldonce we developed a team, we would then develop a list of stakeholders and that
would include local representatives, obviously this committee and
anyone else who is showing an interest. We have had other stakeholder meetings in the past and we would dust those lists off and
incorporate those individuals as well.
The National Park Service, the Commission of Fine Arts, National Capital Planning Commission are typically members of this
committee.
Mr. EDWARDS. If you can keep us in close touch, Mr. Metzler,
with, you know, how that process is going, who is involved at each
stage, when you know who is involved. I would love to stay involved in that.
TOMB OF THE UNKNOWN SOLDIER
And my final question is what is the status of the Tomb of the

Unknown Soldier and potential renovations there?
Mr. SALT. Sir, we are planning this year to grout/re-grout the
cracks. Later this spring, Mr. Metzler will go to inspect a possible
block of marble that is being considered aspossibly be donated.
We are not sure about that yet. But this
The intention is to possibly bring it back and to store it in a secure site. Obviously, there is a lot of interest and views as to that;
the issue as to what we might do with that. And we have made
no decision beyond seeing that this particular block is suitable or
not.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay
Mr. WAMP. I have no additional questions
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00960
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
961
Mr. EDWARDS. Well, let me end as I began. Thank each of you
for your
BURIAL EXPENSES
Mr. FARR. Excuse me, sorry. I just wanted to ask you whether
the burial expense is adequate? If not, is $300, is that an adequate
amount? And it may be outside your lane but
Mr. METZLER. It actually does not apply to us at Arlington Cemetery. We charge no money for anything that is done inside the cemetery. An honorable discharged veteran who is entitled to a ground
burial at Arlington Cemetery is not charged nor is their family
charged.
So everything we do at the cemetery is a benefit without cost to
them.
Mr. SALT. What you are referring to is if you bury someone in
a private cemetery, the Department of Veterans Affairs, if you are
eligible, would pay up to $300.
Mr. EDWARDS. In fact, that raises a quick question I would like
to ask. Do I understand that Secretary Geren or the Army may
have changed the policy in terms of burial of enlisted personnel?
Mr. METZLER. What has changed, is not the burial policy for enlisted personnel, but the military honors.
Mr. EDWARDS. The military honors? Okay.
Mr. METZLER. On January 2nd, 2009, Secretary Geren issued a
policy that directed us that anyone who was killed in the line of
duty by the enemy would now be entitled to full military honors
if the family so chose. The difference between full military honors
and standard honors, if I will, standard honors would be the firing
party, the casket team and the bugler.
If you were to have full honors, it would be the Caisson Military
Band and an escort in addition to the elements of standard honors.
Mr. EDWARDS. And that is all paid for by you.
Mr. METZLER. It is all paid for by the Department of the Army.
So again, there is no cost to the family.
Mr. EDWARDS. Is that in every cemetery or just
Mr. METZLER. Arlington Cemetery is only the one that has that
opportunity to provide those honors.
Mr. EDWARDS. Prior to that policy change, you could have died
in combat; If you were enlisted receive posthumously the medal of
honor but you would not have been given
Mr. METZLER. Well the medal of honor was one area
Mr. EDWARDS. That was an exception.
Mr. METZLER. That was an exception.
Mr. EDWARDS. Silver Star and you would not get full military
honors.
Mr. METZLER. That is correct. You would get the standard honors
based upon your rank for enlisted people, firing party, casket team,
bugler.
Mr. EDWARDS. Are there any budget implications for your budget
on that policy
Mr. METZLER. No.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Mr. METZLER. It is really a scheduling issue for us.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00961
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
962
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Well again let me just end as I began.
Thank you both for your dedicated service to protecting this hallowed ground. And we are grateful you are here and look forward
to following up with you on the wall issue.
Mr. SALT. Certainly.
Mr. SALT. Thank you, sir.
Mr. METZLER. Look forward to your visit.
Mr. METZLER. Just make sure it is a vertical visit.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Cox, welcome. Welcome back. Is it Mr.
McManus?
Mr. MCMANUS. Yes, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you. Welcome to our subcommittee.
Members will now have testimony, Armed Forces Retirement
Home. The witness, once again before the subcommittee, will be
Mr. Timothy C. Cox, the Chief Operating Officer, and he is accompanied by Mr. Steven McManus, the Chief Financial Officer.
Mr. Cox, good to have you back. Your entire testimony will be
submitted for the record, but I would like to recognize you for 5
minutes for any summary comments you would care to make.
Mr. COX. Great. I do have some. Just trying to turn off my phone
here so it doesnt go off, right? Thank you.
Mr. EDWARDS. You bet.
STATEMENT
OF
TIMOTHY COX
Mr. COX. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, as the Chief

Operating Officer of the Armed Forces Retirement Home, I thank
you for the opportunity to appear before you today.
Since the administration has not cleared me to discuss the detailed fiscal year 2010 appropriation request, we can only talk
about the work that is ongoing within our home. I also want to update you on our progress that we evolved to meet the needs of a
next generation of heroes.
AFRH is modernizing to promote this aging-in-place philosophy
and to uphold the central promise to care for our residents. Under
our controls and financial performancecouple of points for you
we are particularly proud that, for the fiscal year 2008, AFRH has
once again received an unqualified audit opinion from an independent external auditor.
This marks the fourth consecutive year AFRH has received this
distinction through our partnership with the Bureau of Public
Debt, starting in the middle of 2004, our financial statements have
had no material weaknesses since our very first audit in 2005. Our
successful audits are a reflection of renewed emphasis on internal
controls.
We experienced a stable financial year throughout 2008 despite
an array of changing economic conditions all around us. We have
consistently shown market growth in our trust fund over several
years. In fiscal year 2008, the trust fund balance reached $167 million, and is expected to reach $171 million in 2009. This is quite
a rebound from its lowest level of $94 million in 2003.
The Scott project we discussed last year: we continue to need
modernization in the D.C. campus$5.6 million in trust fund
VerDate Nov 24 2008
23:52 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00962
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
963
money was requested, and approved, to begin planning for the design/build phase of our dormitory called Scott, built in 1954 and
has had no major renovations since that point.
Completion of the Scott project will provide significant operational savings. About 54 percent of O&M now go into that building on our campus.
We appreciate the $800,000 asked and providedappropriated to
us by Congress in fiscal year 2008 for the study of funding sources
for the trust fund to determine the long-term viability of that trust.
Thanks to your support, we are modernizing our Washington campus and rebuilding our Gulfport campus. Our team of key experts,
consultants, through government as well as private industry, the
final design concept for Scott, rather than rehab, as we talked
about last year, is to replace.
Replacing it with a new commons building and a new health center, it shrinks our campus and also gives us a building that will
be LEED-certified at least silver, if not higher, and reduced the
footprint of that building by about half, which is appropriate for
the size of who we are.
The opening of Gulfport is also part of our ongoing efforts. I am
pleased to let you know that we remain within budget and on track
for a July 2010 completion and resident occupancy in October 2010.
Design is 100 percent complete. Finishes and final color selections are being reviewed. Furniture, fixtures and equipment procurement packages are being prepared. We had a topping-off party
for construction workers, community leaders and others on February 27th.
An update on our master plan here in D.C.: External forces are
at work in our local, as well as global economy. We are mindful of
these developments and want to update you on where we are for
that financial challenge in our master plan.
We reached a major milestone in 2008 with the approval of our
master plan from the National Capital Planning Commission. However, with the changing market, new challenges came up. We had
selected a professional preferred developer, and we decided to stop
negotiations because the benefit to the veterans was diminished in
what they were offering us.
So we have a plan that is approved. We dont have an agreement.
We didnt have an agreement with the developer. At this point, we
are talking with the two hospitals that are neighbors to see if we
should just do our master plan by parcel rather than doing it all
at once.
And last point, we recently were awarded a 5-year accreditation
for the first time by the Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities, known as CARF, a nationally recognized agency responsible for accrediting facilities and providing continuing care retirement communities.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
23:52 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00963
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
964
This, along with the DOD Inspector Generals Office preparing to

come in this September, because the DOD Inspector General is required to come on the years we dont have a national accredited
body accreditation inspection. They will come in September to do
the same thing.
And I thank you, committee members and all of Congress, for all
the support you give us, and I am honored to serve the veterans.
[The prepared statement of Timothy Cox follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
23:52 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00964
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00965
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
965
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00966
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
966
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00967
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
967
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00968
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
968
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00969
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
969
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00970
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
970
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00971
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
971
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00972
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
972
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00973
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
973
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00974
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
974
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00975
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
975
976
HOMELESS VETERANS
Mr. EDWARDS. Great. Thank you, Mr. Cox, for your testimony.
Mr. COX. You are welcome.
Mr. EDWARDS. Where are we on the homeless issue that came up
last year?
Mr. COX. About the homeless issue that came up last year; those
residents were all placed in appropriate D.C. facilities with the
voucher that Councilman Barry worked on for them. So they arent
in the temporary building anymore on our campus, and all have
been placed.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
REVENUES FROM WASHINGTON, D.C. SITE
On the development issue at the Washington site, you werent

projecting any revenues from that until 2013 or 2014.
Mr. COX. 2014. That is correct.
Mr. EDWARDS. So it doesnt put any immediate financial pressure
on you. You dont feel any immediate financial pressure to do a fire
sale agreement?
Mr. COX. None whatsoever.
Mr. EDWARDS. I mean, it would be good for a developer to do a
deal in a down market, but not good for the
Mr. COX. Correct. No, and that is why we backed off. It wasnt
a fair deal for the veterans that we serve.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay, so you feel no further pressure to do a deal
until you feel
Mr. COX. No. We did our long-range study through 2018, and we
show a dip because of potential funding that may come out of that
for a project we cant talk about. But through 2018, we see the
curve going back up.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Mr. COX. So yes, so we can very well sit on that, and that is
where you are going on that, and not have to develop it at this
point.
Mr. EDWARDS. Good.
Mr. Wamp.
WAITING LISTS
Mr. WAMP. Well, I have been at both of these sites. I was down
on the Speakers trip when we went to the Gulfport site, and I was
amazed at how impressive it was, even after the storm, and I knew
we were building it back. Now, we built it back with supplemental
funding, right?
Mr. COX. That is correct, sir. We did.
Mr. WAMP. And it houses how many veterans when you re-open
July 2010?
Mr. COX. Five hundred eight-six.
Mr. WAMP. About 586. And the waiting list is how long?
Mr. COX. We have four different categories of a waiting list. OneA and B are people who lived in Gulfport and moved up with us
since the beginning. Two and three are the categories of people who
maybe didnt move with us, but came back. We had a deadline that
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00976
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
977
they had to live in D.C., so we would move them back by December
of last year.
And then, category three are people who were there but chose to
live somewhere else because they left before Katrina. Category four
is just a waiting list. We have over 600 people on those four waiting lists.
Mr. WAMP. Right. So, it is a prized possession in the veteran
community to be able to go there and live.
Mr. COX. Yes.
Mr. WAMP. And it is probably 10 times nicer than it was before,
and it was nice before.
Mr. COX. It is, 100 percent. The rooms are
Mr. WAMP. It was built back under these new hurricane standards, I assume?
Mr. COX. Hurricane V standards? Yes.
Mr. WAMP. And everything else on the Coast there is, too, probably by now, including all the casinos that are now all masonry
and built to last?
Mr. COX. When I was down there at the end of February, it
looked like everyone is building up at least a level for a washthrough.
Mr. WAMP. And so what kind of waiting list do you have on the
Washington side?
Mr. COX. Washington, about 6-months worth. And again, Washington now we have a thousand. When Gulfport goes back, we will
do the new Scott project, it will be about 600 here, 600 there.
HOMELESS VETERANS
Mr. WAMP. Now, the other issue that came up last year, and this
is my last question, the overall homeless issue, not just Washington, D.C. Sam Farr and I have talked a whole lot at these meetings about how unfortunate it is, whether the number is 140,000
or 100,000 or 180,000. It is somewhere in that range of homeless
veterans down on the streets of our country.
But beyond the two facilities that you run and that we support,
any other action to try to open up other facilities or modify other
facilities for the veteran population that is on the streets?
Mr. COX. Because we are an independent agency, we dont go
through the VA for those things. But we actually have some proposals through DOD to talk about changing our way to be able to
appropriately serve many more veterans.
Mr. WAMP. Okay. That is all I have.
Sam.
Mr. FARR. In dealing with DOD, can you work on that? I mean,
I dont know what the answer is. I know that some of our local
communities build homeless shelters. And I mean, for a small community, we have done an incredible job out of local money, but I
have heard that they cant get reimbursement because of some
kind of veteran department issue.
And it seems to me, if we are going to be dealing with permanent
care of veterans, whether it be done in the homes or being done by
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00977
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
978
somebody else providing it, there ought to be some way of giving
some financial aid for that housing cost.
You know what we do with people that are on the street, when
you can get them into care, what you do is you enroll them, even
if they are indigent. It is indigent care. There is money to pay for
that. They may qualify for Medicaid, and the providers want to get
that reimbursement.
But to meand maybe I need to do some more homework in this
area, but I think that we dont do that for homeless veterans. They
may be eligible for the healthcare needs, but they are not eligible
for the housing needs.
Mr. COX. That is correct.
And unfortunately for us, Congress set the four criteria of admission. So if they dont fit our four criteria of admission, we cant help
them no matter what, because our rules are pretty narrow.
But there are several ways, and we actually have some suggested
legislative language out there.
Mr. FARR. (OFF MIKE)
Mr. COX. In DOD, as a ULB right now.
Mr. FARR. Can you get me some copies of that?
Mr. COX. As soon as I knowyes, I can. I can.
Mr. COX. As a draft? Just as a draft from my agency?
Mr. FARR. Yes. Yes.
Mr. COX. Yes.
Mr. COX. You are welcome. Thank you.
Mr. EDWARDS. Do you need additional questions?
Mr. WAMP. No.
GULFPORT FACILITY
Mr. EDWARDS. You answered several of my questions. And the

one questionjust one last question about Gulfport. The cost of rebuilding that is how much?
Mr. COX. The cost is $240 million, of which $20 million will come
from the trust fund, because we were going to build 64 new units,
and we set aside that money in the trust fund. We did the design
work, but we didnt start that building, so Congress asked if we
would contribute that toward it.
We havent contributed that toward yet because that is the last
part to go, but so far they are on budget, and the budget is expected to use that money.
Mr. EDWARDS. They are on budget?
Mr. COX. Yes, so they are on that budget, and the $20 million
is part of that budget.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Future hurricanes, as you referenced earlier, it will be able to withstand the wind and floods?
Mr. COX. Yes. Category five, so that is wind and as well as
floods.
Mr. MCMANUS. I believe it is 35-feet high.
Mr. EDWARDS. Is it, 35-foot tidal swell?
Mr. MCMANUS. Where the main body is. It will wash through.
There is stuff on the ground level. I will call it the ground level,
but it will wash through that.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00978
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
979
Mr. COX. There is no living. There is no kitchen. There is no storage like we had in the old facility. Our generators are much higher
up than that. So we should be able to survive.
Mr. WAMP. The problem is, now that the barrier islands are
gone, every storm that comes ashore is going to be devastating because you are right there.
Mr. COX. Right.
Mr. WAMP. The barrier islands is what used to slow it down as
it came in and allowed for less protection, but they dont have any
choice. If you stay there, you have to build there now.
Mr. COX. Well, we have a lot of gun-shy residents who actually
staff was working with Camp Shelby down there to look at a place
to have safe evacuation when it is a hurricane category three or
more. And of course, there is a funding issue, things like that, but
they certainly have the space to do it. Because we could survive,
like you said, in the building, but there will be no support services
if it is a bad storm. So we dont want
Mr. WAMP. With all due respect, you all need to see this building.
Anybody that qualifies would be crazy not to go.
Mr. COX. Thank you. We appreciate your support. Thank you
very much. We have worked hard to get there. We look forward to
hosting any time.
Mr. WAMP. Great.
Mr. EDWARDS. I have no additional questions. We will have some
written questions to follow up with.
Mr. COX. Great.
Mr. EDWARDS. But if the members have no other additional questions, we will stand adjourned until tomorrow morning, when we
have General Petraeus.
Mr. WAMP. In the other room, in the big room.
Mr. EDWARDS. Yes, in the big room.
Thank you.
Mr. COX. Thank you.
[CLERKS NOTE.Questions for the record submitted by Congressman Wamp.]
CAVC
Question. Could you explain further the temporary increase in judges for CAVC?
Is there a reason why the increase in judges is temporary and not permanent?
Response. The statute governing the composition of the Court (38 U.S.C.
7253(a)) states that the Court shall be composed of not more than seven judges.
That provision, however, was amended in October 2008 to authorize the number of
judges on the Court to increase to not more than 9, effective December 31, 2009.
That amendment makes the expansion temporary by also stating: Effective as of
January 1, 2013, an appointment may not be made to the Court if the appointment
would result in there being more judges of the Court than the authorized number
of judges of the Court specified in subsection (a).
When requesting authorization from Congress for additional judges, the Court did
not request that these positions be temporary. My understanding is that there was
some disagreement as to this request, and the temporary provision was the result
of a compromise. There is precedent in some Article III courts for having temporary
judgeships. The Court will certainly assess its needs as the sunset provision approaches, although based on current trends we do not anticipate a decrease in the
number of appeals filed over the next several years.
NEW CAVC COURTHOUSE

You say in your testimony that GSA is looking into a property that it owns in
Southeast D.C. for the new courthouse.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00979
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
980
Question. When do you anticipate their study on that property to be complete?
Response. Although we do not yet have a time line of events, in May 2009 the
Court transferred $7 million to the General Services Administration (GSA) and I
met with the GSA Regional Commissioner for the National Capital Region to discuss the next steps. GSA reported to me that over the next several months it will
draft a scope of work document, identify a project manager, identify the specific
requirements for the program, and set out a milestone schedule for the project. The
GSA project manager will then orchestrate necessary studies including the development potential of the parcel in Southwest, D.C.; a massing study to determine possible setback and building site configurations; and an investigation into possible soil
contamination on this site and 50 526 1955 any necessary environmental remediation. During this same time, the Court will engage the services of an in-house
project manager who will oversee the Courts participation in the process. Accordingly, it is my hope that in the fall of 2009 we will have a much clearer sense of
the project costs and timing.
Question. The GSA also recommended that the CAVC courts be located near other
Federal courts. Have all location options near other Federal courts been ruled out
as possible locations for a new courthouse?
Response. Over the past 5 years the Court has worked, both in collaboration with
GSA and independently, to investigate possible courthouse sites in the Judiciary
Square vicinity. That search has included consideration of commercial, federal, and
D.C. owned buildings and land, keeping open the possibility of new construction or
refurbishing or retrofitting an existing structure. Although we have investigated
several potential sites, no option adequately meets the project goals of providing an
appropriate setting to convey the Nations gratitude and commitment to veterans in
a courthouse of adequate size, with appropriate accessability and security, in a fiscally responsible manner.
When I met with the GSA Regional Commissioner last month I discussed this
subject with him. We discussed the unique configuration and build out requirements
of any courthouse, and how the Courts unique space and layout requirements make
finding and retrofitting an existing office building a challenging and expensive proposal. GSA assured me, however, that until a location is definitively selected, they
will continue to assess other potentially suitable sites in the Judiciary Square area.
Question. When would you be able to give us a cost estimate for the construction
of the new courthouse?
Response: Because of the unforeseeable contingencies and studies that may be involved in the advanced planning stage we are currently in, I am not able to predict
when I will have a cost estimate for the courthouse construction. As previously stated in my testimony and in my written response above, I am hopeful that by the
start of fiscal year 2010 I will have received from GSA a more concrete sense of the
costs and timing of the project, and I will certainly provide these details to the Committee as soon as I get them.
ELECTRONIC MANAGEMENT/ELECTRONIC CASE FILING SYSTEM

The electronic management and filing system went live 7 months ago.
Question. How many of your cases use this system?
Response. The Courts electronic Case Management/Electronic Case Filing (CM/
ECF) system has 2 componentscase management and case filing. All cases currently pending at the Court use CM/ECF; however, to what degree depends on the
parties.
As to the case filing component, as of October 2008 when CM/ECF was fully implemented, all represented parties, absent a waiver from the Clerk, are required to
register as Filing Users and to electronically file all documents with the Court.
These documents become a part of and are accessible through the Courts electronic
case record. The Secretary of VA, who is a represented party in every case, is always
a Filing User and required to file electronically.
Self-represented appellants, unless they are granted permission by the Clerk to
become a Filing User, are required to file all pleadings and documents conventionally. The Court then scans those documents to create an electronic record that is
entered into CM/ECF and that may be electronically accessed. The Court transmits
its orders and decisions to Filing Users electronically through CM/ECF. For self-represented parties, the Court prints its orders or decisions and serves them in hard
copy. Generally, between 2025% of the Courts cases include a self-represented appellant. Therefore, in approximately 75% of our pending cases, all filings are received electronically and all decisions are issued electronically. With regard to the
case management component, the Court uses CM/ECF for every pending appeal.
Question. How has it helped in managing the Courts caseload more efficiently?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00980
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
981
Response: The Court and its practitioners have seen several gains since implementation of CM/ECF. Both have benefitted from reduced mailing and courier costs,
and the reduced Court storage space now needed to retain records has been a welcome hiatus for our public office, which has been bursting at the seams for several
years. The benefits to all users of remote 24-hour filing access, the opportunity for
multiple simultaneous authorized users, and the efficiencies of instant filing and notification are self evident and allow our employees and practitioners more flexibility
in when and where they can accomplish tasks. We are confident that as our staff
and members of the Courts bar become more familiar with CM/ECF, we will reap
further administrative benefits.
Question. How many more cases will the courts be able to handle this year due
to the electronic management/electronic case filing system being in place?
Response. The Court currently handles all appeals that are filed, and as stated
above, all current cases are entered into CM/ECF. Thus, the phrasing of this question does not request an accurate measure of the benefits of CM/ECF. Although perhaps not easily quantified, the goal of CM/ECF is to create smoother case processing
for the parties and the Court. It is our hope that we will then see a reduction in
the overall time from case filing to case disposition, resulting in shorter waits for
veterans to receive decisions on their appeals. It is our hope that the efficiencies
of electronic filing will save resources and also enable Court employees and practitioners to complete tasks more quickly and efficiently.
AMERICAN BATTLE MONUMENTS COMMISSION FY 2010 BUDGET REQUEST
Question. Now that the dollar has rebounded somewhat against the euro can you
tell the Committee how much the Commission will use under the Foreign Currency
Fluctuation Account for the current year?
ABMC Response. Since the annualized trend of the US Dollar and the Euro is
expected to be slightly lower than estimated, the Commission expects to use approximately $15,500,000 from its Foreign Currency Fluctuation Account to offset exchange rate losses and to satisfy expenditures relating to our overseas operations
during FY 2009.
Question. What is the FY 2010 estimate for the Foreign Currency Fluctuation Account?
ABMC Response. Based on amount requested by the Commission for its FY 2010
Salaries and Expenses Account, the Commission estimates that it will need
$17,100,000 appropriated in FY 2010 to replenish its Foreign Currency Fluctuation
Account.
Question. How many projects, including maintenance, were planned for FY 2009
at our European battle monuments?
ABMC Response. ABMC currently has 71 projects planned at all sites for FY
2009.
Question. Will a stronger dollar allow the Commission to increase the number of
projects that it will carry out in FY 2009 at our European battle monuments? If so,
how many?
ABMC Response.
No. The number of projects that the Commission can initiate is dependent on the
level of funding appropriated into our Salaries and Expenses Account.
The purpose of the Commissions Foreign Currency Fluctuation Account (FCFA)
is to offset the cost of exchange rate imbalances. If, however, the Commission did
not have access to funds in its FCFA to offset currency exchange rate imbalances,
then the relative strength or weakness of the US Dollar would have a profound affect on the number of projects that could be undertaken during the fiscal year.
DOD CEMETERIAL EXPENSES/ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY/FY 2010
OVERCROWDING
Question. Last year Mr. Metzler testified that mitigating the overcrowding of ceremonies was a high priority for ANC. With an average of 27 funerals per day, this
is understandable. How has that situation changed, if at all?
Answer. Mitigation of overcrowding, primarily of funeral services, remains a high
priority for ANC. The number of funerals and ceremonies has remained about the
same over the past year. ANC continues to have an average of 27 funerals per day
and over 3,000 ceremonies a year. Overcrowding is primarily a problem with funeral
services (not the other ceremonies) that are held from Monday through Friday because the funerals are concentrated in the southeast corner of the cemetery where
most of the open land is available for in-ground burials and where niches are located for the placement of cremated remains. Construction of the Millennium
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00981
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
982
Project has begun in the northwest corner of the cemetery and Phase II is scheduled
to be awarded this fiscal year (FY 2009). However, based on the current schedule,
this project will take approximately seven years to complete. Until the project is
completed, overcrowding will continue to increase.
TOMB OF THE UNKNOWNS
In your testimony, you mention that the Army is looking at a donated block of
marble to replace the block currently on the tomb. The August report on the condition of the current block stated that it was unknown when the current marble block
would be beyond repair; however, it also stated that the kind and size of marble
needed may not be available further down the road.
Question. If the donated marble meets the requirements, what would happen
next?
Answer. If the donated marble is determined to be suitable as a potential replacement for the original block of marble, the Army intends to take possession of the
donated marble in order to secure and protect it. However, no decision to replace
the original marble has been made, and any such decision will be made in accordance with the provisions of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
Question. If it is to be replaced, what would happen to the block currently on the
tomb?
Answer. No decision regarding the disposition of the existing marble has been
made, should replacement be selected for the long-term treatment of the Tomb
Monument. Any decision regarding the disposition of the existing marble will be
made in accordance with the provisions of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
TOTAL CEMETERY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM/DIGITIZING RECORDS
Question. The idea of digitizing records at Arlington is a great one. Where does
Arlington stand on the implementation of the Total Cemetery Management System?
Answer. The Total Cemetery Management System is approximately 35 percent
complete. Version 3 of the Interment Scheduling System will be launched in July
2009. This system will upgrade ANCs funeral scheduling application that will allow
ANC to provide funeral tasks to the military services electronically and to order
headstones from the Department of Veterans Affairs in an automated manner. Completed projects also include the scanning of all burial records and grave cards. All
of the cemetery burial records have been entered into a database and will be used
for the next phase of the plan.
Question. As of today, is there a way for the public to look up records and/or geographical information of burial sites electronically? If not, is that something ANC
is considering?
Answer. Currently the public can look up burial records that date from April 1999
to the present by using a locator/kiosk in the visitors center. The system provides
the location but does not provide geographical information at this time.
In FY 2010 ANC will start a triple validation process to validate burial records,
grave cards and burial maps against the actual physical location of each gravesite.
Each grave site will be able to be located by using the Global Positioning System.
After the project is complete this data will be available for the public on the ANC
website.
WASHINGTON D.C. CAMPUS
Question. Your testimony states that the partnership with a developer at the
Washington Campus fell through. What is your plan going forward for the mixeduse development at the Washington Campus?
Answer. The approved AFRH Master Plan will serve as the blueprint for the redevelopment of the AFRH campus. At this time, AFRH is seeking development partners for implementing the plan, and is considering numerous options, including incremental development of the site with multiple developers. Despite the difficult
market conditions, there is still significant interest in the site from the development
community, and AFRH is diligently working to assess the best opportunity to move
forward with.
SCOTT DORMITORY RENOVATION (D.C. CAMPUS)
Question. How will the DC Campus handle the rebuild of the Scott Dormitory
with the least disruption to the Washington campus population?
Answer. Working with the Resident Advisory Committee (RAC) we are forming
new committees for the Gulfport Stand up and Scott Projects. These committees will
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00982
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
983
serve as a voice for the residents and be critical to our efforts. Coordination will be
critical and, because the two projects are so interconnected, many of our same staff
members will be working on both projects. Again, good communication will be extremely important in keeping these two projects balanced and moving forward. The
Scott Project, unlike moving into the new facility in Gulfport, will involve the movement of residents and services from the Scott building while it is being demolished,
and establishing temporary quarters or places of operation. Demolition and construction will be taking place around us, as we go about the business of our day,
so we will stress and be mindful of safety. Placement of services such as dining, the
wellness center, the library and other activities will be temporarily displaced to our
Sheridan Dormitory and Sherman building, which are easily accessible to residents.
We will use multiple means of communication, such as the newly established committees, our in-house television station Channel99 for updated information, the
Weekly Bulletin, monthly Communicator, AFRH website, and flyers and notices will
be used to get the word out about changes going on in and around our Home.
Question. In your testimony you alluded that the Gulfport facility will be reopening at about the same time the Scott Dormitory will be closing for renovations. Do
you intend to move any residents from the Scott Dormitory to Gulfport?
Answer. Yes. Over 200 prior Gulfport residents have requested to move back to
Gulfport. These residents have rooms in both our Scott and Sheridan dormitories.
ADMISSION CRITERIA
Question. Last year you testified that spouses are not allowed to come into a facility unless they independently qualify. Has there been a re-evaluation of the criteria
by the Armed Services Committee?
Answer. No, to the best of our knowledge there has not been a re-evaluation of
the criteria for spouses by the Armed Services Committee.
FRAUD AND ABUSE
Question. Last year there was concern about healthcare management and oversight to GAO which led to the development of the fraud and abuse hotline. How
many calls has the hotline received in the last year?
Answer. The AFRH hotline has received 13 calls for assistance or to report an allegation of fraud, waste or abuse from May 2008May 2009. In all cases, either assistance was rendered or an investigation was conducted to bring each case to a resolution. The AFRH hotline was initially established in 2004, prior to the concern
that was reported to the GAO. Reports of fraud, waste or abuse can be reported
through the AFRH hotline, email or face-to-face to the AFRH Inspector General. Information pertaining to the reporting of fraud, waste and abuse is posted in every
common area in the buildings at the AFRH, as well as on the AFRH website.
Question. What is the annual cost to operate the hotline?
Answer. The annual cost to maintain the AFRH hotline is $192.60.
FINANCIAL STABILITY
Question. With regard to your financial stability, how has the current economic
situation affected your facilities?
Answer. The current economic situation will slow Trust Fund growth, but should
have limited impact on our facilities as a result of reduced infrastructure costs.
Over the years AFRH grew and spread across over 272 acres of infrastructure and
historical buildings. The infrastructure was engulfing our resources and funding.
Multiple studies had been completed between 1995 and 2002. Every study focused
on the excessive cost at the Washington Home and recommended changes for success. At the heart of each study, results focused at excessive staffing and infrastructure costs. Over the past five years AFRH redefined our footprint on the Washington Campus. Our buildings began to serve multiple purposes. Administration
buildings were vacated. Slowly we vacated numerous buildings totalling over 600
thousand square feet across 102 acres. After completion of the Scott Project we will
have vacated over one million square feet. By reducing our footprint we began to
realize savings we had not experienced before. The overall impact was sustained
growth to the Trust Fund. In five years we have been able to grow the Trust Fund
by $73 million with a Fiscal Year 2008 ending balance of $167 million.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00983
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00984
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00985
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
Insert graphic folio-1962-here 50526C.235
(985)
986
FRIDAY, APRIL 24, 2009.
CENTRAL COMMAND
WITNESS
GENERAL DAVID H. PETRAEUS, COMMANDER, U.S. CENTRAL COMMAND, UNITED STATES ARMY
STATEMENT
OF THE
CHAIRMAN
Mr. EDWARDS. Good morning. I would like to call the House Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Subcommittee to order.
General Petraeus, welcome to our subcommittee. It is good to
have you here. I want to thank you for your 35 years of distinguished military service to our Nation and especially for your leadership at this time of great challenge in such a critical region of
the world.
The purpose of todays hearing is twofold. First, we want to hear
General Petraeus strategic overview of operations in Central Commands Area of Responsibility. This information will assist the subcommittee as we begin to mark up the fiscal year 2009 Supplemental Appropriations bill and the 2010 Military Construction Appropriations bill. Second, we want to review the $947 million supplemental request by the administration for military construction
funding for CENTCOM. Of the 45 projects requested, all but one
are to be located in Afghanistan.
I would like to recognize our ranking member, Mr. Wamp, for his
opening comments.
STATEMENT
OF THE
Mr. WAMP. Well, I want to thank the chairman first for this
hearing and for his leadership here on the Military Construction
and Veterans Affairs Subcommittee. Most of all, I thank General
Petraeus for his presence here today.
I want to thank you on behalf of all the people of Tennessee
where you have a storied history as well, everything from commanding the Screaming Eagles of the 101st Airborne to having the
surgery at the hands of Senator Bill Frist and a little bit of everything, I think, in between.
I have had the privilege in the last 15 years to meet kings and
to become personal friends with prime ministers and with Presidents and to hold Mother Teresas hands and pray with her in the
Capitol, and I consider your presence here today one of those high
moments in my service. We are honored. You are one of Americas
greatest living citizens, and we are so grateful for your service. You
are the premiere soldier of our generation, and we thank you for
what you have done and for what you continue to do and for your
willingness to head up CENTCOM at a critical moment where success is imperative and where our presence in the world is very necessary. I thank you, and I look forward to your testimony and to
the questions and answers. On behalf of everyone on our side and
on our subcommittee and in the Congress, we will stand with you
in a bipartisan and unified way until you are successful on every
front.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00986
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
987
Thank you, General.
Mr. EDWARDS. Well stated. Thank you, Mr. Wamp.
General Petraeus, your full written statement will be submitted
for the record. Now I would like to recognize you for any opening
comments you care to make.
STATEMENT
OF
GENERAL DAVID H. PETRAEUS
General PETRAEUS. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Wamp, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you, not
just for the opportunity to provide an update on the situation in
the U.S. Central Command Area of Responsibility, but thanks to
each of you for all that you have done for our soldiers and their
families over the years, in recent years in particular.
I would like to begin this morning by discussing the way ahead
in Afghanistan and Pakistan, as these countries contain the most
pressing transnational extremist threat in the world and, in view
of that, pose the most urgent problems set in the Central Command Area of Responsibility. I will then discuss Iraq and the status of our major efforts elsewhere in the Area of Responsibility.
Disrupting and ultimately defeating al Qaeda and the other extremist elements in Pakistan and Afghanistan and reversing the
downward security spiral seen in key parts of these countries will
require sustained substantial commitment. The strategy described
by President Obama several weeks ago constitutes such a commitment. Although the additional resources will be applied in different
ways on either side of the Durand Line, Afghanistan and Pakistan
comprise a single theater that requires comprehensive whole of
governments approaches that are closely coordinated.
This morning, I will briefly discuss the military aspects of the
new strategy, noting, however, that, while additional military
forces clearly are necessary, they will not by themselves be sufficient to achieve our objective.
It is equally important that the civilian requirements for Afghanistan and Pakistan be fully met. To that end, it is essential that
the respective civilian elements be provided the resources necessary to implement this strategy. In particular, I urge Congress
to fully fund the State Department, USAID, the Office of Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization, and the interagency Civilian Response Corps to enable this overall strategy.
Achieving objectives in Afghanistan requires a comprehensive
counterinsurgency approach, and that is what General David
McKiernan and ISAF are endeavoring to execute with the additional U.S. and Coalition resources being committed.
The additional forces will provide an increased capability to secure and serve the people, to pursue the extremists, to support the
development of host nation security forces, to reduce the illegal
narcotics industry, and to help develop the Afghan capabilities
needed to increase the legitimacy of the national and Afghan local
governance. These forces will also, together with the additional
NATO elements committed for the election security force, work
with Afghan elements to help secure the national elections in late
August and to help ensure that those elections are seen as free,
fair, and legitimate in the eyes of the Afghan people.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00987
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
988
A major focus of our efforts in Afghanistan is building the Afghan security forces so that they are capable of assuming full responsibility for their countrys security over time. Your support for
generating, training and equipping Afghan national security forces
continues to be critical to our long-term success, just as your support has proven to be of such importance in the case of the development of Iraqi security forces.
As was the case in Iraq, additional forces will only be a value if
they are employed properly. It is vital that they be seen as good
guests and good partners; not as would-be conquerors or superiors,
but as formidable warriors who also do all possible to avoid civilian
casualties in the course of combat operations.
As additional elements deploy, it will also be essential that our
commanders and elements strive for unity of effort at all levels and
integrate our security efforts into the broader plans to promote Afghan governance and economic development. We recognize the
enormous sacrifices of the Afghan security forces since 2002 and by
the Afghan people over the past three decades, and we will continue working with our Afghan partners to build the trust of the
people and, with security, to provide them with new opportunities.
The increase in our forces in Afghanistan has created new critical infrastructure requirements. Expanded contingency construction authorities for Afghanistan and across the AOR serve as important interim solutions because they push construction decisionmaking authority to our engaged commanders in the field.
We appreciate your support for expanded CCA, and increasing
the operations and maintenance construction threshold for minor
construction in support of combat operations would also be helpful.
The situation in Pakistan is, of course, closely linked to that of
Afghanistan. The extremists that have established sanctuaries in
Pakistans rugged border areas not only contribute to the deterioration of security in eastern and southern Afghanistan, but they also
pose an ever more serious threat to Pakistans very existence. Al
Qaedas senior leadership and other transnational extremist elements are located in Pakistan and have carried out an increasing
number of suicide bombings and other attacks. In addition, they
have carried out terrorist attacks in India, in Afghanistan, and in
various other countries outside the region, including the United
Kingdom, and they have continued efforts to carry out attacks in
our homeland.
In response to the increased concern over extremist activity, the
Pakistan military has stepped up operations in parts of the tribal
areas. Everyone recognizes, however, that much further work is required, and the events of recent days underscore that point. Given
our relationship with Pakistan and its military over the years, it
is important that the United States be seen as a reliable ally in assisting with that work.
The Pakistani military has been fighting a tough battle against
extremists for more than 7 years. They have sacrificed much and
have suffered very tough losses in this campaign, and they deserve
our support.
The U.S. military will focus its assistance in two main areas:
First, we will expand our partnership with the Pakistani military
and help it build its counterinsurgency capabilities by providing
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00988
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
989
training, equipment and assistance. We will also expand our exchange programs to build stronger relationships with Pakistani
leaders at all levels.
Second, we will help promote closer cooperation across the Afghan-Pakistan border by providing training, equipment, facilities,
and intelligence capabilities and by bringing together Afghan and
Pakistani military officers to enable coordination between the
forces on either side of the border. These efforts will support the
timely sharing of intelligence information and will help to coordinate the operations of the two forces.
These efforts to build the capacity of the Pakistani military
would be aided substantially by the Pakistan Counterinsurgency
Capability Fund. Pakistan is a unique situation that requires
unique and nuanced authorities. Ambassador Holbrooke and I have
determined that we need both foreign military financing and PCCF
to accomplish our mission, along with the other categories, such as
1206, 1207 and 1208. PCCF will allow us to focus, as well as expand our security development plan with Pakistan.
In addition, we support the continued use of Coalition support
funds as a tool for supporting the operations of our Pakistani partners as they confront extremists who operate in Afghanistan as
well as in Pakistan, and we believe the expansion of outreach and
exchange programs will enable the establishment of stronger relationships with Pakistani leaders at all levels as well.
Within the counterinsurgency construct we have laid out for Afghanistan and together with the support provided to Pakistan, we
will, of course, continue to support the targeting, disruption, and
pursuit of the leadership basis and support groups of al Qaeda and
other transnational extremist groups operating in the region. We
will also work with our partners to challenge the legitimacy of the
terrorist methods, practices and ideologies, helping our partners
address legitimate grievances to win over reconcilable elements of
the population and supporting promotion of the broad-based economic and governmental development that is a necessary part of
such an effort.
As we increase our focus on and efforts in Afghanistan and Pakistan, we must not lose sight of other important missions in the
CENTCOM AOR. There has, for example, been substantial
progress in Iraq, but numerous challenges still confront its leaders
and its people, and we have seen some of those in the past couple
of days. Although al Qaeda and other extremist elements in Iraq
have been reduced significantly, they do pose a continued threat to
security and stability and, again, we have seen that recently.
Beyond that, lingering ethnic and sectarian mistrust, tensions
between political parties, the return of displaced persons, large detainee releases, new budget challenges, and the integration of the
Sons of Iraq, as well as other issues, remind us that the progress
there is still fragile and reversible, though less so than when I left
Iraq last fall, especially given the conduct of provincial elections in
late January and the recent election of the Council of Representatives Speaker.
Despite the many challenges, the progress in Iraq, especially the
steady development of the Iraqi security forces, has enabled the
continued transition of security responsibility to Iraqi elements and
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00989
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
990
has enabled further reductions of Coalition forces and the steady
withdrawal of our units from urban areas. We are, thus, on track
in implementing the security agreement with the Government of
Iraq and in executing the strategy laid out by the President at
Camp Lejeune.
A vital element in our effort in Iraq has been congressional support for a variety of equipment and resource needs, and I want to
take this opportunity to thank you for that. In particular, your support for the rapid fielding of mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles and various types of unmanned aerial vehicles, as well as for
the important individual equipment and for the Commanders
Emergency Response Fund, has been of enormous importance to
our troopers. Your continued support for these programs, capabilities and equipment, as well as for the expanded intelligence and
IED defeat capabilities, will continue to be important as we expand
our operations in Afghanistan.
Iran remains a major concern in the CENTCOM AOR. It continues to carry out destabilizing activities in the region, including
the training, funding and arming of militant proxies active in Lebanon, Gaza and Iraq. It also continues its development of nuclear
capabilities and missile systems that many assess are connected to
the pursuit of nuclear weapons and delivery means.
In response, we are working with partner states in the region to
build their capabilities and to strengthen cooperative security arrangements, especially in the area of shared early warning, air and
missile defense, and the establishment of common operational pictures.
Irans actions and rhetoric have, in fact, prompted our partners
in the Gulf to seek closer relationships with us than we have had
with some of them in some decades. We are also helping to bolster
the capabilities of the security forces in Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan,
Yemen, the Gulf States, and the Central Asian States to help them
deal with threats to their security, which range from al Qaeda to
robust militia and organized criminal elements.
In addition, we are working with partner nations to counter piracy, to combat illegal narcotics production and trafficking, and to
interdict arms smuggling activities that threaten stability and the
rule of law and often provide funding for extremists. Much of this
work is performed through an expanding network of bilateral and
multilateral cooperative arrangements established to address common challenges and to pursue shared objectives.
As we strengthen this network, we strive to provide our partners
with responsive security assistance, technical expertise and resources for training, educating and equipping their forces, and for
improving security facilities and infrastructure. Exceptional funding programs that provide training, equipment, and infrastructure
for our partner security forces enabled our successes in Iraq, and
are of prime importance if we are to achieve comparable progress
in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Lebanon and Yemen also warrant
similar attention. We believe significant gains result from these activities, and we appreciate your support for them.
Finally, in all of these endeavors, we seek to foster comprehensive approaches by ensuring that military efforts are fully integrated with broader diplomatic, economic and developmental ef-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00990
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
991
forts. We are working closely, for example, with former Senator

Mitchell and Ambassador Ross as they undertake important responsibilities as Special Envoys in the same way that we are working together with Ambassador Holbrook and the United States Ambassadors in our region.
In conclusion, there will be nothing easy about the way ahead in
Afghanistan or Pakistan or in many of the other tasks in the Central Command area. Much hard work lies before us, but it is clear
that achieving the objectives of these missions is vital, and it is
equally clear that these endeavors will require sustained substantial commitment and unity of effort of all involved.
Over 215,000 soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and Coast
Guardsmen are currently serving in the CENTCOM Area of Responsibility. Together with our many civilian partners, they have
been the central element in the progress we have made in Iraq and
in several other areas, and they will be the key to achieving
progress in Afghanistan and Pakistan and in the many other locations where serious work is also being done.
These wonderful Americans and their fellow troopers around the
world constitute the most capable military in the history of our Nation. They have soldiered magnificently against tough enemies during challenging operations in punishing terrain and extreme
weather, and they and their families have made great sacrifices
since 9/11, as I know the members of this subcommittee know very
well. Nothing means more to these great Americans than the sense
that those back home appreciate their service and their sacrifice.
In view of that, I want to conclude this morning by noting my
gratitude for the extraordinary support the American people have
provided to our military men and women and their families and by
thanking the members of this subcommittee for your unflagging
support and abiding concern for our troopers and their families as
well.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, General Petraeus.
[The prepared statement of General David H. Petraeus follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00991
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00992
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
992
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00993
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
993
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00994
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
994
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00995
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
995
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00996
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
996
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00997
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
997
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00998
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
998
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00999
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
999
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01000
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1000
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01001
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1001
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01002
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1002
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01003
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1003
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01004
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1004
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01005
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1005
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01006
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1006
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01007
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1007
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01008
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1008
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01009
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1009
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01010
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1010
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01011
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1011
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01012
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1012
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01013
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1013
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01014
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1014
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01015
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1015
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01016
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1016
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01017
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1017
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01018
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1018
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01019
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1019
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01020
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1020
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01021
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1021
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01022
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1022
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01023
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1023
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01024
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1024
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01025
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1025
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01026
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1026
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01027
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1027
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01028
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1028
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01029
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1029
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01030
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1030
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01031
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1031
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01032
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1032
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01033
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1033
1034
Mr. EDWARDS. In terms of the process, we will abide by the 5minute rule, which will include the time for the questions, comments and the answer.
General, if I gavel you down, please finish the thought. So if a
member wants a 15-second answer, he or she can ask a 4.75minute question, but we will try to adhere to that in order to maximize the number of questions, of answers, and discussion.
To all here, let me say everyone is welcome. This is a public, unclassified hearing. We welcome everyone. I would only ask that you
respect the process itself, and allow the testimony to move ahead
expeditiously.
AFGHANISTAN
General Petraeus, let me begin my questions with the issue of

enduring installations in Afghanistan. Our policy in Iraq was to
have, technically, no permanent U.S. bases. Obviously, concrete
lasts a long time, but the idea was that we would not be permanently in Iraq, and we wanted the world and the Iraqis to understand that. There has been some discussion of potentially two enduring installations in Afghanistan.
If that is correct, if that is the policy, could you explain whether
the term enduring means physically the construction of the bases
will be such that they might last for decades, whether we are there
or not; or does enduring mean you would expect a permanent
U.S. presence in Afghanistan?
General PETRAEUS. It would be the former, Mr. Chairman.
Again, the fact that concrete might endure a lot of C17 landings
and hopefully endure beyond our departure, in fact, does not reflect
any kind of commitment to an enduring basis or enduring presence.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Good. May I ask you about benchmarks?
Where are you in terms of public benchmarks so that a year from
now, this subcommittee and the Congress, 2 years from now or 3
years from now, can judge whether we are making the progress
that we would hope to make in Afghanistan?
General PETRAEUS. There is, in fact, a process ongoing, Mr.
Chairman, in the administration to develop a set of benchmarks
that will be done in consultation with the Congress. It is an interagency effort. We have visibility involvement in that from
CENTCOM. The Intelligence Community is also very highly involved with it. I talked to Admiral Blair about it, for example, the
other day, and at that point it had been agreed with all the interagency and on the Hill, and I am sure that those will be brought
forward.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. On military construction vis-a-vis the supplemental appropriation bill, I will never ask you in public whether
the funding request is adequate. The request has been made. That
is official administration policy.
I would like to ask you, in terms of process between now and the
time we get to the conference report on the supplemental appropriation bill, if conditions change in Iraq or Afghanistan in a way
that you would on short notice see need for new construction
projects that were not envisioned when you put together the sup-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01034
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1035
plemental request, would you feel at ease to make those additional
proposals to the subcommittee?
General PETRAEUS. I would, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Great.
Finally, let me ask, in terms of roads, much of your supplemental
construction request for Afghanistan is for roads. Are roads in your
opinion an effective way to protect the lives of our troops from
IEDs?
General PETRAEUS. First of all, roads are important in a host of
different ways, not just to ensure that you can spot where it has
been disrupted and an IED has been planted, but also in terms of
the comment that, where the road ends, the insurgency begins. Of
course, with the ability of the road to tie together the revival of
commerce and business and so forth, Afghanistan, for example, has
substantial mineral reserves. The challenge is their extraction and
then getting them to the market that could use them. So, again,
roads are important.
With respect, Mr. Chairman, let us provide you, again, if we
could, those items that will be constructed with the supplemental
funds in particular, because the bulk of them really, I think it is
correct to say, are for logistical infrastructure. I suspect we are
putting as much concrete into runways as we are into ramp space
and pads for sleeping accommodations for our troopers and mess
halls and so forth, actually, as we are with that. I think the funding for roads may be a good bit more on the AID side and in other
categories, actually, than in the construction, which we are really
doing to accommodate the additional forces that are coming into Afghanistan.
Mr. EDWARDS. Great. Thank you, General.
Mr. Wamp.
General Petraeus, two days ago at Harvard and in your testimony today, you seem to feel the need to prepare Americans for the
next 12 to 18 months as we transition from Iraq to Afghanistan.
You have mentioned the issue in Pakistan, Somali pirates, Iran,
other elements in the region.
Can you lay out what our objectives are and what Americans can
expect in the next 12 to 18 months, particularly in Afghanistan? If
we are successful with this surge of troops, what are the opportunities that we might see there in terms of longer-term security when
we are successful?
General PETRAEUS. Congressman, our foremost objective in Afghanistan is to ensure that transnational extremists are not able
to reestablish the kinds of bases and safe havens that they had and
from which they were able to conduct the 9/11 attacks. That is, obviously, a vital national interest for us that was highlighted very
clearly in the Presidents explanation of the strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Again, it is imperative that we ensure that conditions not return
to the way that they were where, again, transnational extremists
were able to establish that kind of presencetraining camps, essentiallythe global headquarters, if you will, for that particular
movement.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01035
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1036
Clearly the security situation has deteriorated in Afghanistan
over the course of the last 2 years, particularly in certain areas of
the Pashtun insurgency, the Pashtun belt in eastern and in especially southern Afghanistan. It is important that we stabilize those
areas, that we arrest the downward spiral of security and, indeed,
then roll back in some respects and improve the security for the Afghan people so that the other progressand there has been considerably a great amount of other progress, whether it is in telecommunications, again, road construction, access to health care,
the spread of education, you name itbut in many areas of this,
in particular Pashtun, insurgency has been challenged and/or reversed.
To do that, we are obviously deploying additional forces. We are
accelerating the development of the Afghan National Army and its
expansion. There will be an increase in the police forces, and there
is an increase in the NATO security forces as well, especially for
the upcoming elections that will be held on 20 August.
As all of these forces are brought to bear on this problem and on
this situation, they are going to have to take away from the
Taliban, take away from the extremist syndicate in the east, safe
havens and sanctuaries that have been established in some cases
in league with the illegal narcotics industry and traffickers. As in
Iraq with the surge, when we deployed additional forces and those
forces began fighting to take back those sanctuaries and safe havens that al Qaeda in Iraq and some of the militia extremists had
established, they will fight back; and so this will be a tough road
that lies ahead, but it is also a vitally important road that lies
ahead.
Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I will come back during the next
round. I do not want to exceed my 5 minutes.
Mr. Farr.
Mr. FARR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
General, thank you for your public service, for your career and
particularly for your emphasis on academic training.
I began my public service in the Peace Corps. I now represent
the Naval Postgraduate School and the Defense Language Institute. I have been very interested in my years in Congress to try
to create a civilian capability in the U.S. government made up of
the best and brightest civilians we have to do stabilization work.
I authored the Reconstruction and Stabilization Civilian Management Act, that you have mentioned, to authorize the State Department to set up the coordinator for reconstruction and stabilization,
and we created this Civilian Response Corps.
I just want to personally thank you. We would not have gotten
that bill out of the Senate if you had not made the phone call to
a certain Senator, and it amazed me because I did not know you
were aware of the bill. It was Senator Coburn, actually, who told
me that you had made a call, and I want to just personally thank
you, because I really think you appreciate and understand the need
to build this civilian capability.
General Abizaid, years ago before this committee, said something
that I think was really profound. He said, America will never be
able to sustain the peace until we learn to cross the cultural divide.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01036
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1037
I think you understand that extremely well, probably better than
anybody else, as to what it takes to cross that cultural divide. So
my question is, has the military and CENTCOM Area of Responsibility worked or partnered with the State Departments Office of
Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization? To your knowledge, what is your assessment of the work that they are doing? Is
it slow in getting started, particularly in being able to pull together
a Civilian Response Corps? Do you have some ideas for the training
expertise that you think they ought to have?
General PETRAEUS. Well, Congressman, I am actually very
strongly committed to this, as you noted, and we are working with
the Office. We did seek to encourage people to support its construction, and the reason is that, frankly, when I was on the ground as
a division commander, as a major general in northern Iraq, I
turned around and said: Okay, where are all these folks who were
going to help us, who were talking to us when we were down in
Kuwait before we went through the berm? Where are all the experts? Where are all the assistants?
There were not many. In fact, there were none for a while, and
the pool that eventually emerged was thin, I think, and that is why
our soldiers ended up doing nation building. It was necessary. We
embraced it. We had to do it. We got after it.
We appreciate your enabling us with CERP, for examplewhich
proved to be a hugely important component of that because we had
such a vastly greater capability and capacity to actually do nation
building than did the elements of our government that arguably
could be said to actually have that as their primary mission rather
than as an additional duty.
So, again, we want the Office to succeed. We want the Civilian
Response Corps to grow rapidly, to expand. We want to see the
kind of education, training and preparation for deployment that I
think we have worked very hard in the military and have had a
reasonable degree of success with.
Although I want to go on with this because, as you may know,
I actually supervised DLI when I was the commander of the Combined Arm Center, we were in charge of all of the commissioned
and noncommissioned officer education courses, the National Training Center scenarios, the doctrine. That is how we were able to do
the Counterinsurgency Field Manual. DLI was actually under us in
that role, and I was a huge proponent of it. And frankly, we desperately need the language skills; and to that degree, the cultural
skills are also trained out there because, as you know, it takes
more than just a sheer academic knowledge of the language. You
have to have an understanding of the context and the culture in
which you actually employ that language.
I actually went to Admiral Blair the other day after we did the
CENTCOM assessment, the overall assessment that we took several months to do with a couple hundred people looking at the
overall region, the subregions, the functional areas. In the functional area of intelligence, the major finding was that we do not
have the capacity nor do we have the capability in the Afghanistan
and Pakistan region in particular, and we shared that with Secretary Gates; with the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral
Mullen; and with Admiral Blair.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01037
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1038
Admiral Blair is going to take steps to appoint a very senior individual to oversee that effort. He agrees with it completely. As you
know, he also has a very strong commitment to learning as well
as doing. He is a Rhodes scholar and, again, an extraordinary and
intelligent man on top of all the other qualities. So we need to expand that.
We also, actually, need to expand just the basic knowledge of Afghanistan and Pakistan among our forces. We were, over time, able
to do this in Iraq. We were able to have recurring assignments, repeat tours, bring units back, sometimes actually where they served
before, and to develop the kind of nuanced and granular understanding that eventually enabled us to do the kind of sophisticated
reconciliation processes that turned out to be so important in Iraq.
Some of those will necessarily have to take place in Afghanistan.
You cannot kill or capture your way out of an industrial-strength
insurgency such as we had in Iraq or such as exists in Afghanistan.
So, again, you have to have that kind of real feel and appreciation and sophisticated understanding of the local context, and that
can only come by experience, by study, by continued learning, and
by capturing information and sharing it.
We will take steps, in fact, to develop this pool of people and
then to try to keep them in that field while still ensuring their professional development and promotion and so forth. Over the long
term, we have to get very serious about the true long-term development so we are not just filling slots right now and then keeping
them in it for the short midterm. We need to make a much bigger
commitment. And I think that is reflected in Secretary Gates overall concept for the defense budget. It was also reflected in guidance
that he gave last year to develop the real language expertise and
the cultural understanding and, again, the assignment process that
allows us to develop the experts in the State Department, in AID
and in the military, so that we can be as effective as is possible
in local conditions.
TALIBAN

General, welcome. We are really proud to have you here today.
General, there is a story out today that the Taliban forces consolidated control of two northwestern Pakistan districts and went
into a third district. These districts are within 60 miles of
Islamabad. Do you have the necessary tools to counter the Taliban
as they move closer to the capital city? Your comments on this.
General PETRAEUS. Well, Congressman, first of all this highlights, I think, and it underscores the importance of what Secretary
Clinton has said on the Hill in the past 2 days, and that is the imperative that the Pakistani leaders not only recognize that the
most important, most pressing threat to the very existence of their
country, is the threat posed by the internal extremists and groups
such as the Taliban and the syndicate of extremists in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas. That is the most pressing threat
that they face right now.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01038
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1039
Not only is it important to get that, if you will, intellectually, but
then of course you have to act on it. The institutions have to reflect
that. Military forces, over time, have to be configured for that kind
of fight, for that kind of threat, rather than strictly focused on the
conventional threat that has been traditionally the focus of the
military to their east, in India.
In fact, one reason that we have requested the Pakistani Counterinsurgency Capability Fund is to have a source of funding similar to that provided by the Iraqi Security Forces Fund or the Afghan Security Forces Fund that has the flexibility and responsiveness that the Office of Defense, Representative, Pakistan, needs in
the same way that the training equip elements had, again, in Iraq
and Afghanistan. That does not mean that we do not need, again,
the traditional mechanisms with the same kinds of authorities for
DoD when it comes to 1206, 1207, 1208. We do not need Coalition
support funds or FMF or access to FMS. All the rest of these are
certainly very much needed. IMET, again, is another one.
The fact is we need, again, a source of funds that has this responsiveness, that has the flexibility, that can enable us to focus
the effort on the training and equipping and development of forces
that will conduct counterinsurgency operations as their primary objective. And we have been doing that on a small scale, providing
assistance to the forces, for example, of the Frontier Corps and to
the 11th Army Corps, which are the elements operating mostly in
the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and in the Northwest
Frontier Province.
In fact, there was a small element of those forces, 300 to 350
members of the Frontier Corps, that moved to Buner, which is one
of these districts in which the Taliban had located. So this capability will help us enormously. Again, that is why we requested it.
Mr. CARTER. Do you perceive that there is a will to start a
change of direction in as far as the counterinsurgency effort is concerned so that our money will be well invested?
General PETRAEUS. Well, there is certainly a will on the ground
among those troopers who are fighting, again, in the FATA. I mean
they know what this enemy represents, and they have sustained
very substantial losses. So, again, the Pakistani Army has taken
significant losses in this fight over a number of years now, and that
is why in my statement I said they deserve our support. They not
only need it. I think they have earned our support.
What we need to see, of course, over the weeks and months
ahead, is the kind of whole-of-government approach that would result from a complete commitment by the Pakistani senior leaders
to enable their forces. So, again, you do not have a situation where
it is only the Frontier Corps and the Army that are doing counterinsurgency operations. That is not possible. Again, military by
itself cannot do it, and they are actually studying our counterinsurgency manual. Their director of the joint staff is working with their
interagency to develop a counterinsurgency concept and policy.
There is encouragement in that. But, again, what has to happen
is we have to see that actually manifest itself. We have to see it
operationalized over time and to see the kind of commitment and
will that will be necessary to face up to what is, again, an existential threat to Pakistan.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01039
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1040
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Judge Carter.
Mr. Salazar.
AGRICULTURE POTENTIAL IN AFGHANISTAN
Mr. SALAZAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

General, thank you so much for everything you do for this country. We are very proud of you.
I was an Army man myself and never got to the four stars, but
I was an enlisted man.
Mr. DICKS. You got to Congress, though.
Mr. SALAZAR. Yes.
Let me just ask youI know, the last time that we were in Iraq
and you were still there, we visited about the potential in Afghanistan in reference to agriculture. I understand that we have to build
an economy before you can actually really build a society.
Could you maybe comment about that potential and what you
are seeing and what role the USDA could actually have in helping
you achieve those goals?
General PETRAEUS. Well, it could have an enormous role. In fact,
Ambassador Holbrooke and I are very seized with the agricultural
potential in Afghanistan and in helping them redevelop it. As you
know, this was once a very fertile country until it entered 30-plus
years of war. The irrigation systems, the vineyards, the fieldsall
of these that take years or sometimes decades to fully mature and
developwere destroyed over the course of that time. And there
has been an enormous effort to rebuild those, but it still has a very
long way to go.
So we are very keen to see the kind of interagency support for
this that can help it. But we have already, in fact, again gone to
our uniformed services. In this case, the National Guard stepped
forward and said, you know, we have folks in our ranks in agricultural States who are willing to volunteer to give their agricultural
expertise to the Afghan people and to the Afghan farmers. These
agricultural teams have been of enormous help and of enormous
value over there. In many cases, these are true agricultural experts. They are both farmers and academic experts who can do the
kind of soil analysis, crop analysis and then end-to-end market
analysis that could enable real progress if we can ensure that the
security situation does not disrupt it.
So, again, Ambassador Holbrooke and I are very, very keen on
this. It is a recurring theme if you hear him talk about Afghanistan, and we hope very much that the interagency can contribute
substantially to it.
Mr. SALAZAR. Well, thank you very much.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back so that other members can ask questions.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Mr. Dicks.
Mr. DICKS. Thank you, General. I am sorry I missed you at the
Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. I have a subcommittee that
I have to chair myself, so there was a total conflict.
I remember going over with Congressman Lewis in 2003 when
you were commanding the 101st, and then came back in 2007 when
you were getting ready to do the surge with General Odierno. I just
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01040
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1041
want to compliment you on your extraordinary work. If we had followed the lead of what you were trying to do in the north throughout the country, I think we would have been in better shape.
ILLEGAL DRUGS IN AFGHANISTAN
I want to ask you one thing about the drug issue, you know, the
heroin. I see this as just a cancer that is in Afghanistan, and we
have not been dealing with this forthrightly, I believe. And I hope
that the new administration is going to have an aggressive strategy
to deal with this issue.
The other thing I will mention, just to follow up on Mr. Farr, is
I have been a supporter of the Olmstead program, of which General
Abizaid took a year off as an Army officer, went to a country,
learned the language, learned the culture. And I thought this was
such a great program. Then I asked the Army how many people
are in the Olmstead program. I think they said six or seven. So
that is of concern.
Because of Mr. Edwards sharp eye on time, I would like to know
what you think about this piracy problem. What do you think we
should do about it? How do we respond to this?
Thank you.
General PETRAEUS. Sir, first of all, the illegal narcotics industry
in Afghanistan is a cancer, and it not only eats at the rule of law
of Afghanistan and provides substantial resources to the insurgency, as do some other activities, but it is one of the top two or
three primary sources of funding for the insurgency. It also, of
course, causes enormous problems throughout the entire region. It
is, in fact, one of those areas in which we actually have common
interests with Iran and with Russia and certainly with all of the
other Asian states, none of whom want to see the already substantial numbers of addicts that they have in their countries increase
nor to see the expansion of the illegal aspects of this and the
Mafia-related types of activity that it gives rise to.
By the way, with respect to these opportunities for our soldiers
to go to foreign countries for school and experience and to graduate
school and all the rest of that, really to provide them, out of their
intellectual comfort zone experiences, which are so important when
you are doing the kind of work that our troopers are doing in Iraq,
Afghanistan and Pakistan, I hope that as our end strength increases and as we are able to bring our numbers down in Iraq that,
again, our officers, in particular, can take more advantage of this,
but also some of our noncommissioned officers and warrant officers
as well.
PIRACY
With respect to piracy, there are a number of actions that need

to be taken. Among them, it is important that the maritime shipping industries get more serious about this problem. I have just reviewed with Vice Admiral Gortney, who is the Naval component
commander for Central Commandit is his forces, by the way, that
were on the Bainbridge that were augmented by the Navy SEALS.
Mr. DICKS. And we want to compliment the SEALS and the
whole operation.
General PETRAEUS. So they did a magnificent job.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01041
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1042
The work by the crew of the Bainbridge, by the conventional sailors and our special operations sailors was fantastic, and I saw
some of their leaders yesterday, I might add.
With respect to this problem which, of course, stems from the
fact that you have an ungoverned space, essentially, at this point
in time, and that has severe poverty and economic problems and
a lack of rule of law and all the rest of that, those are the conditions, of course, that give rise to this kind of illegal activity. But
we need the maritime shipping companies to do more than they
have.
We started off by saying, if you would just speed up when the
pirates approach you, that will help. If you take evasive action,
that is even better. If you unbolt the ladder that allows the pirates
to climb onto your ship before you set sail, you get extra credit for
that. These were not being taken before. This was strictly viewed
as a business proposition up until recently. They figured, well, we
will go park if, you know, only less than 1 percent of the ships get
pirated. Anyway, if it is, they have insurance, and it would just go
and park off Somalia, and they would negotiate.
Well, that price is going up, and of course the violence is going
up, and the pirates have moved farther and farther and farther
out. As you know, originally it was in the Gulf of Aden, just south
of Yemen and between the Horn of Africa. Now they are as far out
as 450 nautical miles off the coast of Somalia proper.
So I think that they are going to have to take a very hard look
at not just taking additional defensive preparations in terms of just
simple things like Concertina wire to make it hard to climb over
the side or, again, up over a railing, but also in looking at the employment of armed guards or security forces on those. We have put
them on many of the ships that have our equipment on them.
Again, I think that is something that they are going to have to look
hard at.
There is no way that the limited number of vessels from the
U.S., the Coalition maritime force that we have, NATO, EU, and
even others is going to be enough, given the thousands of vessels
that transit that area and the vast size of it. There are disputes
about how many times the size of Texas that actually is. I would
defer to the Chairman on that. Again, this is a problem that we
have to get much more serious with.
Also, you can do a risk analysis. You can look at the ship. There
are certain characteristics of a ship that make them more vulnerable to piracy. Again, I think the maritime shipping industry is
going to have to look very hard at whether they keep those ships
going through these particular waters. And there is a variety of
others. We are going to do a review of this with the leadership in
the Pentagon over the course of the next couple of weeks and with
the interagency, and then we will propose going back.
Mr. DICKS. What about training the crews?
General PETRAEUS. Well, sir, you could. Of course, some crews
have been trained. You heard about that in the case of this Maersk
ship.
Mr. DICKS. Yes.
General PETRAEUS. The arming of crews is another aspect. Of
course, they need to be trained in the use of those weapons then
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01042
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1043
as well. That has to be another element of this. Certainly, the defensive preparations can work. You can have water hoses and others that can make it more difficult. But as someone observed the
other day, it is tough to be on the end of a water hose if the other
guy is on the end of an RPG. So you have got to think your way
through that calculation as well.
Mr. DICKS. I yield back my remaining time.
INTERAGENCY INVOLVEMENT
Mr. EDWARDS. I thank the gentleman.

General Petraeus, you have spoken today in your testimony, orally and in writing, and repeatedly that you cannot win a counterinsurgency effort by simply a military effort alone. You have to
have civilian support. You have to win the hearts and minds of the
people of that region or of that country.
You spoke of the need for full funding of State Department,
USAID, perhaps USDA, the Department of Commerce, and other
programs. Is funding the constraint? I guess what I would ask is:
If you have the funding, do we still have problems with getting
those people from those particular agencies to go to Iraq and Afghanistan?
General PETRAEUS. It is a mix, Mr. Chairman. Based on my experience when I was a commander in Iraq and, before that, the
training equip commanderbecause we drew on a number of the
different interagency elements during that timethere are certain
organizations that are ready to help.
I have to single out the Department of Homeland Security, for
example, which was willing to provide border tactical officers, customs agents, and other experts on border security, which was
something that was desperately needed in Iraq, even as it is of
course needed in our own country. But they had those assets. They
had the capabilities. They were willing to provide them, but they
ran into both authority and authorization issues.
I think they did not have the funding for it, and I am not sure
they had the authority to shift other funding to do that. So, in
some cases, we were able to use training equip moneys for that, because it fit the language that was provided by Congress for that;
but in other cases, we did not, and we just had challenges with
that.
There are other cases with other interagency elements where
they just do not have the capacity to provide the people, and that,
I think, is a serious challenge. It may well be.
There have been reports, public reportsand I think that Under
Secretary of Defense Flournoy talked in a conference about this the
other daythat as the augmentation of civilian members of the effort in Afghanistan goes forward, that it may be necessary to provide some uniformed members to augment that effort. We had to
do that in Iraq as you will recall. You know, it is just a lot faster
to give someone in the military an order, one who is already prepared for deployment and who has weapons training, preparation
and so forth, or who can get that in relatively short order, than it
is to bring someone in from the outside and go through the entire
process and clearances and everything else if they are contracted
or hired in some other fashion. So it may be. That is certainly an
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01043
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1044
option that Secretary Gates is looking at, although there has not
been a commitment or numbers assigned to it yet.
Mr. EDWARDS. Do you have any kind of broad estimate today in
Afghanistan and in Iraq, if you had all of the civilian employees
from the various Federal agenciesUSDA, the Department of
Commerceas to how many military troops you could free up for
their military mission?
General PETRAEUS. I think, in truth, that freeing up would be
relatively small in number because, again, if you come back just for
example to the agricultural area, we could send home a few agriculture teams if we had more agricultural experts. In many cases,
though, I think what it would do is it would enable our soldiers to
focus more on their primary responsibilities of providing for the security of the people, securing and serving the people, and focus less
on these other duties that they end up having to get into because
of the lack of additional capacity in the civilian arena.
AFGHANISTAN
Mr. EDWARDS. Clearly, our goal ultimately is to have the people

of Iraq and Afghanistan be self-sufficient and providing for their
own security. It has taken an awfully long time to try to build up
the forces, the police and security forces in Iraq.
Is there any reason to believe, for whatever differences or learning curves or experiences in Afghanistan, that we will be able to
move that process forward more quickly than has occurred in Iraq?
General PETRAEUS. Well, we have certainly tried to take lessons
from Iraq and apply them appropriately with an understanding of
the significant differences in Afghanistan. In many respects, Afghanistan represents a more difficult problem set. It does not have
a number of the blessings that Iraq has in terms of the sheer oil,
gas, land of two rivers, the human capital that Iraq built up over
the years, the muscle memory of a strong government, albeit one
that was corrupted over time by Saddam Hussein. But, again, it
had a large number of advantages and extraordinary natural blessings in comparison to Afghanistan, which is much more, obviously,
landlocked, mountainous, rugged, rural, with a 70 to 80 percent illiteracy rate. You have the challenging situation of policemen who
cannot read or comprehend the laws that they are enforcing. These
kinds of difficulties make Afghanistan very, very hard.
We have seen that, and we will continue to see that. This is why
up front I said this is going to take a sustained substantial commitment, and I have provided that in each of the testimonies that I
have had on this, and certainly to the military and civilian leadership of our country.
Mr. Wamp.
To follow up on that line of questioning, General, there is no
question the surge was successful in Iraq and that great gains have
been made, but your testimony said that those gains are fragile
and reversible. As I said to you earlier today in my office, my
nephew is a marine right now, and I am interested in the question
of Iraq.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01044
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1045
There was a bombing there yesterday of significant proportion,
still. Yet some Members who have been there in the last 3 weeks
have said that the policing versus the warfighting is the primary
problem, and that law enforcement there is more the issue than a
lack of our warfighting capabilities.
So, as we transition more and more out of Iraq and into Afghanistan, give us a feeling, from your perspective, of how much security
and warfighting capability is still necessary for us in Iraq to leave
it in the condition that those security forces in Iraq will be able to
maintain the progress that has been made so that it is not fragile
and reversible.
General PETRAEUS. Well, that is a very good question. Again, obviously, there has been, clearly, very substantial progress in Iraq.
When you go from 160 attacks per day to now an average of 10 to
15, obviously that represents a significant degree of progress.
Having said that, for all the reasons that I mentioned in my
opening statement, which include the resilience of al Qaeda in
Iraqalthough considerably diminished, it retains a capability, and
it does retain a desire to reestablish its networks, and it does periodically still have the capability to carry out the kind of horrific attacks that it carried out yesterday.
I talked to General Odierno, in fact, not long before coming over
here. They are obviously going through the intelligence, doing, you
know, a very, very rigorous job of trying to determine which network was reestablished, how it was able to carry out the attacks
that it did. In some respects, some of this is actually a bit of the
result of the relaxed security, to some degree, over the very, very
tight security and the innumerable checkpoints and walls and barriers and all the rest of that, some of which has been taken down
over time as, in fact, the security has been improved.
General PETRAEUS. And so, maintaining the vigilance and the
discipline in the actions, particularly of local Iraqi Security Forces
who are the ones on the checkpoints and securing these very sensitive locations, is very important.
We have seen in this case, we do know that, for example, a network that provides foreign fighters from Tunisia through Syria to
Iraq was reactivated or reestablished after the foreign fighter network inside Iraq was damaged very significantly over the course of
the last 6 months or so. And we know that, for example, four of
the suicide bombers in the past couple of weeks were Tunisians
and we captured one of the facilitators. There may be some others
that have come through.
Again, this is the kind of intelligence focus that is taking place
to determine again what network has been able to carry these out
and what actions need to be taken against them.
Those actions will be taken though with considerably larger and
more capable Iraqi Security Forces. They are carrying out the vast
majority of the security operations at this point. We are well into
the process of withdrawing additional forces, the remaining coalition forces going home, gradually coming out of the cities in anticipation of the deadline this summer in the security agreement, and
continuing on with the other aspects of security agreement.
The Iraqi Security Forces number some 600,000 now. Again they
are considerably more capable than they were just a couple of years
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01045
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1046
ago. But there will be continued attacks of this type over time. It
is going to take a considerable time for Iraq to eliminate all of the
remaining elements and you see in fact in that region periodic attacks of this type even in countries in which there are relatively
small cells of extremists, and so forth.
So this is why we say the progress continues to be fragile and
reversible, and it is why we say that it requires continued vigilance
and continued effort. And again we think the policy adopted for
this is the appropriate one, it is something that General Odierno
and I and Ambassador Crocker supported.
Mr. WAMP. I want to pursue Pakistan and FATA, but I will do
that on the third round.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Mr. Farr.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I want to continue with the discussion
of crossing that cultural divide. I think you are able to understand
the need to do that better than anyone. Its ironic that there are
protest signs in this room that say no military solution, and you
are essentially saying the same. There is no military solution. It
has got to be a civilian solution, and we need to work on diplomacy
and it ought to be in the future words, not war.
So this hearing is really in the interest of trying to find how do
we for the first time really begin that transition of developing the
civilian capacity.
The Naval Postgraduate School has a center for post conflict stabilization and reconstruction. Where they do exercises with people
from the U.N. and NGOs, U.S. civilian agencies and military, and
foreign military officers. The exercises try to find out help plan how
you really do stabilization and reconstruction in a war torn areas.
There is also a course being offered to military officers in that
field, but there is very little interest in going into it because there
is no MOS. There is nothing to do with this degree and expertise
that you are developing. Yet you established in your answer to the
first question that there is lack of expertise. I think we agree we
need to develop it, but the Department of Defense is not yet there
in developing the career path for these specialists.
Are you using FAOs, and are they well trained? Is there something beyond that specific to linguistic and culturally expertise, region by region around the world? And do these teams train together so that theyas we do in a disaster mitigationcan go in
and do the ounce of prevention before we need the pound of cure.
I am interested in your thoughts about how we can further develop that professionalism. And is the State Department coordinator for reconstruction in dialogue with you?
General PETRAEUS. The answer to that is yes. If I could go back,
because you have actually touched on an area that I have enormous interest in actually. When you talk about changing an institution, which is what we are talking about here, to appreciate the
need for a particular skill set in vastly greater number than we
have right now. Any time you change an institution, though, you
need the big ideas and then you have to of course educate the organization on the big ideas and hopefully they embrace the big ideas.
And if they dont, you help them put their arms around the big
ideas and squeeze them with them.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01046
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1047
And then you implement the big ideas, if you will, in the military
we practice them, sometimes we implement them in real operations
if those are ongoing, as they are right now, and then you have a
feedback mechanism. And we actually proposed an interagency engine of change in a briefing one time to an interagencyand I
would be happy to provide that whole briefing to youon how you
would go about that.
We were talking about actually getting the interagency to embrace the concept of counterinsurgency because in my view and another the biggest of the big ideas that came out of the CENTCOM
assessment was that the construct, the intellectual construct for
the war on terror, at least within the CENTCOM area of responsibility, needs to be a counterinsurgency construct, not a narrow
counterterrorism construct, counterterrorism being, as you know,
special mission units, precise intelligence, intelligence agency activities, and very specific operations. It needs to be much broader
than that. It needs to be not just special operations forces, but conventional forces, indigenous forces, and it needs to be broader that
that. It needs to be economic, political, diplomatic, informational,
educational and all the rest of that. And that is the ANACONDA
slide that we briefed to the Congress in April of 2008 when we
were explaining that within Iraq you couldnt do in al Qaeda in
Iraq with just counterterrorism forces. It took a holistic approach.
It takes corrections, too, by the way, because you have to separate
the irreconcilables from the reconcilables there as well.
But I think what you are talking about, I mean, you have the
big ideas right there, and the question is how to get the institution
in a sense educated, the organizations educated on them and then
to actually implement them, and then to follow it up and have lessons learned, then to help you refine the big ideas and the education of those and any implementation.
With respect to the FAOs, we do have very good FAO programs.
They involve language training, oftentime in a country or a region
before they actually serve, and then repetitive tours in those. If
anything, though, I think we have to be careful not to eat our
young in this field, and make sure they dont run up against glass
ceilings where all of a sudden they can advance to a certain point
but now they cant go beyond that. There are exceptions to that
and some significant ones, and I think we have to ensure that we
do enable that kind of opportunity and embrace again people who
have had these out of their intellectual comfort zone experiences.
As you may recall, 2 years ago there was a promotion board, and
the Secretary was pretty clear about who was on the board, and
there was a reason I think to ensure that certain kinds of officers
were in fact selected, although of course there is very clear instructions, there is a legal process, and so forth.
So we have to again ensure that there is real opportunity for
these individuals that they feel highly valid. It is ironic that just
yesterday afternoon I sent an e-mail to the Chief of Staff at
CENTCOM down in Tampa, and I said I want you to look at the
coding, the personnel coding, of the spots in the J5 section, which
is plans and policy and strategy, and make sure that they are FAO
slot coded so that we are using the FAOs and the experts, so we
dont bring in somebody who has never been the country and is all
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01047
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1048
of a sudden the country director for our plans and policy. Instead,
we need the folks that are the experts.
Now you need both of course, and you also need the operational
experience piece has to inform this, and we have to get a balance
in there as well. But again obviously this is something that I feel
pretty strongly about, and I appreciate the opportunity to
Mr. FARR. The point is you are going to need some career development there and you are going to need some of those MOSs, as
you say, developed.
General PETRAEUS. Sir, again when it comes to the conflict prevention that one I have to put my thinking cap on and figure out.
We are actually pretty good now in the FAO field, and again there
is a revamping in the Army personnel system some years back that
again does pretty well up to certain levels. But we have to take it
beyond those levels, I think, as well.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you. Judge Carter.
Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. General Petraeus, I like
to read history and I have been reading a little bit of Afghanistan
history, it seems to me that the Afghan people dont like invaders
very much, and they certainly dont like conquerors, the entire population turns on the conqueror. I think the junkyard Soviet equipment that is in Afghanistan today gives a pretty good indication of
that.
As we ramp up forces in Afghanistan, how do we do that without
giving that perception that we are an invader. I think right now
we are still perceived as a helper, but I think that is a fine line
that has to be walked. I am asking you if you perceive any indication of that in Afghanistan and in turn what assets or infrastructure you might need to assist us, assist our forces so that we are
able to continue to be perceived as helpers and not as invaders.
General PETRAEUS. Well, you are exactly right, Congressman,
that the Afghan people do not take kindly to conquerors and they
have shown that over the centuries. And so that is why it is not
just having additional forces, it is employing those forces properly.
And they cannot be seen to be there as invaders or conquerors.
They have to be there to be seen as helping to secure and serve
the people, to be partners and, while being tough warriors, still
being very sensitive, for example, to civilian casualties, which is
probably the single most important issue and the single most challenging issue and sensitive, because in fact the Taliban in particular will literally create conditions in which there is a high prospect of civilian casualties, disregarding the risk that they are putting the civilian population of a local area to by their actions in certain occasions.
So it is something that we have to be keenly sensitive to. And
in fact General McKiernan and I issued tactical directives on this
issue. And his recently released counterinsurgency guidance highlights this, I think we gave a copy of this to all the members before
the hearing. If not, I will make sure that we get it to you right
after this.
Mr. CARTER. The last time I was over there, the only smiles I got
from people were when they were traveling down a new highway
that was being built or under construction and then you saw it.
They dont smile a whole lot over there, but they were smiling
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01048
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1049
about that. So I happen to agree with the discussion that as we
ramp up our forces and we do them intelligently, and I trust you
very much to do that, we also need to make sure that they think
we are there to help because then it will be different. Alexander
the Great was the first one to learn this lesson, and everybody has
been learning it ever since.
General PETRAEUS. Absolutely right.
Mr. EDWARDS. Judge, thank you. Mr. Salazar.
Mr. SALAZAR. General, the transition from our soldiers in Iraq to
Afghanistan, what additional training are you putting them
through? I know we face different challenges and the preparedness
may not be the same as what it was in Iraq. We are fighting in
different territory. Could you address the challenges that we might
have? And how can we help you better prepare our soldiers for
that?
General PETRAEUS. Well, Congressman, we actuallythe best example of this I think is to look at the National Training Center at
Ft. Irwin, California, which is one of the primary sites at which we
prepare units. That is where we conduct thein a sense the final
exercise, graduation exercise, the culmination to the road to deployment, which now starts, by the way, with a counterinsurgency seminar, and that has been the case now for a couple of years. And
that seminar is tweaked, but then the entire road to deployment
is tweaked to have an Afghan focus, rather than an Iraq focus.
At the National Training Center it is a much more rural setting
for these kinds of exercises, rather than for in Iraq where we have
literally built up a lot of small urban areas in the desert, in the
Mojave Desert, to get them up into the mountains there more, out
again in the Mojave Desert which has some pretty good little peaks
out there as well. Everything is done and I mean literally of course
we have Afghan natives, often Afghan Americans, but the Afghan
Americans replace the Iraqi Americans. In every respect that we
can, we try to replicate the situation in Afghanistan rather than of
course the situation in Iraq.
Needless to say, there are always going to be limits. We havent
found a way to bring 10,000 and 12,000 foot peaks into the Mojave
Desert, but they do have again have several thousand foot peaks
out there and they can get the sense of that as well.
There are language differences again for those that are going to
get some of the language training; the cultural training again is obviously different. And again this is all hugely important, because
what worked in Iraq where we literally would move into a neighborhood, right into the neighborhood, right into a deserted house
or a deserted factory or a looted governmental facility. In Afghanistan out in those rural areas that is not done, and so you literally
have to sit with the tribal elders, with the local mullahs, and work
out an arrangement. Typically we provide the security, the persistent security presence that is so important in partnership with
the Afghan forces by being just outside a village rather than right
in the center of it.
So again, that is the kind of changes that we make to ensure
their soldiers are prepared for that.
Now in some cases we have had to send soldiers literally from
Iraq to Afghan, in some other cases to divert them from a deploy-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01049
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1050
ment plan from Iraq to Afghanistan. Needless to say, the sooner we
can do it the better, but inevitably there are requirements that
emerge, and we just went through that. We just had a period
where General McKiernan requested additional forces and those
that had the sufficient dwell, the only ones were either in Iraq or
en route to Iraq, and we had to make some very, very tough decisions, and we did it in coordination with General Odierno and with
General McKiernan in full visibility to the Secretary and the
Chairman, but at the end of the day had to make some very difficult choices and had to send 3,500 or so over in a couple of different decisions of so-called enablers. And these are the very highest demand, low density elements, construction engineers again to
get the infrastructure going, route clearance teams, joint tactical
air controllers, military working dogs, a whole host of intelligence,
command and control, and other elements that again with dwell
time the only place we could find them was in Iraq or en route to
Iraq and we had to divert some of those to Afghanistan.
This, by the way, is what the Secretarys budget is designed to
address. His budget is, as has been observed, a warfighters budget
and it gets at the shortages and the enablers in particular, these
forces that everyone needs.
I met with the Special Operations Command Commander yesterday, Admiral Olson, and the most important topic of that conversation was again these enablers that the special operations forces
need from the conventional side to help their forces be effective.
They are also the same ones that are needed by conventional units
to ensure that they can be effective.
And again, that is the concept of the Secretarys budget. Also,
then those items that everybody cant get enough of, such as intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance platforms, and a variety
of other intelligence-related items.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Dicks.
Mr. DICKS. Secretary Gates saidwhen he was out at Camp
Lejeune, he said that the civilian side of this equation is not coming into place. This is the same problem we had, as you talked
about earlier, in Iraq.
General PETRAEUS. Right.
Mr. DICKS. And now the same thing is happening in Afghanistan,
according to Secretary Gates. How do we deal with this? How do
we get the State Department and these other agencies to come up
with the people that we need or are we going to just have to rely
on reservists to volunteer? How do we deal with this?
General PETRAEUS. Well, in part this is again Vice Chairman
Farrs point of developing the capability and the capacity, much
greater of each in the interagency, and in particular in those agencies that have as their primary mission some of the tasks that we
were having to do with folks in uniform. That is the first issue.
Mr. DICKS. Is there anybody inside the government to get people
together to try to work out a strategy about how we are going to
do this?
General PETRAEUS. Sir, that is going on. Again, this is very much
ongoing. It started, I think, a couple of years ago. In fact, I think
this conference that I talked about at which we presented the idea
of the interagency engine of change was in fact one of the early
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01050
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1051
catalysts for that overall effort, and it is actually gradually coming
together.
But the other issue, that is an issue of just having the sheer capacity and capability. The other effort is then having the
deployability on fairly short notice, and that is a quality that the
military has of course that is fairly unique. We have that ability
to either take someone who is already serving or could be called up
on very short notice and in a very smooth deployment process.
They already have all their paperwork done and clearances and
basic levels of training and equipment and everything else. And
you can just add to that, relatively short order, as you know, put
them through an existing deployment process and then get them
down range. And that is part of that, the overall effort that needs
to be looked at as well.
PAKISTAN
Mr. DICKS. Now, you know there was a lot of objection on our
side when the government of Pakistan made this arrangement in
Swat and put their forces in the barracks. Are those forces still in
the barracks in Swat? And is this what has led to this collapse?
General PETRAEUS. Well, there was an agreement again to allow
essentially sharia law, and at the heart of the dispute had to do
with the lack of what is termed speedy justice, and there was a
complete and utter dissatisfaction with the pace of resolution of relatively small level conflicts, but ones that were tying local communities in knots. And that was not provided, and over time that led
to, that was the cause on which the Taliban was able to build,
among some others. In fact, there is a very good article, I think in
the New York Times the other day, that talked about the other social situations, inequities, and so forth, that persisted there on
which the Taliban was able to play and to generate local support
for them assuming greater control over the area than the governmental authorities whose control was eroding.
And then it was also pursued with some considerable employment of threats, force, intimidation, murder, and so forth. All of
that combined to enable them to get in a position where they could
push this agreement through, and then the greater political dynamics in Pakistan led eventually, after considerable stalling and
regret, I think frankly, to an agreement to it.
And then the big concern after that was the movement beyond
that particular Swat district into Buner and some of the other
areas, from which they supposedly have now withdrawn with the
arrival of the Frontier Corps Forces.
IRAQ
Mr. DICKS. I am going to give you this article. I am not going

to get into it, but it says rape, beatings and bribery, Iraqi Police
out of control. The London Times story of April 24th. It sounds
very, very discouraging about their police force, their security people.
General PETRAEUS. Well, again the police in Iraq do have first
of all a checkered history. They were part of the sectarian violence,
as you will recall. The national police when we went in with the
surge in very short order, with Prime Minister Malikis action real-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01051
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1052
ly, not just his support, but he was the one that pushed this
through, replaced the national police commander, both division
commander, every brigade commander, and 80 percent of the battalion commanders, and then had to replace those replacements a
couple of times in some instances.
Over time they became a considerably better force and a much
more effective force, but the memories that some of them have of
how to do things are bad, and the practices that were employed in
history, going back into the time of Saddam and so forth, which is
what many of them know, those are certainly not in line with the
rule of law as we understand it and as the Iraqis want to implement. And so again there is no question that there is more work
that needs to be done.
Having said that, I think it is only fair to acknowledge the enormous sacrifices that have been made by the Iraqi security forces as
they have taken considerably many times more casualties than our
forces have in the course of the effort to reduce the security threats
and challenges in that country.
KYRGYZSTAN

General and members, I believe we have time for one more round
of questions, and let me begin by asking regarding the supplemental appropriation request. There is a $30 million request for
Kyrgyzstan, given that governments decision to remove U.S. forces
from Hamas airbase. Can you tell me what the rationale is for that
request?
General PETRAEUS. First of all, Chairman, if of course it came
that we were to leave obviously we would not invest in that particular air traffic control improvement. I dont want to get ahead
of things, but we need to give this time still, I guess would be the
best way to say.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay, that answers the question. There was another additional $36 million funded last year from our subcommittee to improve the airfield there, and that has been put on
hold, as I understand. So if there is an opportunity to continue discussions with the government
General PETRAEUS. It is our hope, Chairman. In fact, it is our
hope that actually all parties in the region, and this includes Russia, could see that the great game, the new great game in the Central Asian states should be replaced with a broad partnership
against transnational extremism and the illegal narcotics activities.
It is in everyones interest to unite in that effort, and we think that
that can be done. There are some signs of recognition of that. Certainly I visited every one of the Central Asian states as part of the
effort to establish the northern distribution network withtogether
with the TRANSCOM Commander who did a phenomenal job with
his team there and our joint logistics teams.
We have now, for example, three different routes into Afghanistan from the north. Russia is allowingtwo of those routes go
through Russia. They will ultimately end up going through
Uzbekistan, which why it was important I had that visit that I
talked to you about in your office. And it is our hope that all the
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01052
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1053
countries again in the region are going to see the wisdom of working together against these common threats rather than competing
for influence in a continuation of a zero sum approach that has
characterized activities in the region in the past.
DRAWDOWN OF TROOPS IN IRAQ
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you. My last question would be in regards

to the drawdown of U.S. forces in Iraq. Do you have a timetable
at this point of when our forces will be out of various locations in
Iraq? And also what is the implication in terms of Camp Victory,
for example? Do we still have some forces there or will all forces
be removed from Camp Victory?
General PETRAEUS. Sir, we are actually in the process right now.
There is quite an aggressive process of either handing off to Iraqis,
after removing everything that we can that would be serviceable
and useful and so forth and all of that process, of either handing
off to Iraqis or closing out in some cases the dozens and dozens of
patrol bases, combat outposts, joint security stations, and so forth,
that we built during the surge and during the embrace of the counterinsurgency principles about securing the people by living with
them.
For example, in Baghdad alone we created 77 additional locations in which our forces were located to ensure the security of the
people with our Iraqi partners. And we do indeed with a very detailed schedule that shows when we will either close out or hand
off these various small installations. We are doing that with some
of the bigger and medium size as well and gradually pulling to
some of theand I dont use the term enduring to imply again
an enduring commitment or an enduring presence, but again there
are places in which we will be until our eventual withdrawal from
Iraq. And of course you are familiar with the time line in the security agreement in that regard.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right. Thank you. Mr. Wamp.
INDIA
Mr. WAMP. To set up my final question, let me say that we heard

from the Pacific Command a few weeks ago how pleased we were
with Indias response to what happened in Mumbai on their western edge.
But then Pakistan on your eastern edge is my greatest concern
in the world having been on the ground there a few months ago,
because they are the sixth largest country in the world they have
nuclear weapons and from Zardari to Gilani the leadership is not
as secure as it should be. And as a result you get to the FATA and
you see sharia law and you talked about the education levels. The
closer to the heart of the troubled areas you get, the less they are
educated. I mean it goes down to a level at which they are frankly
not at all educated.
So knowing your capabilities and your success and I think I am
reading clearly what our Commander in Chief desires, I believe you
can win in Afghanistan, but what concerns me is the FATA, and
how in the world you ever leave that situation secure enough that,
speaking of fragile and reversible, you would not invest this kind
of commitment in Afghanistan and ultimately have to leave it even
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01053
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1054
more fragile and reversible. And I know that is a $64,000 question,
but that is my last one.
General PETRAEUS. Well, Congressman, it is very important, first
of all, to come back to what you highlighted at the outset. In fact,
there are people who have rightly said that Ambassador
Holbrookes title should be Afghanistan, Pakistan and India. Now
let me just tell you his portfolio very much includes India, and in
fact the Central Asian states and the other neighbors there. But it
is very important to reduce the tensions between India and Pakistan so that again Pakistan can both intellectually and physically
focus on the most pressing threat to their existence, which again
is the internal extremist threat rather than the traditional threat
of India, and especially when you look at the number of forces tied
up with that, the percentage of their defense budget that is devoted
again to that standoff in the same way that we sort of had a standoff with the Warsaw Pact for so many years.
India did indeed show impressive restraint in the wake of the
Mumbai attacks. That was a 9/11 moment for them, and in fact
they did not ratchet up the tensions. And in fact, I think many observers correctly assessed that they played a very constructive role
in avoiding further increase in tensions that might have been understandable, in fact, given the death inflicted on their innocent civilians in their financial capital.
Ambassador Holbrooke and I have in fact met with the Indian
National Security Adviser, the Indian Foreign Minister, others.
And we obviously work very closely with the PACOM Commander
when we are doing this on the military side. But Ambassador
Holbrookes first trip to the region, for example, didnt include just
Afghanistan and Pakistan; it then continued on into India. He had
my deputy with him for those and then it brought the PACOM deputy out in fact to do the final two stops. So we worked that very
hard.
But we should observe that the Lashkar-e-Taiba, LET, that carried out the Mumbai attacks, again we think they are trying to do
more damage and they are trying to carry out additional attacks.
And one would think that again extremists that are trying to cause
that kind of tension and also to take the focus off of the internal
extremist threat would indeed strive to do that.
The FATA, as you mentioned, is indeed the location of al Qaeda
senior leadership headquarters. It is the location for the other
transnational extremist groups that form the syndicate with them.
That is the syndicate that is of most concern outside the borders
of Pakistan. It certainly causes significant problems in Afghanistan, although obviously the Afghan Taliban is also a huge concern,
as are some other elements. But it is the organization that of
course has carried out attacks in the U.K. And is trying to plan
and execute attacks in other countries, including our own.
And over time, dealing with that, again is going to become a real
bellwether, if you will, for thenot just the capacity and capability
of the Pakistani forces, but also frankly the seriousness of the overall effort focusing on the internal extremist challenge that they face
and that we all face.
Mr. Farr.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01054
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1055
Mr. FARR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. General, I was impressed
with your opening remark asking this committee to make sure that
we fully fund the State Departments needs as well as the Department of Defense. Unfortunately, that account is not in this committee, and I hope that you will make that same recommendation
to Mr. Murthas committee.
General PETRAEUS. I did, sir.
Mr. FARR. I dont know whether you are going to be up here before Chairwoman Loweys committee. She is the Chair of Appropriation Subcommittee on State Department and the Foreign Ops.
General PETRAEUS. Right.
Mr. FARR. That is where the money is. I am interested in following through to build that civilian capability. I dont know what
is in the Presidents budget. We havent seen those numbers yet.
But it seems to me that we are right on the edge of developing that
skill set.
A couple of questions. What are the skills that you need from
your civilian partners that you dont have right now? Is it numbers
or is it specific skills? And secondly, you have of the 215,000 military personnel serving in CENTCOM, many of those are National
Guard and Reserves. Do those folks receive the same kind of cultural awareness and foreign language training that the active duty
soldiers and officers receive?
So essentially what I am looking at here is the skill development
both from the military side and from the civilian side that will enable you to make this transition, working ourselves out of Afghanistan and out of Iraq?
General PETRAEUS. Mr. Vice Chairman, again I think you are
right that there is recognition of the need for these skills for the
capability, for the capacity. And in answer to your question, I think
we need all of the above. I mean, we need, clearly need more numbers, but in those numbers we need individuals that have the kind
of technical expertise in certain functional areas. So in some cases
it will be health, it might be education, it may be local governance,
there will be financial kinds of treasury skills, and again really all
of the different governmental organizations. And then as you work
your way on out to local levels, again sufficient expertise for those,
but then to be effective in another culture it is not enough to know
about those functional areas or have that technical expertise for
our system or our cultures. It is important to know how they work
in the culture in which you are actually going to operate. So there
has to be thisand it has to be very significant in some cases. For
example, in the Iraq situation, Iraq has a very good legal code actually. Yes, Saddam perverted it for his own use during his time as
the leader there, but the basic foundation was quite solid, but we
needed the expertise in it. I mean we literally needed people who
were certified, you know, the equivalent of the Iraqi bar or something like that, but we needed some of them from our own side.
And then it was an enormous plus if you could get someone who
had all of that and was a near native Iraqi Arabic speaker, and
that is sort of the trifecta when you get that, and those individuals
are extraordinarily valuable.
Now, with respect to the preparation of our reserve components,
we certainly do provide culture and language and that kind of
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01055
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1056
thing. But again, I cant sit here and say that an active force in
which there is a yearlong, say, road to deployment, that all of that
that is done during that time can be compressed into the shorter
period of preparation for our reserve component units. And I think
we have to just be again forthright as we assess that to ourselves,
and then ensure that we provide them everything that we can as
they are in their final preparation, in their left seat, right seat ride,
and then in their early months because they will develop expertise.
The fact is once you are down range and you look at a soldier, airman or Marine, there is no difference. You cant look at someone,
you cant even see them operate and say necessarily this is clearly
a reservist.
Mr. FARR. The Post yesterday said that we were perhaps going
to use the Guard and Reserves as the civilian
General PETRAEUS. Oh, I am sorry, that is a differentI thought
you were talking about just in strictly the military tasks. I was
talking about combatunit combat service support, what have you.
No, there isand we did do this for Iraq as well. In our Reserves
in particular, but in the National Guard as well, but in the Reserves we have people that actually are city administrators, they
are certainly lawyers. We have construction expertise in those
units. It is really extraordinary and of course they do it full time.
So you take someone who really does this all the time, put them
in uniform. But you do then need to give them the kind of preparation that is required, and that is something again that we work to
do, but I am sure that we could do that better frankly. Again, there
has to be an investment in them.
We have a limit with the reserve clock, and we have to keep that
in mind, and I think that we have limited it to a year right now.
And so every bit that we take off the front end of that for
predeployment, you are going to pay back in terms of the amount
of time on the ground. And so you have to do a real weighing again
of the risks. Is it better to get the individual out there, allow him
or her to get on the ground and just experience it, and learn on
the job, and particularly if you can get a long right seat, left seat
ride where the person he or she is are replacing is going to be
there. That is the ideal situation, I think.
Mr. EDWARDS. I am going to have to ask the police to remove
anyone who would interrupt the proceedings. I appreciate the respect with which the citizens here have allowed us to continue on
with this hearing.
Judge Carter.
KASHMIR
Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. General Petraeus, going

back to what Mr. Wamp was talking to you about, it seems that
someone has some vested interest in keeping the Kashmir dispute,
the old historical dispute between India and Pakistan, going because of the Mumbai attack and others. As we were talking before,
I was thinking, is there anything we could do to beef up of the Pakistani forces for counterinsurgency if we could get an international
diplomatic effort to try to solve the issue in Kashmir?
General PETRAEUS. I think that that isfirst of all, it is something that is being looked at, and of course if you could resolve that
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01056
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1057
conundrum or even again reduce the tensions, again that could
contribute to an ability to focus more again intellectually as well
just sheer forces physically on the internal extremist threat.
Now there are some organizations though that of course want to
prolong that. They have built their existence on the basis of the
need, if you will, to continue to carry out violent activities. So
again, if that could be done, frankly in the same way that we look
at the Mideast peace process, frankly. That colors everything that
takes place in the CENTCOM AOR, certainly in the western portion of it. And we are very encouraged frankly to see the appointment of Senator Mitchell, met with him on several occasions already, and supporting very significantly one of his deputies as well.
The kinds of political overarching issues that so affect everything
that we do, when those can be resolved or even attended to, they
can help enormously.
Mr. CARTER. I agree, that seems to be something that ought to
be tried. This is a quick final question, as we draw down in Iraq,
there is going to be some presence that is going to be, at least some
kind of short-term presence of American troops over there. Are we
leaving enough infrastructure in place for them to have the recreational, medical and housing facilities they are going to need?
General PETRAEUS. Absolutely, absolutely. Look, I have to tell
you that the medical infrastructure in particular that you all have
provided for our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines has been extraordinary. And I think the number now is something like 90 percent of those who are hit survive, which is the highest in history,
and it is because of advances of course in battlefield medicine, but
also the facilities that are available within that golden hour and
the whole Medevac process and the equipment and training of our
medical personnel.
As you may know, we have also provided a substantial number
of additional helicopters to Afghanistan because of concerns in fact
that we ensure that we have that same kind of responsiveness
there, which is even more challenging given the very rugged terrain and the high altitude. And one of the large elements of the additional forces is an entire combat aviation brigade, of which we
only had one in the country before, and then also some additional
Medevac aircraft on top of that particular brigade.
Mr. CARTER. Thank you very much for this really tough job that
you are doing. We appreciate it.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Judge Carter. Mr. Salazar.
Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. Chairman, I dont really have any more questions. I just wanted to thank the General. Thank you very much
for your service.
And I will yield my time to you, Mr. Chairman, if you have any
additional questions.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Salazar. And thank you all, all
members for being here. General Petraeus, thank you for your
service. And I would like to finish my comments as you finished
your opening testimony by saluting the men and women who serve
under you and your command, not only those who wear the uniform, but those married to the uniform and the children who sacrifice every day. And how grateful I am that because of them and
because of leaders such as yourself, we live in a country where citi-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01057
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1058
zens can come to an open forum and even in their own way express
their personal opinions that might agree or disagree with the opinions of those of us that sit on this subcommittee.
Thank you. And any way we can continue to work together
please let us know. The committee now stands adjourned. Thank
you, General.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01058
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01059
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
Insert graphic folio 2201 50526D.001
(1059)
1060
WEDNESDAY, MAY 6, 2009.
ARMY BUDGET
WITNESS
GENERAL GEORGE W. CASEY, JR., ARMY CHIEF OF STAFF
STATEMENT
OF THE
CHAIRMAN
Mr. EDWARDS [presiding]. Good morning to everyone. I would like

to call the subcommittee to order. We are privileged today to have
with us the 36th Chief of Staff of the Army, General Casey, and
also the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Armythank you very
much for being here today.
I am going to be keeping it very brief in my opening statement
just so we can maximize time for questions and answers.
Chief, let me thank you for your leadership during such a critical
and challenging time for the Army. I dont know of any other institution, public or private, that could have handled facing multiple
warfronts, transformation, growing the institution as much as
growing the forces has meant to the Armyglobal reposition, that
amount of change, given we are facing multiple warfronts, it is a
real testament to you and every soldier that serves under your
command, from general officers and to privates. And we thank you
and everyone you represent here by your presence here today.
It is good to have you both here, and we look forward to the testimony and questions and answers.
At this point I would like to recognize Mr. Wamp our ranking
member.
STATEMENT
OF THE

General Casey, Secretarythank you for being here, thank you
for what you do for every soldier in the United States Army. They
have taken more casualties, done more, growing still, asymetrical,
many challenges. You have served us incredibly well.
General Casey, you are a good man. I appreciate our relationship. We have had a good one. And it carries forward. I know that
we cant talk about everything in the budget request today, but I
am looking forward to hearing as much as we can hear today.
I need to say for the record, Mr. Chairman, that tomorrow morning, 8:30, my son graduates from college in Knoxville, Tennessee.
And there is really bad weather coming tonight, and I may have
to miss the hearing this afternoon, in order to make sure that I am
there. If I have to crawl, I am going to be therewe will make sure
that we have someone in this chair this afternoon in the event I
am not here. I want to say, for the record, early, it is for a good
causethank you Mr. Chairman.
Mr. EDWARDS. You bet. Congratulations. Thank you, and I congratulate you for putting first things first for your family.
You have been an incredible partner in this entire process. I
dont think you have ever missed a committee hearing
Mr. WAMP. Not yet.
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. For the entire time serving together
as partners. I wish you a safe, safe trip.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01060
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1061
General Casey, your full testimony will be submitted, without objection, for the record, but I would like to recognize you now for any
opening comments you care to make.
STATEMENT
OF
GENERAL GEORGE W. CASEY, JR.
General CASEY. Thank you very much, Mr. ChairmanThank

you for the kind words on the performance of the men and women
of your Army, but I will tell you, we couldnt do what we have done
were it not for the support of this committee. And I welcome the
opportunity to give you an update on what we have done over the
last year and to talk a little bit about a way ahead.
You may recall from last years testimony that I said that the
Army was out of balance, and I have really been saying that since
the summer of 2007. And by out of balance, I mean that we are
so weighed down by our current demands that we cant do the
things that we know we need to do to sustain this all volunteer
force for the long haul and restore strategic flexibility to do other
things.
In 2007 we put ourselves on a plan to put ourselves back in balance by the end of 2011, and it centered on four imperatives: sustain our soldiers and families, continue to prepare our soldiers for
success in the current conflict, reset themwhen they return, and
then continue to transform for our uncertain future.
I would like to just give you an update where we are on the six
major objectives that will put us back in balance and then say a
little bit about some programs we have in each of the imperatives.
First of all, our first objective was to finish our directed growth
that the President directed in February, 2007taking the active
Army to 547,000 and increasing the Guard and Reserve by 8,000
and 2,000, respectively.
Originally our plan was to complete that by 2012. With the Secretary of Defenses support we moved it to 2010. I can tell you that
as of today, each of the components of the Army has met their endstrength targets, and that is a big lift for us. Now, we still have
to build units to put about 20,000 of those soldiers in, but having
completed that growth is very important for us.
Two other aspects to that: First of all, one of the reasons it is
important is it allows us to begin moving off the stop-loss this year,
and the Secretary of Defense has announced our plan to do that,
and the Reserves will begin coming off, deploying units to that
stop-loss in August, the Guard in September, and the active force
in January of 2010.
Mr. EDWARDS. So it means you cant call up Congress
General CASEY. This is one of our key objectives, because all
along, as we convert to modular organizations operating on a rotation cycle, our goal has been to be able to deploy units without
stoporders. And so we will meet that goal, I believe, by 2011.
The other thing I know may cause some concern to the members
of this committeeas part of this budget the secretary has announced that we will not build the last three brigade combat teams
that we were originally scheduled to build.
Members of the committee should know that there has been no
final decision on where those brigades will come from, and we will
address that as part of the ongoing quadrennial defense review as
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01061
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1062
part of our overall force mix discussions. And we recognize that
some of the communities that were expecting to receive those units
have already made some significant investments, and we surely
will take that into consideration as we finalize our decisions.
Second key point, and that is to increase the time the units
spend at home between deployments, and this is critically important from three perspectives: One, it gives them time to recover;
two, it allows them to have a more stable preparation period for
the next deployment; and three, frankly, it gives them even more
time to equip and train them so that they are properly trained and
equipped.
Originally, I expected with our growth and holding demand
steady at about 15 brigades. I expected that we would not quite get
to 1 year out, 2 years back in 2011.
With the presidents drawdown plan, if that is implemented as
scheduled, we would get to almost 212 years back in 2011. And
that is a very positive thing for us, because if we have to increase
the time the soldiers spend at home if we are going to sustain this
for the long haul.
Third, we are well on track and moving ourselves away from
Cold War formations and organizations to organizations that are
far more relevant for the operations that we are conducting today.
We are 85 percent done with the conversion of the Army to modular organizations. That is about 300 brigades that have been or
will be converted by 2011. We are 85 percent done with that.
We are almost two-thirds of the way through rebalancing our
force away from Cold War formations, again, to formations more
relevant in the 21st century. An examplewe have stood down
around 200 tank companies, artillery companies, and interdefense
companies. And we have stood up an equivalent number of engineers, military police, special forces, and civil affairs units. It is
their units that have been directing that today.
Together, that is the largest organizational transformation of the
Army since World War II, and it has been done at a period where
we are deploying 150,000 soldiers over and back every year. So it
is a significant accomplishment, and we are on track to deliver on
that.
Fourth, we are posturing ourselves and we are putting the whole
Army on a rotational cycle, much like the Navy and the Marine
Corps have been on for quite a while. This is a big change for us.
Before September 11th we were largely a garrison-based Army
that lived to train. Now we are rotating on a cycle, and we are
going to have to sustain this rotation for a long time to ensure that
we can provide trained and ready units for whatever contingencies
come up, but also to give soldiers and families a predictable and
stable deployment level, and we are on our way to doing that.
Fifth, we are about halfway through our basing and realignment
effort, and I think the committee knows what a significant accomplishment this is because when you take realignment and closure,
and the modular and the growth of the Army, that affects about
380,000 soldiers families and civiliansand again, your timely
funding of all of those accounts has enabled us to keep this on
track. All of that is very tightly and closely interwoven.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01062
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1063
And lastly of it all, is to restore strategic flexibility, and to have
units trained for the full range of missions. And the longer we have
units at home18 months or morethe more they will have time
to begin training for other things.
So I would tell you that we have made good progress toward all
six of our objectives, but we are not out of the woods yet. And I
expect the next 12 to 18 months to continue to be tough as we actually increase the number of forces we have deployed as we shift
from Iraq to Afghanistan
So that is just an assessment of where we are: good progress, but
not out of the woods yet.
A few quick words on each of the imperatives: First of all, sustaining soldiers and families. This is the area where the military
construction budget really, really makes a difference, and the support that we get in housing, barracks, child development centers,
youth service centers, work transitioning units, and administrative
facilities, is absolutely critical, and it sends such a strong signal to
the men and women of the Army and all the armed forces that the
country is concerned about their welfare.
And so this budget gives us what we need from the military construction side to continue to put this Army back in balance by
2011. We continue our focus on families. In October 2007 we issued
the Army Family Covenant and we doubled the amount of money
we put towards family programs. We have sustained that investment in the 2010 budget.
On the prepare side, we have continued to make great progress
in equipping our soldiers and training them for the realities of combat they are going to encounter. I will tell you, probably the most
significant accomplishment since the last time I spoke to you is the
fielding of almost 10,000 MRAPS in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And I was in Afghanistan a week or so ago, and got direct testimony from the soldiers about the value of it. Sometimes they dont
like the way they handle off road, but anyone who has been blown
up with an IED and survived thinks they are pretty good. We have
got enough there now where we are actually beginning to bring
some back to the United States for training, and that is an important plus.
On the reset: We have adopted a 6-month reset model, where the
soldiers come home and they basically stand down for 6 months
and they are manned and equipped at a level that beginsstarting
their training at the end of that period. This is part of putting the
whole Army on this rotational model, and we are making pretty
good progress with that.
Lastly, transforming: We believe that we, as a country, are facing
an era of what I call persistent conflict: protracted confrontation
among state, non-state, and individual actors who are going to continue to use violence to accomplish their political and ideological
objectives.
And we are posturing the Army to deal with that. And I believe
we are going to have a substantial number of ground forcesArmy
and Marine Corpsdeployed for the next decade or so. And so we
have to set ourselves up to do that.
And we are building a versatile mix of brigade combat teams and
enablers that can leverage mobility, protection, information, and
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01063
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1064
intelligence in precision buyers to accomplish any mission across

the spectrum, and we are well on our way to being able to do that.
Let me just wrap up here by saying that the secretary of the
Army and I have designated this year as the year of the non-commissioned officer. Because as we looked around the Army it was
clear to us that our non-commissioned officers are the glue that is
holding this force together at a critical time and allowing us to accomplish the near-impossible every day. And one of the members
of this committee is non-commissioned officer Bill Younghe is an
Army non-commissioned officerand hopefully you can all join us
on the 19th of May when we recognize all the members of Congress
who have been non-commissioned officers over at Fort Myer.
To give you an example of a non-commissioned officer that we
have today, let me just tell you a story about a young sergeant who
won the Distinguished Service Cross for his actions in Baghdad in
April of 2007Staff Sergeant Christopher Waiters. He was on a
patrol when a Bradley in front of him hit an improvised explosive
devise and caught fire.
He suppressed the enemy that was surrounding the site, realized
there were two men trapped inside that burning Bradley, ran
across 100 yards from the Stryker, pulled two of them out and
dragged them back to his Bradley all under fire. He realized after
he treated them that there was still another soldier left on the vehicle.
He ran back into the burning vehicle, this time while the ammunition was cooking off off inside. He found the soldier dead.
Back to his vehicle, picked up a body bag, and went back and recovered his fallen comrade and dragged him out of the burning vehicle. That is the kind of men and women that you have in your
armed forcesand that is the kind of non-commissioned officers
that we have in our Army.
So thanks very much, Mr. Chairman and all of you, and I look
forward to taking your questions.
[The prepared statement of George W. Casey, Jr., follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01064
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01065
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
Insert offset folio 2214 here 50526D.002
1065
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01066
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1066
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01067
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1067
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01068
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1068
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01069
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1069
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01070
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1070
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01071
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1071
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01072
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1072
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01073
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1073
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01074
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1074
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01075
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1075
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01076
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1076
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01077
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1077
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01078
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1078
1079
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, General Casey. And what a compelling story of heroism, which is one of the reasons the members of
this subcommittee are so deeply committed to quality of life issue,
to see that soldiers and their families are treated with the dignity
that they have earned and deserve.
BRIGADE COMBAT TEAMS
I may start with the questions, and we will use a 5-minute rule
here today, as we do, traditionally, in this committee. Let me ask
your thoughts in terms of how we handle military construction for
fiscal year 2010, given we have had the uncertainties of 45 brigade
combat teams that you referenced, rather than 48, and then we
have the uncertainty of what the Army is going to do with the two
brigade combat teams in Germany, whether they will be left in
Germany or not.
Certainly the last thing we want to dowell, two things we dont
want to do: We dont want to have troops come back home and not
have housing for them and quality facilities for them; at the same
time, we dont want to spend money for housing or other facilities
that wont be needed. Can you tell me what the timing in the QDR
is and whether the administrations 2010 budget is going to somehow take into account the possibility of not needing certain facilities that have been projected?
General CASEY. We are very cognizant of the timing of the funding, especially for the projects that are on there in 2010. What I
would ask, Chairman, is that we work with the committee here to
figure out which one of those budgets need to continue, because
they are all the requirement on all three of those installations for
forces that are on the books for laterfor 2011, 2012, and the out
years.
And I believe we can work together to prudently look at what is
on the books and determine what needs to continue and what
doesnt. But I would ask that we guard against the notion that just
because those three brigades may not go to those bases, we should
take all that money and put it someplace elsethere are still valid
construction requirements on all those installations that can be
met though projects that are on the books. So I just ask to work
with you
Mr. EDWARDS. We would like to work with you. If there is anything we can dosmart planning, things that have to be done,
whether or not a combat team moves to an installation or notto
start construction on a housing project, for example
General CASEY. I would hopeby the summerwe would have
a much clearer picture of where we are with regard to the base
Mr. EDWARDS. By the end of the summerand then the time of
the QDRwhen does that QDR
General CASEY. Yes, yes. It is not due back here until February
of 2010, but there is a push to get it done by the end of the summer so that we can influence the 2011 budget. So, we will see
where that goes. We need to come to closure on this, and we recognize that.
Mr. EDWARDS. My second and last question on this first round
isArmy hospitals. I am very proud of the fact that this subcommittee has taken initiativenot the Senate or the administra-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01079
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1080
tion, but this subcommittee has taken the initiative to modernize
our Army hospital system, our DOD hospital system.
In the last 10 months we have put in two separate bills $2.3 billion for new hospitals. As you know, Riley and Denning and Hood
have been selected for those three projects for the Army. We are
looking at making an effort in the supplemental appropriation bill
and additional funding for more hospital modernization.
My question to you would be, is there still a need out there. Certainly Bliss is going to be going immensely, and I dont know how
a hospital designed for 18,000 soldiers can meet all the health care
needs of installations two or three times that size. I visited Knox,
where, you know, they had 400 soldiers in the middle of the summer, and through the cafeteria and then outside to get an MRI because the hospital infrastructure is so old it cant even support an
MRI.
HOSPITALS
Could you address, generally, is there still a need for more modernization of Army hospitals out there?
General CASEY. There is. And I will tell you that the committees
efforts in this regard are recognized across the Army. And when
you look at five hospitals over the last 25 years, and five in the last
2speaks volumes to what you have been able to do for our soldiers and their families. So we very much appreciate that.
As you mentioned, as we look to the future our priorities are Fort
Blissphase one of that is funding for women and child care center, and that is wonderfulbut we need to look at the long-term
replacement for Beaumont medical facility out there.
You also mentioned Hood. There is a phase one program on that,
and I believe we need to continue that. As you know, that is one
of our larger bases there that supports quite a large number of
families.
Our third priority would be upgrading Landstuhl to allow them
to accomplish a UCOM, AFRICOM, and Central Command mission
that they do. We are not looking for the wholesale refurbishment
of the hospital there, but they perform significant mission for those
three combatant commands because of where they are located in
Germany.
And then lastly, Fort Irwin and Fort Knox would be our fourth
and fifth priority. Fort Irwin because of its isolated location and
Fort Knox because of the state of its facility that you already mentioned. But, yes, there is still a need there.
Zach.
UNFUNDED REQUIREMENTS
Mr. WAMP. General Casey, I know you cant talk about some of
the specificsbut is there anything that is a priority for you that
is not in this request?
General CASEY. Not an immediate priority, Congressman. As I
said, this 2010 request BRAC military construction what is in there
for family housing allows us the flexibility to keep our plan on
track withobviously anything like barracks, training barracks,
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01080
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1081
family housing, is going to get done over time, but right now I believe we are funded at an appropriate track.
BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE
Mr. WAMP. You talked about BRACin your opening statement,

is there anything on BRAC from the Armys perspective that we
need to know about? We had studies, hearings a month ago where
our 2011 deadline is going to be met for the most part, but there
are some sites that are going to slip, somewhat. We found that out
along the way. But from your perspective, BRAC is on track, and
the Army has what it needs in terms of the realignment?
General CASEY. We do. And the only thing I would ask the committee to look at is, we need the 2010 BRAC funding on schedule.
If we get that on schedule we will meet the target.
Mr. WAMP. On time.
General CASEY. On timein October.
SUSTAINABLE PERFORMANCE RATIO
Mr. WAMP. And you talked about predictable performance. Catch

us up. We had General Petraeus several weeks ago and how the
Commander in Chief made the decision that he has made relative
to Iraq and Afghanistan. Catch us up on what you foresee where
ratios of performance for men and women in the United States
Army, this year, next year, the year after. I know last year you
said 3 to 1 is what is sustainable. We are nowhere near that. When
do we get there? When can we get to a more sustainable performance ratio for our troops based on the new paradigm in the Obama
administration based on the published statements that we know or
the changes that we have already seen?
General CASEY. I alluded to that a bit in my opening statement,
Congressman, but our original plan was that we would sustain
about 15 brigade deployedbased on that plan and on our
growthwe estimated that we would get not quite to 1 year out,
2 years back ratio.
If we execute the Presidents plan, we will actually, we would be
about the same in 2009, in terms of ratiowe will actually get almost to 2 years back and almost to 212 years back in 2011. It
doesnt quite get us to the 1 to 3 that I would like to be at, but
it gets us to a more sustainable ratio faster than I thought we
would. Now, you always think that there is something else out
there, and we know that other combatant commanders have requirements for forces to do things that they have not been able to
meet because they have been deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan.
So that is where we have work to balance. But right now, knock
on wood, draw-down plan executed about on schedulewe are in
a much better position from a ratiothan we would have been
without it.
Mr. WAMP. That is it for me.
Mr. Farr.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01081
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1082
IMPACT OF DECLINING CONSTRUCTION COSTS ON MILITARY
CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
Mr. FARR. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, General Casey, for your lifelong career and public
service in the military and for your leadership, and frankly, for
your really well and concise briefing of the committee this morning.
I wanted to follow up on the chairmans question on the FYDP. Is
there going to be some slippage of construction projects that will
be needed in a timely fashion.
When will we know that, because what we have been able to do
in the past is move other projects up? And I guess intertwined with
that is, what is the impact of the economy on this as far as the decline in construction? How is that affecting the cost of military construction?
I think it was just last year that you were talking about the fact
that the prices of materials had just accelerated along far greater
than the bids and expectations, and I wondered, now, is that a reverse now? Are those prices coming down? Is it more affordable to
do construction now?
General CASEY. If I could ask you to take the second part of that
questionon the first part. What we would like to be able to do
is sit down with the committee and look at the installations. And
that these three brigade combat teams are going to go to and identify the projects that need to continue. Basically, could be in effect,
going forward from the out yearsstill needed to billet soldiers and
units at those installations. And then probably by the end of summer, I would hope, we would be able to come back with a final, a
more final basing plan. So that we could effect the rest of this. But
we would like to work with you on that as we go forward.
Mr. FARR. When do you think we will know that? I mean, before
our final markup?
General CASEY. When do you plan to mark?
Mr. EDWARDS. Well, we dont know for sure, but our goal, for the
reasons you have mentioned in terms of the importance of timing,
our goal is to definitely have a bill to the president by the first of
October. So we will do markup possibly some time this month. Do
we have a date set up? Okay, more likely, then, June, for markup,
but we will still have time in conference committee to adjust that
as late as, potentially, September.
General CASEY. I would think that by September we should be
able to have a more concise laydown of where we are going to go
with this. I believe that we can work together to do the right thing
for theand the installationsand the soldiers so those places are
not at a disadvantage.
JOINT DOD-VA CLINIC IN MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
Mr. FARR. We believe so strongly in the quality of life and talk

about it in this committee. We have probably 6,000 or 7,000 uniformed people on the Monterey Peninsula who are either going to
DLI or to the Naval Postgraduate School. And we have been trying
to develop a joint clinic with the Veterans Administration and
DOD. I would really appreciate it if you could put in a good word
this clinic is really cost effective. The Army is doing a cost analysis
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01082
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1083
right now. The VA is going to build it, and I would really love to
see it as a joint clinic. But there are questions of whether you are
going to do this jointly.
It makes a lot of sense to be built right in the footprint of where
the Army community is, where the military community is, and it
really is part of providing full service to the families of the soldiers
there.
General CASEY. I know that we have been looking at it. I know
there was a team out there in Aprilworking with the V.A. I am
told that by June we should be able to take this to the next level.
Mr. FARR. Okay. Thank you. By June?
General CASEY. By June, that is what I am told.
Mr. FARR. Maybe you can put in a good word and move it up a
little. Thank you.
I have some other questions regarding DLI, and Naval post-graduate school, but I will put those in the next round.
Judge Carter.
General Casey, first of all I want to say how glad I was to see
you in Germanyand had a nice visit, and that was very nice.
General CASEY. Were you on the broken plane?
Mr. CARTER. I was on the broken plane. We appreciate the visit
we had.
We thank you for what you do. You do a great job.
I think this is part of what they are saying, I couldnt hear what
people were saying on this and, so I guess I am getting old.
ARMY FUNDING PRIORITIES
Theexpenditures we are talking aboutBRAC implementation

grow the Army, and FCSI couldnt hear what you were saying.
You were talking about prioritization of those sometime in the fall,
so we can get some idea of how the Army will prioritize these
major programs?
General CASEY. I would tell you, CongressmanBRAC is the
law, so we are going to do that before we do anything else. But I
would tell you, the BRAC, the new posturing, the growth of the
Army, and the modular conversions are all so tightly intertwined
and on such a tight schedule of units deploying over and back that
it is really hard to prioritize beyond that. And we are really at the
point now where we are executing, and any change to the priority
or inside of that model has second-and third-order effects; it just
will drive us crazy. So we are in execution mode right now, and all
of this is so closely tied together, and we can deliver on the schedule that we are looking for here, getting BRAC done by 2011.
ARMY POLICY ON PROSELYTIZING
Mr. CARTER. Well, I appreciate that answer. I guess they are all
priorities, is what you are saying, and that tells us where we have
to go. And I appreciate that. I am going to have to recognize the
quality of life issue that came up today in conversation in a meeting I had. About the fact that the United States Army seized a
bunch of biblesin Afghanistan and destroyed them. Can you tell
me the Armys policy on destroying religious works of all faiths?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01083
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1084
General CASEY. I am not familiar with the event. Our policy in
the Army is certainly not to destroy bibles. The issue
Mr. CARTER. ActuallyI raise the issue with a soldier who
shipped bibles to Afghanistanhe brought them to a bible study
printed in the Afghan languagethey were seized and shredded
and burned, I understand. So I was wondering if there is a policy
to destroy religious works if they are being used for proselytizing?
General CASEY. I would absolutely check on that.
Mr. CARTER. We need to be fair across the board with all religious documents. I do have a problem with destruction of these bibles.
General CASEY. I will look into it and get back to you
Mr. EDWARDS. Is that allokay.
Mr. Salazar.
AFGHANISTAN

And General Casey, thank you so much for your service to our
country. I think you and I have visited a little bit about, you know,
what your thoughts are on the stay in Afghanistan, how long it has
going to be, or what your thoughts are on that.
Do you see us building permanent medical facilities in Afghanistan over the next few years? And also, if you could also address,
during this transition time do we have adequate medical facilities
to treat our soldierswarriors?
General CASEY. I dont see us building any permanent facilities
in Afghanistan. I believe we may upgrade some of the medical facilities that are there now to a more durable commission. But our
policy is not to build any permanent facilities.
With regard to your other questionis there adequate medical
support thereI believe there is, and I believe with the addition
of the additional troops there will be sufficient medical assets that
come in with them to make sure that all soldiers in Afghanistan
have adequate medical support.
You should know that we have been working on issue on
Medivac and whether or not the samethere was a similar standard in Afghanistan to Iraq and what the ongoing combatbrigadethere are additional medical evacuation helicopters with
that unit that will help us to get the ratiosand so, we the services, pride themselves in their battlefield medical care. And 90 percent of the men and women who make it to a medical facility survive their injuries. And it is major improvement, and it is absolutely critical to sustain this force over the long haul. And so I am
confident that we will have the appropriate medical facilities there
for all of the forces that go in.
Mr. SALAZAR. And, sir, do you think we are doing an adequate
job of transition of our soldiers here and training them properly to
go to the new front of Afghanistan? I mean, it is a kind of different
warfare than it was in Iraq, so
General CASEY. I do. In fact, I was at the joint-readiness training
center less than a month ago looking at one of the units that had
been remissioned from Iraq to Afghanistan. And I just visited in
Afghanistan the 3rd brigade of the 10th mountain, who was the
first unit to be remissioned from Iraq to Afghanistan, and they
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01084
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1085
were already there. And we were able to adapt their training plan
after they had been through their major training exercise, to give
them the skills they needed. And the leaders that I have talked to
have felt that they have had the skills to succeed in Afghanistan.
The environments are different, but the ways of operating and
the tactics are quite similar. And the other thing that helped the
3rd brigade of the 10th mountain was that a third of the folks had
been there before. And so they understood the environment. We
continually adapt our training at our training centers to ensure
that they stay relevant to the environment the soldiers are going
to. I am confident that our soldiers are getting the training that
they need.
Mr. SALAZAR. Well, we appreciate that very much. And also, I
just want to commend you on the importance of our soldiers being
able to stay home for a certain period of time before they are redeployed, and I do appreciate that very much. I know it is really important to many of our troops.
Once again, thank you very much, and I yield back.
Mr. Crenshaw.
JOINT CARGO AIRCRAFT
Mr. CRENSHAW. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. General, thank you

for your service. It is awkward since you dont have the numbers
for thethis years budget. It is a little disappointingwe are
going to hear from the Navy this afternoon too without having
budget numbers.
I know you cant talk specifically about things, but I want to ask
youthere is a program called the Joint Cargo Aircraftand it is
about a $3 billion program. There are a lot of rumors flying around
that it is only going to be funded at maybe half the levelhalf as
many airplanes as originally talked about. And it is a joint program between the Army and the Air Force, and the Army, it is
probably more important, and I think the Air Force is going to be
in charge, and the rumor is that the Army should be in charge
that you have to have as many planes under the supervision of the
Air Force. But, can you tell us, how, in your view, what requirements, what needs that the Joint Cargo Aircraft (JCA) fill.
General CASEY. I cant, and you are right, I cant confirm or deny
the rumors. The requirement was designed to fill what we call the
last tactical mile. The ability to get into a smaller airfield than a
C130 with supplies to resupply our brigades. That requirement for
the Army still exists. I will tell you my personal view, and it is one
I have shared with the chief of staff of the Air Force, is that I dont,
the Army, I dont necessarily need to fly those missions; I just need
to have the service. And so there has been the discussion, really
for the last 18 months or so between us and the Air Force about
what is the best way to do this. And we have not resolved that, but
we are continuing toward that.
Mr. CRENSHAW. We would, I guess, in Afghanistan, it would be,
in places like that, really important
General CASEY. Absolutely.
Mr. CRENSHAW. The helicoptersthey dont do it as wellthere
is so much demand
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01085
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1086
General CASEY. We are spending about $8 million a month to
contract with that type of aircraft support in Afghanistan. And so,
again, the requirements exist.
Mr. CRENSHAW. So nothing is reallynothing has changed in
terms of your requirements and needs.
General CASEY. That is correct.
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD
Mr. CRENSHAW. Thank you. A quick question about the National

Guard. Actually, about how important they are to the Armys allvolunteer force. And their undertaking a lot of missions that we
didnt ever imagine them undergoing. It is an incredible job. And
also I can tell you, from states like Florida, they have a lot of work
that they need to take care of back home, in terms of disaster relief, hurricanes. I dont think we would have recovered from the
hurricanes we had had it not been for the National Guard.
Can you tell uswe talked about the equiping levels for the National Guardto about 60 percent. Has any progress been made?
And what would you say the equipment level is today?
General CASEY. Progress has been made, Congressman. And I
would just tell you that we could not do what we are doing today
without the contribution of our Guard and reserves. And there are,
I believe the average is between 60 and 70,000 Guardsmen and reservists mobilized over the last year. And it has been that way for
several years45 percent of our Guard and reserve are combat veterans. That is a fundamental equivalent. And we are working
closely with the Guard, particulary, on their equipment. We have
developed a program of identifying what we call dual-use equipment. And that is equipment that we need to work on mission, but
also used for state needs. And that has been our priority. And I
want to say we are about 80 percentso we have got to about 80
percent of the dual-use equipment average across all of the states.
We are headed toward at least 90 percent, and we believe when we
get there, that combined with something that we are trying to do
and this is really hardbut we are trying to array the Guard units
on the rotation chart in a way that leaves a sufficient proportion
of soldiers in every state in the event of state emergencies.
And that is a Rubix Cube. So I commit to working on that. It is
not going to be 100 percent. But those two things, I think, combined, are going to give the governors the support they need to do
missions while we continue to employ the Guard overseas.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. Bishop.
AFGHANISTAN

Welcome, again, General. I would like to follow up on Mr.
Crenshaws inquiry regarding the C27, the Army and the Air
Force.
You mentioned $8 million a month for contractors. Is that adequate in order to provide a timely supply for our troops, particularly in Afghanistan?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01086
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1087
General CASEY. Our troops are getting the supplies that they
need.
Mr. BISHOP. At the additional expense?
General CASEY. At additional expense. And frankly, we are doing
a lot of it with our CH47 helicopters. And so, any kind of fixedwing support takes the load off of our helicopters. Now with the
new aviation brigade going into Afghanistan, there will be more of
those available, as well.
I am not concerned with an immediate problem of improving support to our troops in Afghanistan. They are getting the support
that they need, and that is a good thing.
Mr. BISHOP. All right. We will visit at another time.
Back to BRAC. In your testimony you describe in detail how important BRAC is to the effectiveness of the Army for the future,
and I agree with you. But I am concerned that the Department of
the Army has somewhat ignored and underfunded some of the
major infrastructure needs, particularly school construction for
communities, that are upticked as a result of BRAC.
This has grown repeatedly urgent as the time comes and as our
troops are beginning to move and their families are beginning to
move. Yet we still seem to be in a logjam with the Department of
Defense and what they are doing to help these communities with
school constructions. Can you tell me whether the department really feels that it is its responsibility or is it being passed off to somebody else? Because it would seem that there is a moral responsibility on our part and on the departments part to help these local
communities.
General CASEY. Well, we dont have a direct role inall of these
installations that are affected by BRACwhat I have is a very
good joint effort between the base and the community in terms of
identifying numbers of children coming in and out.
Mr. BISHOP. Right. But the amount of Impact Aid is minuscule
compared to what the community needs are, and that is the point.
The Education Subcommittee controls Impact Aid; Defense and
MILCON deal with the other parts of the logistics.
Somehow we must break that logjam. I think this subcommittee,
along with Defense, is really working on it, but I just want to keep
it on the table.
Let me move to another
General CASEY. And are very supportive of that, because educating our children is a critical element in terms of sustaining this
force.
Mr. BISHOP. That is quality of life, and it relates to a lot of the
other issuessuicide and mental health for child dependents of our
military.
HOSPITALS
The other matter I want to touch upon is the recently funded rebuilding of Martin Army Community Hospital, which is one of the
oldest in the Armys ongoing inventory. There is a large veterans
population in that area, and Mr. Farr mentioned the co-location of
DoD and V.A. facilities.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01087
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1088
We have been in discussions with V.A. as well as with the Army
about the possibility of expanding the mission of Martin Army to
be a co-located hospital for the DoD, the Fort Benning community
for active duty and retired and families, as well as for V.A. Can I
get you to put in a good word for that, also?
General CASEY. As a result of the war transition effort, we work
very closely with all of our hospitals in the Veterans Administration. I am not particularly familiar with the relationship at Fort
Benning, but I will put in a good word for that.
Mr. BISHOP. We have talked with the military medical folks and
the V.A. medical folks about it. They all seem to consider it an idea
worth exploring. An inquiry by you as chief of staff of the Army
would be helpful, and certainly a good word, sir.
Mr. Dicks.
Mr. DICKS. Thank you, General. I am sorry I missed your opening statement.
First of all, I wanted to say that we appreciate very much the
funding for the Warriors in Transition Complex at Fort Lewis.
I guess it is in the supplemental, right Mr. Chairman?
Mr. EDWARDS. That is correct.
Mr. DICKS. In the supplemental. And, you know, we have the
same problem out at Fort Lewis that Congressman Bishop is talking about. We have a growing force; we have schools that were
built by, I think, the military. I think we have the Office of Economic Adjustment coming out there.
These schools now are 50 or 60 years old, and they need to be
repaired, or they need to be fixed or replaced. So I think this is a
bigger issue than can be handled by Impact Aid in the defense
budget, which is about, what is it$15 million. That is not anywhere near adequate to take care of the problem.
So I am concerned that we have to focus on this. You know,
whether we have to go into authorization or how we have to do
this, but we are getting to a point where these schools are no
longer adequate, and these are the schools that the Soldiers children are going to.
And there have been issues about ownership, that some of them
are owned by the Department of Education and some of them are
owned by the local school district. The bottom line is, this is now
becoming a problem that I think deserves your attention. So I want
to weigh in with this, because it is a big problem at Fort Lewis.
The other thing I just wanted to mention, something I have been
interested in over the years, is the George and Carol Olmsted
Foundation. Are you aware of this? Olmsted. O-L-M-S-T-E-D.
As of 2008, the foundation has a goal of selecting 10 officers each
from the Army, Navy, and Air Force and five from the Marine
Corps. I think they selected a smaller group. But I would just mention some things about the Olmsted scholars. Abizaid was an
Olmsted scholar.
They learn a foreign language fluently, experience a foreign culture in depththey spend a year in the countrystudy formal subjects broadly, earn a masters degree routinely, travel a foreign
country and region extensively, meet foreign citizens continually,
and understand fully how others view the United States, and pre-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01088
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1089
pare thoroughly to be effective as future leaders, Abizaid being an
example. What do you think of this program?
General CASEY. I think it is a great program. I think it is one
of a number of programs that we are actively seeking to put our
junior officers in. Because as we look at the complexities of the security environment that we are facing now, and we are sure to continue to face in the future, we need leaders that arent just competent in their core proficiencies, but are broad enough to do a
range of things. And everything you mentioned that those fellows
do, it speaks of a broad vision. And that is exactly the type of officer that we are trying to create.
Mr. DICKS. Is the foundation completely supported by the family
foundation, or does the government put some money into this?
General CASEY. I dont know the answer to that. I can find out.
Mr. DICKS. It just seems to me this is a worthy program. This
might be something that would benefit from some federal support
and no one has ever asked me to even consider thisbut, I think
this is a great program. I think for a small investment we might
be able to ensure this opportunity is available even if the value of
the foundation declines because of the economic circumstances. It
might be something that we can help from the Governments perspective. But you take a look at that.
What about future combat system? You have been a huge supporter of it. You know, the Secretary of Defense has made certain
statements. What can you tell us about where we are with this program?
General CASEY. I cant tell you more than the secretary has said
publicly until you get the budget. But he has directed us to continue with what we call the spin outs. Basically, continue with the
network and anything in the program except for the manned
ground vehicleand he has directed us to stop the manned ground
vehicle and relook the requirement and then restart it. And so that
is what we are doing. As you can see from his statements, he was
not convinced that we had fully taken into account the lessons of
7 years at war in building the manned ground vehicle.
Again, he supports every other element of the program but that.
And so that is the direction that we will proceed. And we are on
a track to redo that requirement, starting from a blank piece of
papernot completely blankbecause we have leveraged significant technological insights from the program. And we know what
the safe technology with respect to any kind of ground vehicle technology. So we will build on that, and we will develop a requirement
by the end of this year and put it out for contract. Meanwhile, we
will continue with the rest of the program. We feel the rest of the
program will affect all of our brigade combat teams, which I think
was one of the major sticking points when we started in this program. We intended to spend an awful lot of money for fewer than
15 brigade combat teams. And as we looked at that ourselves, that
didnt appear to be the right way to go. So now we are affecting
every brigade combat team in the Army with the technologies that
have come out of this program. So we have got an awful lot of good
out of this. We will get a ground combat vehicle from the program
with the restart.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01089
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1090
DRAWDOWN OF TROOPS IN IRAQ

We will now begin the second round.
General Casey, let me ask about the present timing of the drawdown of soldiers from Iraq. I assume that was not built in the fiscal
year 2009 budget request, because the new president still was not
in office and had not put in place the policy that we have.
Did the fiscal year 2010 budget assume the present drawdown
rates of our troops in Iraq, mitigated by the buildup in Afghanistan, in terms of troop housing and barracks? Fundamentally, what
I want to get to is this: Are we are going to have troops coming
back from Iraq that dont have barracks to live in and adequate
housing?
General CASEY. No, let me explain. First of all, the assumptions
in the 2010 OCO take into account thelevels of the drawdown.
I am pretty sure of that. We are actually getting, this week, from
General Odierno, the specifics of, and we will then take that back
and put it against our construction plans and to do exactly what
you say. I cant tell you 100 percent that we are there yet because
we are just getting the specifics of the details.
Mr. EDWARDS. By the way, for the record, one of the reasons
sometimes we have these so-called commercial earmarks is, military conditions change from the time the administration budget is
put together and our commanders on the ground support the need
for adjusted budgets, but because it wasnt in the formal annual
administration budget request it is defined as an earmark, and
some of the citizens against government waste groups then accuse
Congress of adding unneeded projects. So, I couldnt pass up that
opportunity to get that into the record.
IMPACT AID
On Impact Aid, let me just follow up on what Mr. Bishop said

and Mr. Dicks said, because I know Judge Carter has faced the
same situation at Fort Hood as I did when I had the privilege of
representing Fort Hood. We have been kicking this can around,
and nothing has really happened as a result.
I remember at Fort Hood, for example, the cities of Killeen and
Copperas Cove literally were at the state maximum tax rate allowed by state law. They couldnt increase the tax rate anymore,
and so while Impact Aid provides funding once the students are in
school and buy Part A, Part B reimbursement, there is not part of
Impact Aid that has any significant funding for construction.
And perhaps we need to work with the Department of Health
and Human Services, or the Health and Human Services Appropriations Committee to figure a way through this, because while it
is not under our jurisdiction, it certainly, as you have referenced,
it certainly impacts the morale of Army families. They come back
home from their third tour of duty in Iraq and their kids are having to sit in a classroom of 45 students rather than 25 students because there just wasnt the local construction budget.
So I hope we can work through this. I think there has been a
lot of talk about this over the last couple of years. I think the prob-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01090
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1091
lems are real; I have just not seen any solutions yet, and your leadership would help there.
FinallyI will wait until the third round, if we get to that, because there is not enough time. My question in the third round
would just be to get your general analysis, having commanded both
the national forces in Iraq, 2004 to 2007, what is your overall analysis is of where we are in Afghanistan and Pakistan. But I will
defer that to the third round.
Mr. Wamp.
UNSOLICITED ASSISTANCE
Mr. WAMP. In January when I visited General Chiarelliyour

lovely wife, General Casey, and others, where we discussed the
statutory impediments to outside groups, nonprofits, and businesses, in our country that want to help both wounded warriers
and military families. And it was actually said as we were talking
about ways for our free enterprise system, besides the employers
of the Guard or reservists, that very much want to help our military families, knowing that this is an ongoing struggle with
unsustainable rotations in deployment. And they want to help.
Apparently, there are still some impediments in the statute. And
I was wondering if this is the year for us to try to include language
or even a new free-standing bill that would actually break down
some of those barriers so that outside entities can support our military if they want to. Now, we have asked the Army to give us some
language, and we have looked at it. But there is still concern, I
think, about sole source contracting, and things that they are
afraid it might violate. And so, Public Law 109148 in DoD 5500
7Renables injured and ill service members and their family
members to receive unsolicited gifts from nonfederal entities.
We know this is law and no one argues this, but apparently it
is not enough. And that is what I want to try to get through here.
So we want to know what else the Congress can do to remove these
barriers to enable support. And then ask you, General Casey, if you
are able, when things are provided, to provide logistics or transportation, lets say, if somebody gives Little Debbie snack cakes. I dont
know, that is what my district does. But are you then able to support the transfer of these goods to our military families or to our
wounded warriers.
Those are two groups that I know from listening that a lot of
people want to help. But apparently there are some impediments
in the law. And are we at a point yet of knowing exactly how we
can take that down. I know that the language that you provided
basically gives the authority to the secretary to allow these
things
General CASEY. You are exactly right. And I would like to work
with you to figure out what we need to do to change it. Because
I get this all the time, traveling all around the country. Folks want
to help. And we tie ourselves in knots because of the laws that you
refer to.
I would like to work with you personally to break these barriers
down. Because we have been doing this 7 years, and we ought to
be able to figure it out.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01091
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1092
Mr. WAMP. And I still think the biggest issue is solicited versus
nonsolicited. I mean you cant go out ethically and ask for a bunch
of stuff. But if comes unsolicited, I mean, that is where there is just
a pent-up demand of assistance. And I know that we can take more
help. And when I go out and meet the military families, there are
a whole lot of needs that a lot of people could fill without us having
to appropriate the money. And I sure would like to help close this.
Mr. Secretary, do you have a comment on this?
VOICE. We will take it back and work on it. The appearance of
conflict issuewe havent crossed
General CASEY. Lets do this. It will take uswe have been playing with this for too long.
Mr. WAMP. Lets try to do it this year. We have the same problem here. The pendulum swings back and forth. So long as there
is transparency. It is ridiculous that we cant go to lunch with certain people, but that is the way it is. The pendulum swings back
and forth. Lets try to find some logical middle ground. And then
write some language that allows these outside groups to contribute
to these unbelievable Americans and their families. Which is the
main thing we are all about is the families. You have got the troops
under your command, we are supposed to support these families.
This is one way to do it.
Okay. We will work together. Thank you.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Wamp. Good idea.
Mr. Farr.
Mr. FARR. Yes, just to follow up on that. I hope you will look into
donations, for example, like books for schools, if there is space
available on aircraft.
We really had a hard time getting some books to schools in the
Peace Corps. Sometimes the military could take it and other times
it couldnt. I would appreciate it if you looked into that.
LANGUAGE TRAINING
We have had some interesting hearings. We had General Abizaid

here a few years ago, and he said something really profound that
I think you would agree with. He told the committee that we can
not win the peace until we learn to cross the cultural divide.
And there is a lot of, Now, interesting, but how do we cross the
culture divide? One is by understanding the languages and the
country.
General Patraeus was here a couple weeks ago and saying the
same thing. There is this whole of government effort to build the
civilian reconstruction and stabilization corps, and corps competency.
The military and the Army, for a long time, has had foreign area
officers, FAOs. The Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey has a
center for FAOs. Do you know where you are training Army FAOs
and is there any possibility that you could look into sending more
of those folks to the Naval Postgraduate School? With the Defense
Language Institute also located in Monterey, albeit with different
missionsthe Defense Language school is for basic language training, whereas the Naval Postgraduate School is post-graduate education.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01092
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1093
We also have a Center for Stabilization and Reconstruction Studies there so it seems to me, that we need to get them all integrated
and what we need is the Mos. I wonder if you have any thoughts
on, do you know where the FAOs are trained now by the Army?
General CASEY. Well, as a former FAO, I can speak from personal experience. I was originally, actually, scheduled to go to BLI
for Japanese language training right out of grad school. And about
half way through grad school I get changed to go to Yokohama, at
the foreign service institute there, to study the Japanese language
there. I didnt wind up going, but that is the kind of the things that
we do. I will get back to you with exactly where we train our candidates for language training, but I think we try to
Mr. FARR. It is not just language training. It is the area studies
as well.
General CASEY. For example, in my area of studies, I went to
and I would prefer to do that because of the exposure that it gives
to things outside the military. And, I know we graduate students
at a lot of different schools.
Mr. FARR. The Navy school has been curious to why the Army
hasnt sent more students.
General CASEY. We actually, special forces has a program where
they send special forces out there
Mr. FARR. The other issue, I was briefed on earlier in this year
by the Army civilian leadership is that in the out-year projections
for the DLI starting in 2011 and 2012, there is going to be a student enrollment decline. I cant imagine why there would be declining enrollment in a time when we need these languages more than
ever. And to grow the Army, I think this is part of your ad,
General CASEY. My staff passed that on, and I checked it, and
there is no
Mr. FARR. It is a rumor?
General CASEY. I would categorize it as a rumor. Again, I
checked the data and was told that they are not expecting to be
in decline.
Mr. FARR. I would hope that we would be growing linguists. How
do you feel about this contracting out for linguists. This is becoming very controversial.
General CASEY. Right now, I dont think we have any choice; I
guess we build up our pool of people who have the critical attributes. One of the interesting programs that we have just started
here is being able to enlist with us soldiers, people who are green
card holders, who have critical language skills in the critical areas.
And bring them, and allow them to come in immediately for citizenship. And I just enlisted about a dozen of those folks up in
Times Square in New York about a month ago. These are folks that
have, out of a dozen, there were four masters and eight baccalaureate degrees. And they all spoke at least two languages. So it
is a good deal.
Mr. FARR. Good. Congratulations. I appreciate that.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Farr.
Members, just to clarify the order of questioning on round two,
we will go to Mr. Crenshaw next, then Mr. Dicks, then Judge
Carter, and then Mr. Bishop.
Mr. Crenshaw.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01093
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1094
Mr. CRENSHAW. I have nothing to add.
Mr. DICKS. Why dont we go to Mr. Bishop? I think he was ahead
of me.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. In round two we base it on what order you
appear, but if you
Mr. DICKS. I would yield to him.
Mr. DICKS. He had a grimace that I was worried about. [Laughter.]
EVACUATION TIME FOR WOUNDED SOLDIERS IN AFGHANISTAN VS. IRAQ
Mr. BISHOP. I was unaware of the grimace. But thank you, Mr.
Dicks, for yielding.
General Casey, I would like to ask you to discuss for a moment
the medical evacuation pertaining to our wounded warriors in Afghanistan as compared to Iraq. For some time now, we have been
aware of the fact that, because of the terrain and the districts requirements in Afghanistan, the evacuation time to get wounded
warriors to the hospital is significantly longer in Afghanistan than
in Iraq.
We were informed that steps were undertaken to shorten that
timeframe. Could you update us on where we stand on that now?
How will that be impacted by the additional flow of troops?
General CASEY. This is something that the secretary of the Army
actually picked up on, oh, 5, 6 months ago. And, frankly, there
were not enough helicopters in Afghanistan to allow them to meet
the standards. But having done this in Iraq, it is just a function
of helicopters. It is where you position your surgical teams, and it
is how you risk assess every mission.
And so with the deployment of the second combat aviation brigade into Afghanistan, the resources that they need to bring the
time from pickup to the level one station will come down. So we
will be in much better balance.
Mr. BISHOP. You have had to utilize, for the Army and the Marine Corps, call service like Air Force medevac units. Is that not
so?
General CASEY. Sure. We want to use all of the capabilities that
are available to us.
Mr. BISHOP. That will deplete the capacity for those particular
units to perform their Air Force missions, would it not? Do we need
to concentrate more on that? Do we have enough personnel? Do we
need more people to specialize in that in the Army, or do you think
that the joint supply is okay? The Air Force is now beginning to
be stretched also, with regard to the deployments of medevac units,
which takes them away from some of the other missions that they
have been working on.
General CASEY. I cant speak for the Air Force, but Itwo
months ago directed a study ofbasically it was a relook of the
whole Army aviation package, based on the lessons that we have
learned in the last 5 years. We did one in 2003. And that was pretty good. But boy, as you suggest, we have learned an awful lot over
the last 5 years, and so I thought we needed to take a look at it
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01094
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1095
and update it, and medical evacuations by helicopters is one of the
elements.
Mr. BISHOP. Thank you, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Bishop.
Judge Carter.
General Casey, back to what Mr. Crenshaw was talking about a
minute ago. We have just come back from a dialogue with the EU,
and it proves that we are still the sole military aircraft for manned
troops for NATO and the EU, many of which have a large portion
of that duty, but doesnt the United States military provide that
service for our allies?
General CASEY. I cant speak to whether we do it for all the allies. I know we do it for some allies. That is why I couldnt speak
to the scope of what you were addressing.
MILITARY HOME SALES AND BENEFITS
Mr. CARTER. But there is a conversation in the EU about whether or not they should start buying those kinds of airplanes.
Another thing, I met with some folks on Saturday night, and
they were talking about home ownership among our soldiersand
the fact that they are being transferred. We recently put together
a mortgage package that was passed through this Congress,and
it is my understanding that language in the packagerestricts our
soldiers from qualifying to get the $8,000 new house benefit because they lived in the old house less than 3 years.
They are being transferred because of BRAC and other reasons.
They bought a house less than three years ago and are having a
hard time disposing of that house. Then they move to the new base
and they are not getting the benefits of the mortgage package that
we in Congress put together. I was wondering if you had heard of
anything about the saleability of their homes, and if they could
take advantage of some of the benefits we put forward in our most
recent mortgage package or their inability to utilize those benefits?
General CASEY. I have not heard that specific problem. I have
heard of folks having challenges, particularly with that July 2006
date, where you had to buy your house prior to that
Mr. CARTER. The fact that you have to have bought the house before that. That is a real issue because an awful lot of them bought
after then, and yet they are required to move and sell and get back
into the market.
General CASEY. Yes. I have heard that. I know that we are working on the implementation instructions in the Army Corps of Engineers, there is the executive agent for the department, and I think
we expect to have those things out shortly.
Mr. CARTER. You think that should be something we should address, maybe try to amend what we did?
General CASEY. Let me get you the particulars so that we dont
launch on something here that is maybe taken care of in the instructions.
Mr. CARTER. Okay. Very good. Thank you.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Carter, any questions? Okay.
Now the very sensitive and emphatic Mr. Dicks is recognized.
Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Thank you.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01095
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1096
General, on page two of your statement you go though a discussion of the situation we are facing with failing states and terrorism, and we know that our forces are being trained for counterinsurgency, basically. What isnt being done? I mean, when you
talk about readiness to fight a major conventional war, do we have
any unit in the Army that is training to do that, or is everybody
training for counterinsurgency?
General CASEY. No. The majority of folks are working on counterinsurgency. But, in Korea, I visited the
Mr. DICKS. Yes. Of course.
General CASEY [continuing]. Standard North Korean scenario,
conventional scenario. I visited them up in December and saw their
after action revue. Recently, General Sharp conducted at one of his
major annual exercises, the 3rd Corps from Fort Hood, went over
there and played the counter-attacking corps. And so we are taking
the opportunities when we can to keep those high-end conventional
skills trained.
Mr. DICKS. But it is pretty minimal, at this juncture
General CASEY. Absolutely.
Mr. DICKS. I mean, of these 45 brigades, how many of them have
trained for full spectrum warfare, or conventional warfare?
General CASEY. Byfirst of all, at low levels, company platoon
and below, combat is pretty much combat, and so, we have a combat-seasoned force. And boy, there is great, great value in that.
Where you get into the significant differences is at battalion level,
lieutenant colonel level, colonel level and above. Where in counterinsurgency operations things play out very slowly, and you have to
figure out trends over time rather than making snap decisions
against an ememy formation that is attacking you. And you mass
your fires very precisely against individual targets, where in conventional war you mass them against enemies and enemy formation. Those are the high-end integration skills that we are not
training.
Mr. DICKS. Things like artillery, I think, would that be part
of
General CASEY. Artillery integration is a great example of that.
And so as we get more time at home, what I have told the Army
is that if you are home for 18 months or less stay focused on the
regular warfare. If you are home for 18 months or more, take some
time to rekindle your conventional warfighting skills. But to do it
in simulation because we have very good simulationdo it in a
way that doesnt drag the troops back out to the field, unnecessarily.
And so, we will, as we expand our time at home, we will gradually rekindle those skills. But it will be faster, because this is combat-seasoned force.
Mr. DICKS. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.
Members, I think we have time for one more round. I still want
to ask about Afghanistan-Pakistan, but something Mr. Wamp was
talking about, citizens who want to help, prompted me to think
about something I have wondered about for some time now, and I
am not sure of the answer. Is there any federal program, or DOD
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01096
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1097
program that ensures college tuition for the children of the troops
killed in combat or in service of the country?
General CASEY. Beyond the V.A. benefits that come for schooling
in general, I couldnt say that there is one
Mr. EDWARDS. So if they havent qualified with the new G.I bill
maybe they died, maybe they are a private and maybe they died
after only 2 years of active duty, and they wouldnt qualify for the
new G.I. bill.
I was just at an event several weeks ago where we dedicated a
new Post Office in honor of the Marine veteran Sergeant John
David Fry, and after he finished his tour of duty in Iraq, seven
days from going home, he volunteered to go out and diffuse one
more bomband the third bomb he diffused the enemy had hidden
another bomb underneath that third bomb, and after serving, finishing his duty, his bags were packed, he gave his life for the country, his three children, all of whom were under the age of 10 when
he died what about their college education if they choose to go to
college.
So I may follow up on that. It wouldnt be under the direct jurisdiction of this committee, but again, this committee is so committed
to quality of life issues. So it is something that maybe we could put
together a public or a public-private partnership on that.
AFGHANISTAN AND PAKISTAN
With the 3 minutes I have, I know that is not much time, but
could you give us an overview of your analysis of where we are in
Afghanistan and in Pakistan?
General CASEY. Well, I think what we are seeing in Afghanistan
are the beginnings of the shift of emphasis from Iraqemphasis of
priority from Iraq to Afghanistan. The first of the brigades that
were sent in to ensure that, to secure elections this August, is already on the ground thereand I must say, the folks on the
ground there did a great job of preparing their bases, preparing
their equipment, because they came in on the planes, got on their
equipment, and went right into the fight, and made a significant
difference.
Down south, in the Khandahar area, the forces are continuing to
come in. They will be in there prior to the August elections.
Based on my experience, I believe that we have put sufficient
forces there to ensure that there are secure elections in August.
And I think that that will be a big plus for the Afghanis.
As I look to the future, the Afghan army is about, size-wise, is
about where the Iraqi army was in 2005. They are the same size
country and about the same size population. The police, in Iraq, in
2005, were about a year behind the army. In Afghanistan, they are
several years behind the army. So we have a way to go to build
up their security forces. There has been money put against that,
so I would expect that to proceed. I expect it will take us 3 to 5
years to bring the Afghan security forces to the point where they
can take over. And the additional forces that we have there plus
the existing Afghan forces, I think, can hold the levels of violence
down to acceptable levels so that progress there can continue.
On the civil side, and there has been some discussion about the
civil support here, I mean, we need the political and economic in-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01097
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1098
vestments there to move the whole process forward. We have all
been saying for years, you are not going to do this by military
means, alone. And we need that political and economic investment
to help them move along.
Afghanistan is a several decade proposition. So my thought is
that we need to bring the Afghan security forces to the point where
they can take over.
Mr. EDWARDS. Just to clarify, you dont mean massive or significant numbers of U.S. troops being in Afghanistan for several decades?
General CASEY. I dont. But that is what I am saying. We have
to bring the Afghan security forces up so that we dont have to do
that.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
General CASEY. You mentioned Pakistan. That is a critical part
of the Afghan-Pakistan strategy. It is a much tougher nut, on the
one hand because of the Pakistani desires for sovereignty. It is a
sovereign country. And so they are wrestling with how much of our
help they can accept. And they are going to have to do things their
own way. And so it will just be a tougher challenge. My Pakistani
counterpart was here a month or so ago. We had some discussions,
and he is focused on doing more in the frontier provinces there
against the terrorists. You read the papers like I do, and you can
see what is happening there now. It is something that we all have
to watch carefully.
That is probably the toughest change that we have on the security front for the country.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you for your overview. I know it is limited
time, but that overview is very helpful.
Mr. Wamp.
CASUALTIES IN IRAQ
Mr. WAMP. General Petraeus said to usbased on the increase

in troops in Afghanistan the situation will get worse before it gets
better.
[Off mike]
How many KIAs have we had since Memorial Dayhow many
combat related? Are we still sustaining in Iraq? It seems like the
bombings are mostly directed at civilians and not necessarily our
troops.
General CASEY. The casualties in Iraq are significantly down. I
cant tell you in exact numbers, but everybody sees that, that they
are significantly down. We are over 4,000 killed and 31,000 wounded since the war started there. And we all appreciate the sacrifices
of the men and women both in Iraq and in Afghanistan. As you
suggest, the casualties in Iraq are down substantially from where
they were a year ago.
Mr. WAMP. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Farr.
IMET
Mr. FARR. I had one question. It was interesting reading your

background. How important to our Defense Department is the
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01098
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1099
International Military Education Training program, where foreign
officers come to study here?
General CASEY. It is hugely important. Every time I have a foreign counterpart visit, they ask for more folks. And I have focused
on getting majors into CGSC and getting lieutenant colonels and
colonels into our war college.
Mr. FARR. General Patraeus said the same thing, and everybody
says the same thing. The problem we have is that program for foreign military officers that is not funded by the Defense Department. It is funded by the State Department. We passed a budget
that really squeezed the State Departments budget. And I just told
Norm that maybe we ought to use some Defense money to pay for
the IMET program.
General CASEY. Generalfrom the Pakistanichief of staff, is a
graduate of Leavenworth. We just inducted him in the Leavenworth hall of fame. And he went out there, I think with 10, 12 of
his classmates, and inducted him in. And that is the kind of relationships that we havewell, we just got lucky on that one. But
there are many, many more like that out there.
Mr. FARR. Well, the king of Jordan studied at the Naval Postgraduate School under that programand I think it has incredible
benefits, and I would hope that you might want to speak to Secretary Clinton about it because it is in her budget. And we need
to figure out a way to get that program funded and without squeezing other programs.
Along that same line, we have createdthe military got ahead
of the State Department in being able to create this Center for
Training Stabilization and Reconstruction using NGOs, using our
civilian forces and military, both ours and foreign military officers.
You have got to come see this program. Send more officers for
training.
What is interesting is the Postgraduate School has this course
set up for getting a Masters degree in S&R, and there is a lot of
interest particularly for officers coming back from Afghanistan and
Iraq, because they see this program as a good career investment.
The problem is the military hasnt created an MOS for thie career parth. And what I keep hearing is, we have got people who
want to come and then they look at the future and they say, I got
a masters degree and this incredible background. Where do I go?
General Patraeus said it is a real problem for him because they
want to get that training. And I wondered if you would look into
that. I talked to Secretary Chu about it and he said, You know,
you have just got to figure out a way tocareer in MOSit is like
an FAO
General CASEY. It is kind of civil affairs.
Mr. FARR. But it is not.
General CASEY. But it is not exactly
Mr. FARR. I would appreciate it if you could look into trying to
get an MOS for people that have a masters degree in Stabilization
and Reconstruction studies.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you
Mr. Crenshaw.
Mr. Bishop.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01099
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1100
AFRICOM
Mr. BISHOP. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Let me just ask you about the Africa Command, AFRICOM. Last
budget cycle I think we funded some renovations to the headquarters in Germany, which were not all expended, as I understand, partially, because there is no decision made regarding
whether the headquarters there will be permanent.
I understand that the construction money will remain there. I
am told by General Ward that regardless of whether AFRICOM
moves to another location for headquarters, some utilization will be
made of facilities there, thus justifying leaving that construction
money in place. Of course, I am concerned about how that construction money will be spent. Also there were conditions for the
ARCsthe area centers within Africa Commandbut none of
those countries was willing to allow us to do it; I understand whatever construction funds are there for those are not expended either.
What do you see as the developing importance of the Africa Command, and how do you see the military construction needs developing in light of the 3-D policydefense, diplomacy, and development? How will that impact us in terms of funding construction?
General CASEY. I think the short answer isI dont know. But
I was with General Ward in Mombasa, Kenya 10 days ago. And we
were participating in a seminar with troops of armies from
Kazakhstan all the way down toand it was a handoff meeting between the African countries from Central Command, who were now
moving over to Africa Command.
And he personally has been all over that continent talking to the
leadership, explaining to them that Africa Command does. And I
thing you know they got off to kind of a rough start because people
thought we were coming in to take over. And he has been tamping
that down, and I think making very good progress.
I went from there up to Djibouti to the Joint Task Force on Africa. And there are about 1,400 folks there and they are affecting
every country in the Horn of Africa by deploying small teams of,
really, noncommissioned officers, out theretreating cattle, treating people, drilling wells, and it struck me that that is the role of
AFRICOM. I think that is where
Mr. BISHOP. For development and diplomacy?
General CASEY. Development and diplomacy. But small numbers
making a big difference, and I have been very impressed with that.
We talked briefly about the long-term plans for the headquarters,
and I think, at best, I think that they are not done. At that time,
Kip didnt give me any indication that they were any closer to finding a place to go. Either for headquarters or for the regional commands on the continent. So I think that will probably be some
time. But I dont want to speak for him.
Mr. BISHOP. Thank you.
Mr. EDWARDS. Members, any additional questions
If not, General Casey, thank you for your distinguished 39 years
of service in the Army and your leadership as the chief of staff of
the Army. You were here as a resource witness today, and we know
how hard you have worked every day on behalf of the quality of
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01100
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1101
life and military construction issues that we deal with, so we look

forward to continuing to work with you.
Thank you both for being here. We are adjourned.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01101
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01102
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2

U.S. NAVY, U.S. MARINE CORPS BUDGET
WITNESSES
ADMIRAL GARY ROUGHEAD, CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS
GENERAL JAMES T. CONWAY, COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS
STATEMENT
OF THE
CHAIRMAN
Mr. EDWARDS [presiding]. I will call the subcommittee to order.

And, Admiral Roughead, General Conway, thank you both for
being back here. You certainly dont need any introduction to this
subcommittee.
The only thing I would add to that is just, on behalf of our subcommittee and my family and all our families, thank you both for
your incredible lifetimes of service and leadership to our country.
We are deeply grateful to you.
And, by the way, you would have been thrilled. Right after our
morning meeting with General Casey, we had 32 World War II veterans in Texas that had come to Washington.
There is a group that helped pay for them to come and see the
World War II memorial, those that have never been here, never
seen the World War II memorial. And I now know how we won
World War II. Those guys are incredible, incrediblebut you carry
on in that tradition. And thank you.
I would like to recognize Mr. Crenshaw, the ranking member, for
any comments he would care to make.
STATEMENT
OF THE

I just want to add my words of welcome to you all. General, Admiral, thank you for your years of service.
For me, in my district, the Navy and the Marines have a strong
presence, I get to see these guys from time to time. And I appreciate all you do for the Navy and Marine Corps community.
I think this subcommittee, everyone knows, tries to work together in a bipartisan way. Last year, we finished on time, and we
look forward to doing that again.
I must say, I am a little disappointed that we are having this
hearing when we dont have the Fiscal Year 2010 budget request,
but that is just a function of the way things are going. But I am
sure we will have a good discussion, and I look forward to working
with you all to develop the kind of bills that we have in the past
that provide for the families and men and women, our heroes.
So thank you again. And I look forward to your testimony and
questions.
Thank you.
(1103)
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01103
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1104
And for the record, your full testimony will be submitted for the
record. I would like to recognize Admiral Roughead for any opening
comments you would care to make.
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Yes, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. And then we will get into questions and answers.
STATEMENT
OF
ADMIRAL ROUGHEAD
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Chairman Edwards, thank you. AndMr.

Crenshaw, thank you.
Mr. CRENSHAW. You can call me the ranking member. [Laughter.]
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Okay, the ranking member. I will do that.
Mr. CRENSHAW. You know, I dont get called that very often.
Admiral ROUGHEAD. I will intersperse my comments many times.
But it really is my honor to appear before you today and represent
the dedicated Sailors and the civilians and our families of the
United States Navy.
And I appreciate the opportunity to testify about our Navys
shore infrastructure and how essential it is to carrying out our
Navys mission. Our families thrive, and our Sailors deploy, and
our ships sail from our infrastructure ashore.
For years, our increased operational demand, rising manpower
costs, and aging fleet has compelled us to underfund shore readiness. Today, as a result our future shore readiness, particularly the
recent recapitalization of our infrastructure, lags behind where I
would like to be.
This years military construction budget prioritizes critical requirements focusing on fleet readiness, quality-of-life issues, the
elimination of excess infrastructure, quality standards across all installations, the maintenance required to achieve service life and
low life-cycle costs, and, finally, the integration and refinement of
shore planning capabilities and processes.
On the issue of quality of life for our Sailors, Navy civilians, and
Navy families, I am very thankful for your support and pleased
with the progress that we have made in housing for our families.
I am also extremely pleased to report the opening of our first unaccompanied housing privatization project, Pacific Beacon in San
Diego.
These quarters, Pacific Beacon, are the best enlisted bachelor
quarters I have ever seen in my time in the Navy. With your support this year, we will construct new bachelor housing at Naval Air
Station North Island, as well.
I also want to thank you for your strong support for Navy children. Our Navy is leveraging Overseas Contingency Operations
funding, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, and the fiscal year 2009 budget to build 17 new childcare development centers.
In addition, with commercial contracts and military-certified inhome care, we will be able to increase childcare spaces by 7,000
and respond to requests for childcare within 3 months and at
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01104
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1105
25,000 hours childcare and youth services, a resource that is invaluable to the families of our deployed Sailors.
Beyond quality of life, our bases must adequately support the
most sophisticated fleet in the world. We will perform major repairs for drydocks, Navy operational support center facilities, barracks, airfields, and utility infrastructure throughout the Navy to
keep our shore facilities ready. These projects are possible thanks
to your tremendous support throughout theor through the ARRA.
I will also be personally involved as we conduct our Quadrennial
Defense Review, as the Navy considers Naval Station Mayport as
a carrier homeport. This review in no way diminishes my support
for either Norfolk orof course, none of our infrastructure or
equipment would run without energy. We have focused on energyrelated projects that will develop alternative and renewable energy
sources and improve energy efficiency in all of our facilities.
Most recently, the Recovery Act has enabled us to begin installation of advanced photovoltaic systems in Hampton Roads. We are
going to continue to invest in energy research and development.
With the 2010 budget, we will have the necessary resources to
maintain the readiness of the fleet.
I thank you again for your time today and for your continued
support of our 600,000 Sailors, civilians, and our families who support us back at home.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Admiral.
[The prepared statement of Admiral Roughead follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01105
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01106
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1106
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01107
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1107
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01108
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1108
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01109
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1109
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01110
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1110
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01111
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1111
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01112
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1112
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01113
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1113
1114
Mr. EDWARDS. General Conway.
STATEMENT
OF
GENERAL JAMES T. CONWAY
General CONWAY. Sure. Chairman Edwards, ranking member,

and distinguished members of the Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies. Thank you for
the opportunity to report to you on the state of your Marine Corps.
Our pledge is always to provide you a candid and honest assessment, and it is in that spirit that I appear before you today.
Since testimony before your committee last year, progress in the
Anbar Province in Iraq has been tremendous. Indeed, we think our
Marines there are moving into the most long-awaited phase of operations, the reset of our equipment and redeployment of the force.
In February, we had a Change of Command of the Multi-National Force-West in Anbar province. The commander of the MultiNational Corps, who was present at the event, commented that he
believed this will be the last rotation of Marines in Iraq. We tend
to agree.
Having recently returned from a trip in theater, I am pleased to
report to you that the magnificent performance of our young Marines and Sailors in the province, regardless of their task, continues.
In Afghanistan, however, the Taliban have increased their activity. The 2nd Marine Expeditionary Brigade, a force that will number over 10,000 Marines and Sailors, is en route and will meet the
30 May latest arrival date.
The 2nd MEB is deploying as a Marine Air-Ground Task force.
They will operate under Regional Command South, primarily in
the Helmand province, where 93 percent of the countrys opium is
harvested and where the Taliban have been most active. This part
of the country also includes a wide open stretch of border with
Pakistan.
We consider the operating environment in Afghanistan as well
suited to our expeditionary ethos of being fast, austere and lethal,
with emphasis on the austere. As our numbers grow in Afghanistan, Marines and their families have refocused their resolve to yet
another crisis area on the map.
There are many challenges ahead, but your Marines understand
the effects of operations there will make this country safer.
Our force remains resilient, despite an average deployment to
dwell tempo that is slightly better than 1 to 1 in most occupational
specialties. With your support, our growth of the force by 27,000
Marines has proceeded ahead of schedule. We will easily reach the
level of 202,100 Marines in our active component before the end of
the fiscal year.
Our growth has been achieved with no change in standards. Indeed, more than 96 percent of the young men and women who enlisted in our Corps during fiscal year 2008 had earned their high
school diploma, a rate that exceeded the standard for the Department of Defense, at 90 percent, and our own self-imposed higher
standard of 95 percent.
We attribute our accelerated growth to four factors: quality recruiting; exceptional retention levels; reduced attrition; and, not
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01114
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1115
least, an incredible generation of young Americans out there who

welcome the opportunity to fight for this country.
The growth of our force does not just include personnel. It includes infrastructure, as well. In the past, we have placed operational priorities ahead of good housing for all Marines. With your
support, we have recently been able to reverse that trend by expanding our efforts in military construction.
Our warriors have no hesitation about life in an austere and expeditionary environment when deployed; however, they want their
families to enjoy quality housing, schools and facilities while they
are away. Single Marines rightfully expect to have clean and comfortable quarters when they are back home.
Our number-one priority in military construction is now building
new barracks to provide adequate bachelor housing for our entire
force by 2014. We do appreciate the continued support of Congress
toward this effort.
We are deeply committed to the care and welfare of our wounded
and their families. Our Wounded Warrior Regiment reflects this
commitment through all phases of recovery.
To assist in the rehabilitation and transition of our wounded, injured or ill, and their families, we have a Wounded Warrior Battalion on both coasts, at Camp Pendleton and Camp Lejeune. The
headquarters of our Wounded Warrior Regiment is in Quantico. I
would like to thank you all for your personal visits to our wounded
warriors around the country and also overseas.
Our great young patriots have responded magnificently and have
written their own page in history. They know, as they go into
harms way, that our country is behind them. Military construction
that is commensurate with their needs and demonstrates a commitment to their families and is a tangible way of recognizing their
sacrifice.
On their behalf, I thank you for your enduring support. We
pledge to be good stewards of the resources you provide and remain
committed to the defense of this great land.
Thank you once again for the opportunity to report to you today,
sir.
[The prepared statement of General James T. Conway follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01115
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01116
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1116
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01117
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1117
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01118
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1118
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01119
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1119
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01120
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1120
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01121
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1121
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01122
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1122
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01123
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1123
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01124
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1124
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01125
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1125
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01126
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1126
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01127
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1127
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01128
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1128
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01129
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1129
1130
Mr. EDWARDS. General Conway, thank you. And I am going to
take part of my opening 5 minutes just to mention the name of a
great Marine. You mentioned al Anbar Province, andgreat young
Marine in my mind. We dedicated a post office in his honor just
a few weeks ago in my district, just a few miles from where I live,
Marine Gunnery Sergeant John David Fry.
And he was a demolition expert, went out during his time in
IraqI think he defused literally hundreds of bombs. And he had
his bags packed, was less than 7 days away from coming home, had
three children under the age of 10. And the call came in asking for
a volunteer to go out to al Anbar Province and defuse some bombs
that had been located at a roadside there.
And he went out. And the third bomb he defused had a fourth
bomb hidden underneath, which killed him. And as I looked at his
three young children that day at the post office, I just thought this
was why every one of us is so dedicated to supporting the quality
of life for these great Americans.
We know we cant ever begin to replace those little childrens father or that widows husband, but we are going to do everything
we can to provide the kind of quality of life that their families deserve. So thank you.
I know that reflects the kind of spirit that we see in the Navy
and the Marines throughout our country and throughout the world.
INADEQUATE HOUSING
I just have one question that I would begin of each of you, and
that is, do you have a number in terms of number of barracks and/
or family homes that dont meet your respective Navy or Marine
standards for
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Yes, sir. We, in the area of our family housing, have made the investments that we will be able to rectify all
of the inadequate housing with the investments that we have
made. So family housing, we are in good shape.
With respect to the substandard category for our unaccompanied
housing, I put that at about 42 percent. And that doesnt mean
that the accommodations are unsanitary or unsafe. They may be
not sized properly or the square footage that we want, but I put
the number at 42 percent of bachelor enlisted housing.
Mr. EDWARDS. And on the present budget glide path, when do
you think the money will be committed to bring those up to standard?
Admiral ROUGHEAD. My intention, Mr. Chairman, is that we will
have that done by 2016.
Mr. EDWARDS. I hope, with some good luck, maybe this committee could compress that. I certainly hope so.
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Yes, sir. Thank you very much.
General CONWAY. Sir, about 96 percent of our family housing at
this point is PPV (Public-Private Venture). Of those units transferred, approximately 4,400 remain that are considered inadequate
and these are being renovated, replaced or otherwise demolished by
our partners. When completed in 2014, there will be no PPV housing units deemed inadequate. Of the remaining Marine Corps
owned inventory, only two would by definition be considered inad-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01130
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1131
equate. These are General Officer quarters, deemed inadequate by
definition that they require more than $50,000 for repairs, but are
fully habitable.
And we estimate that we have roughly 2,700 spaces which constitutes less than 4 percent of our total inventory that we would
label as inadequate. As I said in the statement and as you have
heard me say before, that has become a real priority for us, because we have waited until we were in extremis, I think, to respond to needs.
We have over the FYDP about $1.52 billion of requests for construction associated with our barracks and family housing. If those
requests are supported, then we will solve our problem, we think,
by the end of the 5-year plan.
Mr. EDWARDS. In fact, Admiral Roughead, if you wouldnt mind,
if you could give me a similar number for the Navy. What would
it take to get all of your bachelors quarters up to Navys standards?
Mr. EDWARDS. It would sure be nice for us to know what that
goal is. And perhaps we can compress some of these
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Sir, the figures that we are using is on or
about $85 million in MILCON and then about $80 million a year
throughout the FYDP for the maintenance costs that would be associated. So it is not an insignificant amount of money.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for that.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Crenshaw.
HOMEPORTING NUCLEAR CARRIER AT NAVAL STATION MAYPORT

Mr. EDWARDS. Not only the ranking member this afternoon, but
a great member of this subcommittee.
We are going to start out, Admiral Roughead, you mentioned in
your opening statement the decision that the Navy made to homeport a nuclear carrier at Naval Station Mayport.
And I know you made that decision after a 2.5-year study. You
weighed all the strategic, operational, environmental consequences
of the decision.
And that report stated in pretty strong language that it is in the
best interest of national security to have a second nuclear carrier
homeport on the East Coast and that Naval Station Mayport was
the best place to do that.
I was a little disappointedI got a call right before Easter from
the Deputy Secretary of Defense that said that, in spite of the
Navys decision, that that decision was going to be further reviewed
as part of the Quadrennial Defense Review, (QDR), which is disappointing, because of all the study had gone into, decisions made.
Last time I got a phone call like that was right before Christmas
a few years ago, when the former Deputy of Secretary of Defense,
who at the time was the Secretary of the Navy, called me to say
that they were thinking about decommissioning one of the carriers
and it could very well be the one that was in Mayport,so when
I get these kind of phone calls right before holidays, I have a new
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01131
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1132
policy at my office now. They dont accept calls from high-ranking

military officials anywhere near a holiday.
But I know that the nuclear homeporting decision is going to be
made as part of that QDR. And we dont know exactly when we are
going to get that. And we dont know whether there will be some
budget requests this time, because we havent seen it yet, in terms
of some of the upgrades needed.
But if you dont mind, I wanted to ask you just a couple of questions about that.
But, Mr. Chairman, I wanted to just see if it is possible to submit
the Navy Record of Decision in final Environmental Impact Statement on the proposed homeporting of additional surface ships at
Naval Station Mayport, Florida, in the official record?
Mr. EDWARDS. Without objection.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01132
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01133
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1133
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01134
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1134
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01135
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1135
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01136
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1136
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01137
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1137
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01138
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1138
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01139
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1139
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01140
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1140
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01141
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1141
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01142
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1142
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01143
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1143
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01144
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1144
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01145
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1145
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01146
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1146
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01147
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1147
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01148
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1148
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01149
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1149
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01150
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1150
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01151
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1151
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01152
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1152
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01153
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1153
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01154
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1154
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01155
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1155
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01156
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1156
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01157
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1157
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01158
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1158
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01159
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1159
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01160
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1160
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01161
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1161
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01162
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1162
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01163
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1163
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01164
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1164
1165
Mr. CRENSHAW. I am going to give you a couple of quotes from
that report and just to see if that is still your view, if that is okay
with you, sir.
One, there is a quote that says, Homeporting a nuclear carrier
at Mayport would reduce risks to fleet resources in the event of a
natural disaster, manmade calamity, or attack by foreign nations
or terrorists. Now, do you still believe that statement to be accurate?
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Yes, sir, I do.
Mr. CRENSHAW. I dont want to sound like a lawyer, but it is
hard for you to comment on a lot of these things, because they involve a bunch of FY 10 budget requests.
Just two more questions. One other quote, it says, The aircraft
carriers of the United States Navy are vital strategic assets that
serve our national interest in both peace and war. The President
calls upon them for their unique ability to provide both deterrence
and combat support in times of crisis.
Utilizing Naval Station Mayport to homeport a CVN enhancing
operational readiness. Operational readiness is fundamental to the
Navys mission and obligation to the commander-in-chief.
And I guess my question is: Do you still believe that statement
is accurate and correct?
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Yes, sir. I believe the ability for us to have
flexibility in the positioning of our force is a good thing. Much of
my perspective is based on having commanded out in the Pacific,
where there were several options for basing a variety of our ships
out there. And I think that flexibility is a very good thing.
Mr. CRENSHAW. And this last statement alludes to that, as well.
It saysthe quote is, The consolidation of CVN capabilities in the
Hampton Roads on the East Coast presents a unique set of risks.
CVNs assigned to the West Coast are spread among three
homeports. Maintenance and repair infrastructure exists at three
locations, as well.
As a result, there are strategic operations available to Pacific
Fleet CVNs should a catastrophic event occur. By contrast, Naval
Station Norfolk is a homeport to all five of the CVNs assigned to
the Atlantic Fleet, and the Hampton Roads area is the only East
Coast location where CVN maintenance and repair infrastructure
exists.
Its the only location in the U.S. capable of CVN construction
and refueling. There are no strategic options available outside the
Hampton Roads area for Atlantic Fleet CVNs should a catastrophic
event occur.
And so the question, again, is: Is that still your view? Is that accurate?
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Yes, sir, it is accurate. All of our nuclear
carrier infrastructure is nowon the East Coastis now all in the
Hampton Roads area.
Mr. CRENSHAW. And time for one more question? Before I came
to Congress, I was involved in providing financing for various companies around the country. And one of the things that we always
used to look at was a cost-benefit analysis, and it involved evaluating risk.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01165
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1166
And so the question, based on that report that took 2.5 years to
come up with and was very thorough, the question becomes, when
you decideand we dont know the number yet, because we dont
have the budget request, but, it is not inconsequential the amount
of money that it is going to take to upgrade Mayport to be the
homeport for a nuclear carrier.
But is cost part of your risk analysis? I think I have figured up
somehow, if you take the total cost of our carrier fleet, the total
cost for MILCON and recurring cost is less than 1 percent. It
would be less than 1 percent of the total value of our aircraft carrier fleet that you would be spending to avoid some of the risks
that you talked about.
Does that make sense to you in a cost-benefit analysis?
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Yes, sir. Those are the similar numbers to
what we looked at as we were going through our analysis. And,
clearly, I think the QDR will dig into those numbers, and the analysis will be further examined.
But those are the similar numbers that we developed as we were
going through our
Mr. CRENSHAW. And I assume all that will be part of the QDR
review, all the hoursthat is great. Thank you very much.
Mr. Dicks.
Mr. DICKS. Admiral and General, good to see you again.
Tell me, what was thewhere did the Mayport CVN homeporting decisionhow did that get started? What is the history behind this?
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Well, the history behind it, Mr. Dicks, as I
mentioned, having served out in the Pacific, and put some thought
into the strategic dispersal of our forces out there, and I was involved in the decision as to where the additional aircraft carrier
that was moving to the Pacific would go.
So when I came back to the East Coast, to Fleet Forces Command, and then on to my current position as Chief of Naval Operations, I wanted to take a look at not just the distribution of our
forces throughout the Navy, but also a similar look on the East
Coast.
And that is when I got into looking at where the various types
of ships were based and particularly the aircraft carriers, because
of the one base structure that we used in Norfolk. So that
Mr. DICKS. Well, I think that is a very legitimate matter. We are
all concerned about military construction costs, how much it costs
to do these things. But I think what we did on the West Coast was
the right decision. So I better understand it.
GUAM
Congresswoman BordalloI have been meeting with her, trying

to help her a little bit, as Chairman of the Interior and Environment Subcommittee. Guam is going to be under a great deal of
pressure, and I am very concerned about it.
I understand that the Joint Guam Program Office held an industry forum on Guam last week. You know, we are going to put a lot
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01166
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1167
of troops into Guam, and I am just worried that we may not have
the infrastructure there to deal with it.
And, you know, and people would say, Well, the government of
Guam should do it. They may not be capable financially of doing
it.
Has anybody looked at this from the Navy? And the Marine
Corps is involved in this, too.
Do you have any concern about this?
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Well, my interests for Guam are primarily
to be able to support the Marine Corps, but also an interest that
I have in some flexibility for carrierwhat I call a hub, where you
could put a carrier in for short periods of time that would be operating out in the western Pacific. But I think the bulk of the
Mr. DICKS. You have got the SSGNs there, too, coming in.
Admiral ROUGHEAD. We do. The SSGNs come in. But the bulk
of the activity is
Mr. DICKS. The Marine Corps.
Admiral ROUGHEAD [continuing]. Really supported by the Marine
Corps, so I
General CONWAY. Sir, there are several issues, as you highlight.
And it is going to be examined, I believe, in the Quadrennial Defense Review. This whole issue of global laydown is one of the topic
matters, and there is a group already working it.
The question will be, how much overseas infrastructure can the
Nation afford? There are issues in Korea. There are issues in Europe and, of course, the Guamanian issue.
Our estimate is that the early estimates are way short. We have
talked in terms of $4 billion cost to the U.S. government. We think
it is going to be much more than that when you look at all the considerations, infrastructure, training opportunity, all those types of
things.
So I thinkin the first instance, the Department is going to have
to come away with a prioritized list and a certainty with regard to
whatmore of a certainty as to what those costs may be.
You are exactly right with regard to the ability of Guam to support our early estimates. And these are also some of the JGPO estimates, is that to stay on the timeline that we are on, which would
have completion roughly around 2014, that there needs to be about
$3 billion a year of contractual effort that goes into work there.
Our estimate is that the territory itself can only do about half
of that. So we are already concerned that we are not going to make
the timelines that are established out there.
And there are other issues. We are going to put potentially 8,000
to 10,000 Marines out in the middle of the Pacific. We have got to
make sure we can train out there.
Mr. DICKS. Right.
General CONWAY. The USD policy has promised us that they will
see to our concerns and that the proper EIS will be accomplished
before we conduct some of those moves that would land us in a
place without the ability to train.
But we are concerned about that. And we are going to engage
very strongly, I can assure you, in the QDR with those concerns.
Mr. DICKS. And some of these are pretty serious environmental
issues. They have got a dump that has to be closed down and a
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01167
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1168
number of other things. I just was worried, that, you know, we are
really committed to Guam, apparently, and it doesnt look to me
like they have the capability to do all the things that I think we
are expecting them to do.
So I hope you all will get the Department motivated to look at
this. And I just want to also say that, on the housing, we still
we dont have anybody living onI mean, the enlisted people still
living onwhat were those things?
The one at Birmingham was called the Guppy. You know, this
is where theythe Sailors, when they came in, they get off the
ship. They go there. I think we have them all in barracks now.
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Well, wethroughout the Navy, we do not
have all of our Sailors who are afloat, we do not have spaces for
them ashore, all of them. At the end of the
Mr. DICKS. What is the shortfall?
Admiral ROUGHEAD. It will be 5,000, Navy-wide, at the end of
2010. So we have a plan to make the investments in bringing our
Sailors ashore. We will be investing in that throughout the FYDP,
and the objective is to get all of our Sailors off the ships by 2016
so that all of our Sailors who are afloat have a place ashore.
Mr. DICKS. Has my time expired?
Mr. EDWARDS. Yes.
Mr. Farr and then Mr. Kennedy.
STABILIZATION AND RECONSTRUCTION MOS

General Conway and Admiral Roughead, thank you very much
for your service and for your leadership. Welcome to the committee
where every member thinks they are a garrison commander.
I want to commend your leadership and mention that in previous
hearings we have had hereAdmiral Mullen before you and General Petraeuswe have created a Center for Stabilization and Reconstruction studies at the Naval Postgraduate School.
Its capabilityit has been doing a lot of gaming in the sense of
bringing together NGOs, international NGOs, U.N., our military,
foreign officers that are there through the IMET program, and so
on, to look at how you deal with issues of stabilization and reconstruction.
NPS has designed a training program and offers a masters degree in it. We are finding a lot of officers who are coming out of
Iraq and Afghanistan who really want to get into this career. It is
a new career.
But the Defense Department hasnt created an MOS for it yet.
And General Petraeus was saying we really need these skill sets.
And I know you have indicated your interest. I am asking all the
combatant commanders and the commanders here to do what it
takes to create a career path.
I have talked to Secretary Chu about trying to get a sub-specialty code designation for stabilization and reconstruction career
positions. I had hoped that you could bring that up as an issue to
discuss, because the desire to get the training and masters degree
is there, but why get it if you dont have a career path?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01168
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1169
S&R AND FAO EDUCATION AND TRAINING
And it is kind of intertwined with the FAOs. And I know the

Navy and Marine Corps are sending students to NPS for FAOs
education. But I dont think that there is any requirement that
they go through this stabilization and reconstruction training.
I think there needs some sort of leadership here to bring the two
together. They are both at the same school. Well, one is funded
under Homeland Security. Excuse me. The Stabilization and Reconstruction program is funded by an earmark. And the FAO is in
your budget.
I would like to see how the Navy could bring those two programs
together using the Center for Stabilization and Reconstruction as
part of the curricula for your FAO positions.
And, also, I am asking the Navy to POM the Center for CivilMilitary Relations. It is of high value to you.
So if you could look into that, I would appreciate it.
I wondered if you know whether the demand for Navy FAOs
matches the number of students that are in the pipeline. Admiral
Mullens was encouraging people to get this training, and then
I dont know. Do you
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Well, we have placed a significant emphasis
on our Foreign Area Officer (FAO) program. And we have
Mr. FARR. These are Foreign Area Officers.
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Foreign Area Officers. And their training
will be a combination of language training and then assignments.
I know that, within the Navy, I have caused our major headquarters to look at restructuring their organization so that we have
a career path flow for Foreign Area Officers.
I have been in the Navy long enough to have seen us attempt
FAO programs on a couple of occasions, and they have not succeeded simply because we didnt provide for the career progression
for these young men and women who have a passion for the regions
in which they are going to work and then not being able to realize
the type of career progression.
So we are working on that. But I am pleased with where we are
with our FAO program. In fact, we are getting ready to do another
screening board for FAOs here in June to select another group of
Foreign Area Officers. And I believe that we are on a good
path
Mr. FARR. Would you be able to name the naval postgraduate
school the Center for FAO Education, if you could designate that.
I dont know what it takes, but
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Sir, well, I would saywe dont send all of
our officers to P.G. school. Some
Mr. FARR. Go to regular
Admiral ROUGHEAD [continuing]. Go to other colleges and universities. And then, as we get into, particularly in the FAO program,
I think being able to tailor where those individuals can go based
on their backgrounds, future assignments.
But I do believe that the post-graduate school is an extraordinary
capability
Mr. FARR. See, you have the DLI there, the Defense Language
Institute.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01169
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1170
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Exactly. Yes, sir.
Mr. FARR. Monterey Institute of International Studies
Mr. FARR. You have this consortium of intellectual capacity in
Monterey that could really do well in producing the curriculum and
adjusting it to global needs. And if you created the FAO center
there, I think we could really get a better bang for our buck.
General CONWAY. I certainly support the idea, sir, of the stabilization and reconstruction degree. And I think that weour approach is a little different. Because our commanders have wound
up doing this so often in the absence of other elements of American
power, we tend to decentralize the effort, and we give everybody
some.
I could still see the value of a special staff officer that had this
MOS, though, and this capability. So we certainly, I think, want to
take a look at that.
General CONWAY. Our FAOs go to different places for language
school. Many do go out to NPG, but some study right here in Washington, D.C. So we would have to look at percentages, I think, before we could perhaps build the lever on that beam, a center for
all FAOs, unless we have different qualifications or qualities in our
officers.
Mr. Kennedy.
DDG1000
Mr. KENNEDY. Thank you, Chairman.

Thank you, and welcome. Admiral Roughead, it is a pleasure seeing you. General Conway, thank you both for your service to your
country.
Admiral Roughead, first, if you could, just comment briefly on
General Gates plan to truncate the DDG1000, complete the third
ship, and what you envision to be the future service combatant
moving forward with the technology that we have invested in so far
in that ship. How do you foresee us moving forward for the Navy,
in terms of that future service combatant ship?
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Yes, sir. As you know, Secretary Gates, in
his announcement, he mentioned the truncation of three ships and
then the restart of DDG51 line. And that also included an alignment of the work, the construction work, with the ships, the DDG
1000s going to bath for construction, to be able to take advantage
of the efficiencies that are there.
As I have discussed beforeand we have had the opportunity to
talk about itI think the technologies that are in the DDG1000
are going to help us inform not just future combatant classes, but
I think we will be able to inform other ship classes with that.
Improvements that can be made to the DDG51 will also allow
us to take that information, what we learned from the DDG1000,
and help us better approach future combatant designs. So that is
how I see that playing out in the future.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01170
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1171
NAVY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS
Mr. KENNEDY. Terrific. I know what a champion you are of education. Obviously, professional development is so crucial.
Can you tell us a little bit about how you see the evolution of
professional education in the Navy, as we see special warfare becoming so much a bigger part of modern warfare, and how your
leadership is bringing in and ushering in a whole new sense of
kind of strategic thinking, in terms of the individual Sailor, and
how they have critical development skills and how they have leadership training skills and the importance of having that as opposed
to just the doctrine training that they have had maybe in the past?
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Yes, sir. And I am very proud of the institutions that are in the United States Navy that get to that. All the
serviceor all the services have their Service Academies, and I am
very proud of what we have done with the Naval Academy.
But what we have done with the Postgraduate School of what I
call raising all boats, let the rising tide raise all boats, getting some
more structure at postgraduate schools, standing it up as a Naval
Station so that we can focus on the educational and development
process and work the infrastructure with another piece.
But I am also extraordinarily proud of what we have been able
to do with our Naval War College, which I consider to be the center
of maritime thought in the world and naval thought in the world.
We have at the War College established a new look at the operational level of war, the training that we have going on there.
We have put significant emphasis into our international program
at the War College. And in fact, just last week, I hosted all of the
international students here in Washington. That experience and
what we are able to expose our personnel to is absolutely extraordinary.
And as you know, we are going to be hosting the International
Seapower Symposium up in Newport, make all of that as part of
an educational process.
What we have also done in Newport is that we have taken our
Senior Enlisted Academy and aligned it more with the War College. Not that I am trying to teach every master chief how to become the greatest strategic thinker in the world, but rather to be
able to take that educational and intellectual effort that takes place
at the War College and have our senior enlisted benefit from that.
We are also incentivizing additional language capability among
our force. We talked about the FAO program and aligning our command structure so that, when somebody comes out of the field, they
have a place to go and apply that which they have learned.
So I think that the way that we are coming at our intellectual
and development of our Sailors is to take thosewhat I consider
to be three extraordinary institutionsand make sure that we are
looking at them as a set, resourcing them in ways that allows them
to maximize the value they have to the Navy and the nation.
And so that is what my approach has been. And I think, in the
year-and-a-half that I have been CNO, we have made some significant changes at the Postgraduate School. We have made some significant changes at the War College.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01171
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1172
But it all has to tie together, and that is what I have charged
my Vice Chief of Naval Operations who now sits on a coordinating
board to make sure that we are not just doing eachs, but that we
have this incredible capability and we are using it in unison.
Mr. KENNEDY. Well, I really, again, once again, appreciate your
service. And thank you for that description. I think you are absolutely right. It is really proving to be a big success.
I also appreciate your work for diversity in the Navy and in the
special forces, too, seeing the importance of that, and it is being reflected, and it is very important. Thank you.
Mr. Crenshaw.
HIGH RATE OF DEPLOYMENT IMPACT ON MORALE
Mr. CRENSHAW. Thank you. This is maybe a question for both of

you all. This higher rate of deployment, obviously, impacts the Soldiers, the Sailors, their families, the equipment, operational facilities.
And so the first question, I think, is just maybe could you comment on how the morale of the Sailors and the troops have been
impacted by this high rate of deployment? Lets start with
General CONWAY. Sir, we are pretty pleased. We check about a
dozen what I call indicators or metric each month to determine resiliency of the force, and we are pretty pleased with what we see.
Now, I would offer that we have some cultural advantages over
the Army, which is the other ground force and whose deployment
to dwell approximates ours. And we do 7-month deployments, and
our troops really like that. Our families really like that.
And after a Marine has been in the operational forces for about
3, maybe 4 years, we rotate them out to do something else. We
send them to the headquarters or to a training command or to recruit or something else. And that is giving them a break and having them spend some time with his family and his children, so that
when he comes back at the end of that time, he is sort of raring
to go. And that seems to be working very well for us.
The leading-edge indicators, I think, as to whether or not we are
accomplishing what we want to do are re-enlistments of both the
first-term force and the career force. And I can point to with some
pride, I think, that we closed out our first-term re-enlistments 2
months ago, and last month we closed out our career force. That
is on the fiscal year.
So halfway through the fiscal year, you know, we are getting all
of those that we want. And those numbers are way up compared
to what they used to be. They used to be about 25 percent of the
first-term force. Now it is about 35 percent.
So it tells me, the families are happy. They are enduring it well.
They sense that we care. We are building the types of things to
make quality of life satisfactory for them. And so that is sort of the
good news side of the story.
Now, I will tell you that there are some trends that we see
withvery recently with divorce, which is slightly up this year. In
the 7 war years thus far, we have led the other Services with the
lowest percentage of divorces, but suddenly this year we are leading them in the other direction. And I want to watch that closely.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01172
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1173
Suicides were up last year. It runs a bit of a sine wave, but last
year we had 42 suicides, most of them as a result of failed relationships.
And I will be honest with you: just in preparation for coming before this committee, I note apparently alarming rise in what we
consider driving under the influence. So it may be that our Marines
are drinking more.
Whether or not that is related to dep tempo and the war, I dont
know yet. The DUI at this point encompasses two categories. One
is, you know, you had too many sips of champagne on the way back
from the wedding and you got pulled over because one of your
lights was out. The other one is, if you had a .20 and you in no
way should have been on the road. We have got to cull those stats
down to see what is what here.
But there are a couple of things that we have got to dig into to
make sure that we keep a resilient force and we dont embarrass
ourselves.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Admiral.
Admiral ROUGHEAD. We watch our deployment ratios very closely. And for us, by and large throughout the Navy, we are deploying
and providing the time back home for our Sailors that meets a very
good standard for us.
There are some communities that we have that are being pressed
harder than others. Clearly, our SEALs are very busy. Explosive
ordnance disposal are busy. Intelligence officers are in great demand, because they are able to support more than just the Navy.
But I am pleased with what we have been doing and how the
tone of the force is reflected in surveys that we do quite frequently.
Similar to General Conway, good positive trends. Retention is extraordinarily high. Attrition is down. I will also tell you that the
economy is a factor in that. But we see trends that really go beyond
the economy.
In our case, for some of the things that General Conway mentioned, we have seen a slight rise in suicides. And in the month of
February, we had more than we had seen in any given month, but
now we are back down to the norm.
So I have a group that looks at that from many different perspectives, and we are trying to better understand it, because our suicide demographic is very different than the other services. It tends
to be more senior. And we are getting our arms around that.
We have seen significant declines in vehicular accidents, remarkable declines in vehicular accidents. And we have also, you know,
contrary to the Marine Corps, we have seen a drop in our DUIs in
recent months.
So the trends that I see are good. And the tone of the force is
good. I never take it for granted. We always have to be looking,
and then, whenever we begin to see an indication, we have to get
into it, peel the onion back, and figure out what is going on.
Mr. CRENSHAW. When you have got these kind of strains in
terms of deployment, does it leave you in a position, say, with infrastructure or operational facilities where you are asking for funds
for higher combat priorities? Do you sense there is any less money
for some of the infrastructure or some of the facilities?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01173
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1174
It is a question I would ask youI cant ask you to comment on
a budget request, but are there things that arent in there that
maybe ought to be there because of the way the priorities are right
now, in terms of combat deployment?
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Well, I would say that thethrough what
this committee has been able to do, you know, taking care of our
kids is huge. And what you have allowed us to be able to do to increase the number of childcare facilities is significant.
We have taken extra money because of the strains that we have
seen not just on deployments, but also kind of anticipating the economic effects on our force. We have increased in our Family Service
Centers the number of counselors, and we have seen the utilization
of those counselors go up. And as a result of that, we have seen
our people, I believe, making better decisions.
So we are trying to lead the target, get the things in place that
allow our families and Sailors to better address the issues that
they face as a member of the U.S. military and just as an American
citizen.
So I think we have been able to target those investments in ways
that we have been able to minimize and mitigate some of these
pressures that they are under.
General CONWAY. I will give you a two-part answer, sir. There
is not a Marine that wears this uniform that doesnt want to go to
Afghanistan now, and that includes our married guys.
But we realize all along that the families are the most brittle
part of this whole equation. I mean, the Marine will go do what he
is trained to do, but our families determine whether or not we keep
that resilient force because, if they are going back to Texas, they
put young Johnny in a heck of a strain, you know, to decide, does
he go or stay?
So we have probably put more resources than ever before against
our families and against quality of life and professional family
readiness officers, increased childcare center, base infrastructure
that makes quality of life that much better, you know, while the
Marine is gone.
And it sent a strong signal. I mean, it is a psychological signal
as well as a tangible signal when they see that crane, you know,
over the site.
But all in all, I think it has been very healthy for us. And it is
because money has been made available, I think, commensurately
recognizing the need.
DOD HEALTH CARE SYSTEM MODERNIZATION
General Conway, this subcommitteeand I am proud of this

took the initiative to see that we need to recapitalize, modernize
our DoD health care system. So it wasnt an OMB request, but it
was this committees request. I think it reflected the needs we were
being told by commanders in the field for new hospitals.
Part of that $2.2 billion is going to Pendleton and Lejeune, as
you know. Would you just say for the record whether that money
is needed and those hospitals do need modernization? And will that
be a significant service to your Marines and their families?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01174
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1175
General CONWAY. Happy to do so, sir, because it is a tremendous,
first of all, capacity that our families will be able to take advantage
of at our two major bases throughout the whole Marine Corps.
Secondlyand it gets back to the ranking members question
it sends a tremendous signal to our families that, hey, we get it.
The Navy is doing wonderful work for us, forward-deployed as
they are, with the docs and the corpsmen. They are right where we
need them to be.
But in the meantime, our families are suffering a little bit. The
specialty doctor that is tough for the Navy to contract to go to Jacksonville, North Carolina, is just not always there.
The lines are longer for virtually any kind of care because the
numbers of providers are less. So I think that these hospitals are
going to be tremendous adds to our Marine Corps and Navy community that live there with us. And it is money, I think, very wisely spent, is the way I would categorize it.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you for that.
GUAM
My final question would be to follow up on Mr. Dicks questions

about Guam. The increased cost for infrastructure at Guam, has
that been reflected in deliberations on the fiscal year 2010 budget
request? I know you cant tell us what is in that budget request officially, but will those numbers reflect that additional cost? Or is
there going to have to be more work done and then later adaptation to what the real costs are going to be?
General CONWAY. You are right, sir. We were asked not to speak
about the budget. I think it drops soon, and we will be able to talk
more.
But there was X amount of money that was applied to Guam.
And I think that money ispending the discussion and QDR.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
General CONWAY. I think, again, as I answered Congressman
Dicks question, there are competing priorities. The department is
going to have to decide, in conjunction with the national treaties
and agreements and so forth, which should take priority and which
need to be funded.
So the real costs are in the out-years. And so nothing, I think
it is fair to say, would be done in 2010 that would anchor us one
way or another. So the QDR discussion, I think in that regard, is
very timely.
Mr. EDWARDS. Good. Thank you.
Mr. Farr.
INTERNATIONAL MILITARY EDUCATION TRAINING PROGRAM
Mr. FARR. How important is it to both of you to have the International Military Education Training program, where we bring foreign officers to study at
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Hugely, Mr. Farr. There, in my mind, as we
seek to work with other militaries around the world, there is probably no other program that allows us to be able to develop the
types of relationships that we need with foreign militaries.
I was in the Pacific when the tsunami of 2004 hit. As you know,
we had had a hiatus with our IMET with Indonesia. That was the
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01175
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1176
largest relief operation the U.S. military has ever undertaken, and
we had people that we knew, that we had worked with, that we
had built up trust with in the various countries in the region that
we could call. And it set the wheels in motion.
When we tried to contact individuals in Indonesia, it was as if
we didnt even know where to start. And it is the trust. You cannotthere isntthe only switch there is for trust is to turn it off,
but you just cant flick a switch and turn trust on. It is built over
time. It is built over lifetimes. And I cant endorse IMET enough.
Mr. FARR. Our problem is it is funded through the State Department, not through the Department of Defense. And that budget has
been so squeezed and competes for everything else the State Department is doing. I just passed a note to Mr. Dicks that I think
it is important for the DoD to fund it.
General CONWAY. If I can, sir, I will emphasize the point with
a negative. I visited General Kiyani twice in Pakistan. And it is
considered that we have lost, in his terms, a generation of Pakistani officers who have cordial or even friendly relationships with
the United States because we did not do that for a number of years
with the country of Pakistan. Now, look to how important that
country is to us today.
The military undergirds relationships when, you know, our relationships with other nations may be rather sine wave. That military connectivity is always there. It is always pretty good. And it
sometimes takes time, but it almost invariably comes back. That is
the value to it.
And where it does not occur, such as in a situation like Pakistan,
we find ourselves scrambling to try to regain it. And there is always going to be a little bit of reluctance do that because the trust
just isnt there.
Mr. FARR. Well, I hope that you will also make your concerns
known to Secretary Clinton, whose budget has it.
You have the Cooperative Strategy for the 21st Century
Seapower, which speaks to fostering and sustaining cooperative relationships with international partners. I wondered what you are
doing to increase the student enrollment in that program. They
both go to the War College, following up on Congressman Kennedys statement, and to the Naval Postgraduate School, and what
we need to do to get more countries to be sending students to that
program.
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Sir, I would say that it iswhen I look at
the navies with whom we work, I encourage them to take advantage of the Postgraduate School. For many of the countries, that
can be a fairly expensive proposition. So I think, you know, how we
can reach out to those countries who perhaps dont have the resources and then how they can be funded
Mr. FARR. And that is funded separately from IMET, right? That
is in your domain, in the Defense Departments domain?
Admiral ROUGHEAD. I would like to get back to you on all of the
specifics, because there are many differentI have someone to lay
out all of the various funding mechanisms that we have to engage
with foreign countries. And it becomes a pretty complex roadmap.
But I think there iswhat we do at the Postgraduate School is
important, the international program at the War College. We have
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01176
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1177
started our Surface Warfare Officers School, an international
course for department heads. That is extremely important, because
that brings them in at the lieutenant level. That means that they
have a whole career of having a relationship with the United
States Navy.
I have also invited navies to participate in even some of our
shorter courses, executive business courses, where we can bring
some of their young leaders in to see how we do things within our
Navy and in the business of the Navy.
We also have foreign officers that go through flight training. So
we are always looking for opportunities to do that. Moreover, we
have been deploying shipsfor example, right now, off the west
coast of Africa, we have one of our large amphibious ships that we
call Africa Partnership Station. For 6 months, it is working with
the regional navies there.
The hospital ship USNS Comfort is now on its way down into
South America. All of those add up in this building trust and building cooperation that I think is so important for our future and for
the future of all countries around the world.
General CONWAY. That is the point I would make, sir. It needs
to be outside just the formal education process. It has to be constant. It has to be in earnest, and you have got to work at it.
We recently had a sea-basing conference, which we think is an
exciting new concept, and we invited 16 different nations to come
in, because we think that coalition warfare is the way of the future
and that they ought to understand what we are doing and see if
it has value to them.
I think in every case we got good comments from these people
in terms of how they might see the value of seabasing, how they
might plug in, and it has caused us to alter our thinking some, in
terms of how we would fold in a coalition type of effort.
So it is those types of things just repetitively across the calendar
and throughout the Services that I think really start to cement
those bonds.
Mr. FARR. Well, I appreciate it that support I have learned in
Congress that we always fund warfare, but when you get down to
the educational component, that is at the bottom.
And I think what is becoming increasingly clear in the last few
years is that we need to plus up our education, the relevancy of
education, and the training to go with it. And it is a challenge because it is not the way we designed these programs to be on top
rather than on bottom. And I think it is going to take your leadership to prioritize it.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you. Well said.
Mr. Dicks.
Mr. DICKS. Admiral, I wanted to also say, we appreciate your
coming out to the state of Washington on a couple visits. And it has
been very well received out there.
And, at the Bangor base, we not only have a lot of Sailors, but
we have some very good Marines, by the way, General.
General CONWAY. I was out there about 2 months ago.
Mr. DICKS. Yes, and they have increased the numbers out there
because of the security issues. And it is very interesting to see how
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01177
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1178
you are protecting those submarines going in and out of the Trident Base. I think it is a good plan.
USS HARTFORD
Let me ask you this, Admiralwhat plans does the Navy have
in place for repair and return to service of the USS Hartford?
Admiral ROUGHEAD. The USS Hartford is making her way back
from the gulf. She is in the Mediterranean right now. USS Hartford is the submarine that collided with the USS New Orleans.
And we have been looking at a series of options for her and the
cost of that repair to her. And she will likely be repaired in a private facility. That is the way we are leaning now. And the contractual vehicles will be firmed up.
Mr. DICKS. The submarine force has realigned its focus to the Pacific AOR by implementing a 60/40 split on homeporting plans.
Does the surface force intend any kind of similar realignment?
Admiral ROUGHEAD. What we have looked at, Mr. Dicks, as you
know, we have realigned our carriers, realigning the submarines.
This look that I did on our strategic posture, we believe that the
surface ships right now are about right.
MAINTENANCE
Mr. DICKS. Okay. A recent INSURV inspection indicated that

Navy maintenance at its currently funded level may not be keeping
pace with the increasing strains imposed by our tempo of operations. Does the Navy intend to increase itswell, you cant talk
about that. I mean, are you concerned about that? Do you think we
are keeping up with naval maintenance?
Admiral ROUGHEAD. What I would say, sir, is that the INSURV
report that is being discussed in the press is one that is on its way
up to me now. But when you look at some of the information, the
trends and the performance is not alarming. It is pretty consistent
with where we have been.
But one of the things that we have done, a few years ago, we did
away with the organization that took an engineering life cycle approach to our surface ship maintenance. We have a very structured
way of looking at our aircraft carrier maintenance. We have a very
structured way of looking at our submarine maintenance. And we
stopped doing that with the surface ships.
Because of some things that I was seeing as a fleet commander
and then coming into this position, I have re-established that structure and that organization, and we are now going to be putting our
conventional surface ships into that engineered approach.
I do believe that, once we get into that, it will likely indicate that
we will be seeing more resources required for ship maintenance.
But I want it based on a good engineering approach.
Mr. DICKS. And one final thing. You know, I come from Bremerton, Washington. We have the shipyard there. You know, I think
we have done a lot on buildings and there is a lot of concern about
earthquakes in our part of the world. That is seriousbut I worry
a little bit about it. Are we modernizing the shipyards with the
kind of equipment that is necessary to do the work in the future
years? Do you think we are putting enough into that, I mean, kind
of the infrastructure of these yards?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01178
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1179
Admiral ROUGHEAD. I believe that our investment plans for our
industrial facilities are keeping pace with the ships that we are
doing, the types of maintenance that we are doing. We are always
looking for new technologies, better ways to do it.
And I think as those technologies and approaches become available, we should take advantage of it, because we have to look at
total life cycle cost. We simply just cant ignore that.
So I will continue to look to ensure that we are making the right
investments for our shipyards.
Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. KENNEDY. Thank you.
I have two parochial questions, but some general ones, too. The
general ones are on the Medical Corps, whether you have concerns
about whether you are getting enough doctors, nurses, and so forth
in the Medical Corps to serve your Sailors and Marines.
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Yes, sir. A couple of years ago, we were
challenged with our medical recruiting. That has turned. We put
a tremendous amount of effort into that, and we are seeing really
good numbers this year.
Mr. KENNEDY. Good.
Admiral ROUGHEAD. So, again, we have to keep on that. Plus, we
are also growing our medical capabilities for Marine Corps growth.
Mr. KENNEDY. Terrific.
Admiral ROUGHEAD. So right now, we are doing quite well.
EDUCATION
Mr. KENNEDY. You know, my good friend, Sam Farr, was talking
about it, education. It seems as though we do so much to educate
the best and brightest in our country in the military. It would be
so great to think about ways to keep them in some way after they
leave the military and tying them into civil service of some kind
and ways ofand education system and tying them to our communities.
I know so many of them continue to serve our communities in
so many ways. But to make sure that we keep track, we are trying
to navigate the transparency just in medical records between, obviously, the active DoD and the V.A. But it would also be great to
have transparency between our servicemen and women who we
have invested so much in and we put such great stock in, as the
continuing assets that they are for our country, after they have
served us in the armed forces, to continue to be there as an asset,
if you will, in civilian life in some form.
With this great, new national service bill that we passed, it
might be interesting for us to look at ways that we might be able
to tap into all that they have to offer, in terms of the great education that they have received and all that they have to offer, in
terms of their experience leadership-wise, you know, and education-wise.
When you think about all of the young people in our communities
who could benefit from them as role models, it would just be tremendous. I know just in the mentoring area, we are working so
hard in our inner cities to tie up some of ouryou know, young
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01179
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1180
people into mentors in the community, if we could just facilitate,
if you will, some of these veterans with some of these kids who are,
maybe in need of a role model.
It would just be terrific. And it might not be anything more than
just making that introduction to a local Boys and Girls Club or
something of that sort.
I know that the Junior ROTC program is fantastic in myNewport you would think is, white bread and Americas first resort. We
have the highest public housing in the state, and it is the greatest
opportunity for kids who never would everyou would never have
the opportunity to see the ocean, to get out there and go sailing all
summer long.
And if it werent for the Navys base there, there are many kids
in the inner city, and they consider Newport inner city. They would
not otherwise go to the shoreline.
We actually have kids from Providence come down and participate in the Navy ROTC program, never would otherwise have a
chance, in a state that is called the Ocean State, to participate in
being able to sail on Narragansett Bay.
They learn discipline, and they learn leadership, and they get an
introduction to the United States Navy. So I would just encourage
continued Navy ROTC. To the extent that you can do it in areas
where there isnt maybe, easy access for, folks that may have a legacy of Navymaybe like my communitybut maybe other communities of diversity, that would be great, because we all know that
we need to have more diversity wherever we can, especially for the
newer demands on our Navy that will invariably come in the developing world.
We need to look like the developing world that we are going to
be going into and, working in. With the countries that we are going
to go to, we need to look like those countries that we are going to
be going into.
And so it basically behooves us to inculcate early thatand I can
tell you, 85 percent, 90 percent of my applications for the Naval
Academy are all legacy kids who have beenwhose parents and
grandparents and great-grandparents were in the Navy. And that
is great.
But I want to see more kids from the inner city who have never
heard or had one of their family members been in the Navy before
think about the Navy as an opportunity in terms of their future
and the opportunities that it holds out.
If the Navy ROTC was out there more, I guarantee that more of
them would think about the Navy as an opportunity.
Admiral ROUGHEAD. Sir, if I could, this past yearbecause I
share your passion on thisI took some money from our personnel
account and I stood up 20 additional Junior Navy ROTC
Mr. KENNEDY. Thank you so much.
Admiral ROUGHEAD. A modest number, but we targeted those
areas that you are talking about exactly. Where can we allow
young men and women to see the Navy, see the opportunity that
the Navy offers? Whether they elect to come in or not, that is their
decision. But at least they are exposed to it.
We also sponsor a program called Starbase Atlantis
Mr. KENNEDY. Yes.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01180
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1181
Admiral ROUGHEAD [continuing]. That brings middle-school kids
in to expose them to space and aviation.
And there is another program that I am very interested in working with the initial organizers of it. It is called Naval Operations
Deep Submergence, where you take middle-school kids and teach
them about what it takes to operate submarines, not the warfare
aspect, but navigation and oceanography and things like that, because I really do believe that we have great things to offer young
people.
Those are the ways we do it. And I have been able to realign
some money, and I am very pleased to
Mr. KENNEDY. Thank you so much. Thank you so much.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Members, let me ask you. We can do this two ways. We can submit any additional questions in writing and adjourn. There will be
three votes. Or, if anyone has a question you would like to follow
up with in person, I will be glad to come back.
What is your
Mr. CRENSHAW. I would be happy to submit the questions in
writing.
Mr. EDWARDS. Anybody have any questions you would like to ask
them first?
If not, Admiral Roughead, thank you.
General Conway, thank you for
Admiral ROUGHEAD. And, Mr. Chairman, if I could, earlier question I said that we would be beyond our substandard BDQs by
2016. That is when we are going to have everybody ashore. And I
would like to take for the record when we will have cleared that,
but I just wanted to correct that before
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you for that.
We stand adjourned.
[Questions for the record submitted by Chairman Edwards to Admiral Roughead]
BARRACKS
Question. Will you formulate a master plan for buying down the 42 percent of barracks that have been assessed as substandard? When will such a plan be completed?
Answer. I will formulate a master plan to address substandard barracks in PR
11. My objective is to eliminate substandard barracks by 2020, however that will
depend upon balancing available funding with competing Navy priorities.
Question. What is the Navys definition of standard barracks?
Answer. The Navy uses the DoD standard for permanent party barracks, which
sets a minimum of 90 square feet per person and requires each Service member to
have his or her own sleeping room.
Question. Do you have a target date for bringing Homeport Ashore barracks up
to the DoD standard of 90 square feet per person?
Answer. Our current priority is to achieve the Homeport Ashore goal of getting
all Sailors currently living aboard ships into accommodations ashore by 2016 at the
Interim Assignment Policy (IAP) standard of 55 square feet per person. The Navys
long-term bachelor housing goal is to comply with the DoD standard of providing
a private sleeping room for each Sailor at a minimum of 90 square feet per person.
Our plan to achieve that standard will be developed in POM12.
Question. Will you seek an expansion of barracks PPV authority beyond the three
authorized projects?
Answer. To date, the Navy has executed two of the three authorized PPV pilot
projects and is conducting a business case analysis to determine the most cost effective approach to meeting projected Bachelor Housing requirements through the
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01181
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1182
third PPV project. The business case analysis will inform future decisions regarding
additional PPV authority.
EAST COAST CVN HOMEPORTING
Question. With regard to CVN homeporting on the east coast, what specifically
will the QDR address? Is it simply a question of validating the Navys preferred alternative?
Answer. The 2010 QDR will address the need for strategic dispersal of the carrier
force in the broad context of future threats, future Navy force structure, and cost
effectiveness.
Question. What is the Navys most up-to-date one-time cost estimate of implementing the preferred alternative? Please break down your response by military
construction, OMN, PCS, etc.
Answer. The Final Environmental Impact Statement, issued in 2008, estimated
one-time MILCON costs for implementing the preferred alternative at $456M, including:
P187; Dredging ($48M)
P186; Foxtrot Wharf Improvements ($39M)
P250; Controlled Industrial Facility ($139M)
P251; Ship Maintenance Support Facilities ($157M)
P502A; Parking Garage ($28M) and P503; Road Improvements ($15M)
Planning and Design ($30M)
P187 channel dredging would provide dredging of Wharf F, the Mayport turning
basin, entrance channel and Jacksonville Harbor Bar Cut 3 to a depth of 52 ft to
allow safe navigation and vessel maneuverability for all ships that currently dock
at Naval Station Mayport. The cost of this project was updated and included in the
FY2010 Presidents Budget Submission for $46.303M.
In addition to the one-time MILCON costs, there is an estimated $85M one-time
maintenance cost for Management & Industrial Plant Equipment and an estimated
$24M one-time cost for Permanent Change of Station associated with relocating personnel.
Question. What are the new recurring costs of the preferred alternative?
Answer. The Final Environmental Impact Statement, issued in 2008, estimated
the total recurring costs would be $20.4M. This amount includes Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization/Base Operating Support (SRM/BOS), operations, and
maintenance costs and also reflects a reduction in BAH as compared to housing the
CVN ships crew in Mayport area vice Norfolk area.
END STRENGTH
Question. On April 6, 2009, Secretary of Defense Gates announced a series of
budget and policy decisions for the Department, which included a decision to halt
reductions in Navy end strength. What was the Navys planned end strength, and
how does the decision by Secretary Gates affect that?
Answer. In FY09, Navys active duty end strength was on a planned glideslope
to 322,000 personnel by the end of FY13. The FY10 National Defense Authorization
Request seeks to stabilize the force at an active duty end strength authorization of
328,800 personnel for Navy.
OUTLYING LANDING FIELD
FOR
EAST COAST CARRIER LANDING PRACTICE
Question. When does the Navy expect to produce a Record of Decision for the new
OLF site in Virginia/North Carolina?
Answer. A Record of Decision for the new OLF is currently planned for the latter
half of 2010. Navy is currently working with multiple federal and state agencies to
complete data collection and analysis to ensure we have done the due diligence necessary to make an informed decision.
Question. What is the Navys target date for commencing operations at the new
OLF?
Answer. The target date for commencing operations at the new OLF is CY 2015.
[Questions for the record from Chairman Edwards to General

Conway]
BARRACKS
Question. What is your total deficit (after accounting for all currently funded military construction) of adequate barracks spaces?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01182
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1183
Answer. The Marine Corps total requirement for bachelor enlisted quarters
(BEQ) is 93,300 spaces. With the $1.168B and over 12,000 spaces funded by Congress in FY 2009, the Marine Corps remaining adequate BEQ space deficit is approximately 7,000.
Question. As you noted in your testimony, you will meet your target end-strength
of 202,000 by the end of fiscal year 2009. Clearly the Grow the Force military construction program has not proceeded at the same pace. How will you accommodate
the bigger force until the GTF MILCON program is fully completed? Will you seek
to accelerate your barracks modernization program?
Answer. The Marine Corps is handling the acceleration of its force growth
through use of temporary facilities and other measures such as delaying demolition
of older facilities. With the increased retention rates, the enlisted demographic within the Marine Corps has shifted to a more senior force with the ability to live on
the economy. Additionally, at their discretion, local commanders may use tools such
as allowing junior NCOs to live on the economy or assigning more than two Marines
per room for temporary periods. Current deployment cycles have also helped alleviate space crunches across our installations.
The Marine Corps is accelerating its barracks modernization program and will
soon reap the benefit of an aggressive FY 2008 and FY 2009 construction schedule.
Question. Do you have a standard for training barracks? If so, what is the deficit
of adequate training barracks spaces, and what is the estimated MILCON requirement to buy this down?
Answer. An adequate barracks for recruits is an open-bay barracks in good repair.
Congress has provided both MCRD Parris Island and MCRD San Diego Military
Construction funding in FY 2009 for Recruit Barracks. At MCRD Parris Island the
funding will complete the replacement of the 3rd Recruit Battalion barracks and
provide additional recruit barracks spaces that will support the increased throughput generated by our end-strength growth. At MCRD San Diego the Recruit Support
Barracks and the Recruit Remedial Fitness Center will free-up recruit barracks
space at MCRD San Diego by consolidating injured recruits into their own barracks.
We are grateful for the additional recruit barracks you added to our program in FY
2009.
Approximately $140 million in Military Construction is proposed in FY 2010 to
complete the improvements at our recruit depots to fully support recruit quality of
life. These improvements include two additional barracks projects and a new mess
hall proposed at Camp Pendleton, Edson Range (where we also train recruits from
MCRD San Diego) as well as a mess hall addition at MCRD San Diego. Thank you
in advance for your support of our FY 2010 program.
At the completion of these projects (approximately 2012) all barracks at MCRD
Parris Island and MCRD San Diego and Edson Range at Camp Pendleton should
be adequate.
GUAM
Question. You stated in your assessment that the U.S. MILCON share of the realignment of Marines from Okinawa to Guam will be much more than $4 billion.
What specific needs have been underestimated, in your opinion?
Answer. It is important to understand the context of the original $10.27B cost for
relocating Marines to Guam. This cost estimate represents only the infrastructure
and facilities development costs for the relocating Marines. It was developed at the
very early stages of the proposed relocation before any significant planning had occurred or comprehensive assessment of the existing conditions on Guam, including
detailed project site locations or engineering and environmental data.
As planning has advanced, we have been able to more completely identify many
of the costs involved in the relocation. These costs remain fluid as we continue our
planning and environmental efforts. With regards to construction costs, for example,
the compressed construction timeline (7 years to 4) along with the need to import
many of the construction workers requires workforce housing and logistics support
for the massive workforce that will be required on Guam during the short duration
construction build up. This is anticipated to cost approximately 8% of the primary
and supporting facilities costs. Additional construction costs include the new Navy
requirement that all new facilities in the Department of Navy be constructed to a
LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Silver certification. This
requirement typically increases the facilities construction costs by approximately
8.5%. There is also a Guam Gross Receipt Tax assessed on all construction projects.
This may result in an assessment of 4% on the sum costs of the total primary and
support facilities for all construction projects. Finally, as the planning develops, it
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01183
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1184
appears as if the project will require major improvements to existing roads and utilities.
In addition to these additional construction costs, as we have evaluated alternatives and assessed their various impacts as a consequence of preparing the Environmental Impact Study, we may have unknown mitigation costs and the need to
acquire additional land to insure adequate training capacity for the force laydown
for the associated training ranges and infrastructure, and to compensate for environmentally protected lands. Finally, there are the numerous requests by GovGuam
that remain undefined, with much or all of the discussions being interagency.
It is anticipated that the net change from all of the above will add up to several
billion dollars in construction costs over the original $10.27B estimate. Since GOJs
investment is capped, all additional construction costs will be funded via the U.S.
government.
Question. What specific questions will the QDR address with respect to the Guam
realignment?
Answer. The SECDEF has directed the QDRs Global Posture working group to
consider two issues related to the Guam realignment: 1) The Asia-Pacific Training
shortfall, to include shortfalls on Guam, as well as, joint training shortfalls across
the Pacific and 2) Grow the Force implications on the Guam agreements and
PACOM.
BLOUNT ISLAND
Question. The Marine Corps has indicated a need for about $125 million in
MILCON improvements to Blount Island. What is the importance of this installation and the identified requirements?
Answer. Blount Island is a national strategic asset and key to Marine Corps expeditionary capability and future force regeneration.
The Marine Corps acquisition of Blount Island in 2004 offered the Marine Corps
substantial opportunity for realizing the full potential of the installation and its logistics support facilities. The Marine Corps has already expanded the use of the installation from its traditional role as the home of United States Marine Corps
prepositioning to service as the logistics hub for all Marine Corps equipment returning from OIF/OEF. Additionally, it has most recently served as the deployment
platform for Marine Corps equipment deploying to OEF utilizing the facility as the
Seaport of Embarkation as well as the Seaport of Disembarkation.
Blount Island will play a major role in Marine Corps equipment reset efforts. The
most important facility requirements to support reset efforts at Blount Island include approximately $155 million of projects to improve existing operational capacity
and maintenance operations, provide adequate storage and supply space to properly
account for equipment, improve efficiency of ship on load and off load operations,
and increase throughput capacity.
These construction projects are tied directly to the war effort and are consistent
with the projected volume. Construction improvements include wash rack expansion, hardstand expansion, container staging space, warehousing, hazardous material handling, expansion and improvements to ship berthing and additional depth
dredging in order to accommodate larger ships. These requirements were previously
identified in the installations long range facilities plan to improve the installations
efficiency in executing its preposition mission. However, these projects are needed
sooner to support critical near term reset efforts.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01184
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2

SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
WITNESS
HON. ERIC SHINSEKI, SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
STATEMENT
OF THE
CHAIRMAN

order and want to welcome Secretary Shinseki and your leadership
team to our subcommittee. It is good to have all of you here, and
thank you for the work you do on behalf of Americas veterans.
The purpose of todays hearing is to hear the administrations
budget request for fiscal year 2010. We have seen the raw numbers
on that and look forward to hearing some of the specific details behind those budget numbers.
I will make a very brief opening comment before recognizing Mr.
Wamp and Mr. Lewis for any opening comments they would care
to make.
Let me begin by saying, it is the responsibility of this subcommittee to ensure that we are not only saying thanks to our heroes, but providing for their earned needs, as well. I am proud of
the work this subcommittee has done on a bipartisan basis since
January of 2007.
I want to thank Mr. Wamp for his close partnership a every step
of the way.
With this, we have been able to increase health care and benefits
funding for veterans over the past 2 years by $17.7 billion, $9.9 billion more than requested by the administration. These funding increases will mean a number of things: improved access to needed
health care services at our V.A. medical facilities. It will mean all
Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom veterans will be screened for post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury.
The increase will mean that the Department of Veterans Affairs
will be able to address its significant backlog in facilities maintenance to ensure that our veterans are cared for in a safe and
healthy environment.
It will mean fewer veterans will be homeless, and I know we all
long for the day where there is not one homeless veteran on any
street of any city in America.
Our increases over the past few years will mean our veterans
will receive the benefits they have earned much sooner than otherwise. And it will mean that this generation of veterans will receive
a greater education benefit than at any time in our history.
Yet, despite all of that work together, we know that much work
remains to be done.
(1185)
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01185
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1186
I would like to, again, thank all the members of this subcommittee on both sides of the aisle for our work over the past 2
years and look forward to continuing that work together as we
craft in the weeks ahead the fiscal year 2010 budget for the Department of Veterans Affairs.
The administrations budget request for fiscal year 2010 totals on
the discretionary side $53 billion and an additional $55.8 billion in
mandatory spending. On the discretionary side of the ledger, the
amount requested represents an increase of $5.4 billion over the
fiscal year 2009 appropriation, an increase of over 11 percent.
And, again, we look forward to hearing more of the details and
the rationale behind those budget proposals.
At this time, it is my privilege to represent our partner in this
effort, Mr. Wamp, our ranking member, for any comments he
would care to make.
STATEMENT
OF THE
Mr. WAMP. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership
and for that partnership.
And, Mr. Secretary, I always like it when you come, because we
get to come to the big room here as opposed to the smaller room
over in the Capitol, as much as we enjoy that.
And I want to first applaud President Obama for your selection,
which I think was a very wise one and an early one. And, of course,
you had a long and storied history before the Military Construction
and Veterans Affairs Subcommittee here in all aspects of your life.
And for your whole team, we are grateful for your service to our
country.
I also want to say that I thought that Secretary Peake did a very
good job. Both of you have unique skill sets and experience and
knowledge and understanding that is very, very helpful to all of
our veterans. And I think, frankly, this is somewhat of a seamless
transition, even though change is underway.
I also want to say what I said to a group of realtors that were
just in my office when they asked me about this privilege I have
to be the ranking member on the subcommittee that I am grateful
that, in a bipartisan way, we can say that we are doing more and
more for our veterans, in terms of funding, creating efficiencies and
more accountability in the V.A., and in a bipartisan way we have
met at the waters edge, so to speak, on this issue and continue to
do so.
And I applaud our chairman and the leadership of the Congress
and the executive branch over the last 3 years particularly, as is
manifested in this budget request, making a greater commitment
to our nations veterans at a time where it says all the right things
and it actually does all the right things.
And there are many fears out there that our country is not honoring our veterans. And I can actually look people in the eye today
and say, That is changing rapidly. And I really believe that. And
that is a good thing.
Now, in your testimony, Mr. Secretary, you mentioned 28 times
some form of the word transformation. So I want to ask you a little later about that, because I do think that sweeping changes are
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01186
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1187
still in order and I do like that spirit that you are coming in, that
you want to change things and transform the V.A.
I am a little puzzled still about what this administrations position is on advanced appropriations. We, as appropriators, think
that there is a lot of value in this annual process of scrutinizing
budget requests and that, frankly, that is how you bring accountability. And without it, the executive branch could just run the
country without any oversight from the people, which was guaranteed under the Constitution.
And I would like for you to clarify that as we go through today
and then maybe even speak to some of the new positions that you
have proposed and created in the V.A.
The V.A. is a very necessary, very necessary agency, but it is a
large bureaucracy. And one thing I would like to see is that it
doesnt get any larger when we have so many new and efficient
ways to deliver health care, particularly to our nations veterans.
Growing programs might not necessarily be the way.
But having said all of that, I just cant thank you enough for
your service to our country for so many years in so many different,
very valuable ways. And I do stand united with the leadership of
this Congress, committed to every man and woman that you represent as you sit here and testify today.
And I yield back.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Wamp, for your comments and for
your work day in, day out on behalf of Americas veterans.
It is certainly a privilege when we have the opportunity to have
the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Lewis, here. He is
no stranger to anyone who has ever worn our nations uniform, because he has spent so many years of his life in Congress fighting
for servicemen and women, their families, our veterans, and their
families.
He is now the ranking member of the full committee, having
served as chairman of the full committee, chairman of the Defense
Appropriations Subcommittee.
And, Mr. Lewis, we are honored to have you here, and I would
like to recognize you for any opening comments you care to make.
Mr. LEWIS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I dont intend to make an extended statement, except to say that,
unfortunately, I am going to have to go to the Rules Committee in
a whilethe supplemental appropriations bill on the floor tomorrow.
But I did want to come to recognize the great people who are beginning to lead this agency in a new direction. I think my colleagues would be interested to know that the first time I met Eric
Shinseki was when hethe day he was being sworn in as chief of
the Army. And he and his wife, Patty, and Arlene and I have become friends over these many years.
I really do believe he has the experience and the capability of
giving an entirely new direction to the agency, which I think really
does need that new direction.
So it is a pleasure to be with you. I may have a chance to ask
a couple of questions in a moment.
Thank you.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Lewis.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01187
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1188
General Shinseki is no stranger to this subcommittee or any of
us on the committee, but this is his first time here as Secretary
Shinseki. So, for the record, let me briefly introduce him in saying
that he is the seventh secretary of veterans affairs, sworn in on
January 21, 2009.
As Mr. Lewis referenced, he served as chief of staff with the
United States Army from June 21st of 1999 until June 11th of
2003. He retired from active duty on August 1st of 2003 after 38
years of service.
And thank you and Patty both for those many years of service
to our Army.
His previous assignments as a leader in the Army included commanding general, U.S. Army Europe and 7th Army, commanding
general of NATO Land Forces Central Europe, commander of the
NATO-led stabilization force in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
He served two distinguished tours of service in Vietnam and has
a degree from West Point, 1965, and a masters degree from Duke
University.
And as Mr. Lewis referenced, his wife, Patty, I think their family
commitment to our troops and their families is indicated by her
leadership in creating the Military Childhood Education Coalition,
which has been a very, very important and effective voice on behalf
of the children of our servicemen and women who make so many
sacrifices every day, even as we speak.
Mr. Secretary, your full printed testimony will be submitted,
without objection, into the record. I would like to recognize you
now. Thank you for bringing your leadership team with you. I
would like to recognize you now for any opening comments you
would care to make.
STATEMENT
OF THE
HONORABLE ERIC K. SHINSEKI
Secretary SHINSEKI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

And thank you Ranking Member Wamp and the other distinguished members of this committee, for holding this hearing and
allowing us to be here.
And, Mr. Wamp, thank you for those kind remarks for Jim
Peake. He is an old friend. I picked him to be the Army Surgeon
General while I was still serving, never regretted that choice, and
he went on to do great things here. I am honored to be following
him and continuing many of the good things he started.
I am pleased, also, to be joined today by V.A.s senior leadership.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, if you dont mind,
I would like to take a moment to introduce them.
I will begin on my far left, Undersecretary Pat Dunne from Benefits Administration. Next to me, Dr. Gerald Cross, acting Undersecretary for Health, Acting Assistant Secretary for Management Rita
Reed, Acting Undersecretary Steve Muro from the National Cemetery Administration, and Acting Assistant Secretary Steph Warren
from the Office of Information and Technology.
I thought having all of us here would enable us to address many
of the questions that may come up today.
I would also like to acknowledge the leaders of our Veterans
Service Organizations who are also part of the audience and partners and advocates for our nations veterans.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01188
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1189
We thank you for this opportunity to present the Presidents
2010 budget for the Department of Veterans Affairs. Let me also
thank you for your unwavering support, as the chairman indicated,
on this committee for our veterans through previous generous appropriations to our budget and for the stimulus funds you authorized for the department.
V.A. has begun to lay down the groundwork to implement President Obamas charge to us to transform V.A. into a 21st-century organization. V.A.s 2010 budget request increases V.A.s resources to
nearly $113 billion, up 15 percent from our 2009 resource level, the
largest percentage increase for V.A. requested by a president in
over 30 years.
With this budget, V.A.s transformation begins by increasing our
investment in information technology, by undertaking organizational reforms, by ramping up the training and leader development
of our workforce, and by other initiatives which are intended to improve the ways in which we serve veterans. These are essential if
we are going to improve client services and enhance responsiveness
to veterans needs.
Information technology is vital to achieving the presidents vision
for a 21st-century V.A. I.T. enables almost everything we do at Veterans Affairs. More than $3.3 billion in funding is needed to support our I.T. requirements and will allow V.A. to invest in new and
emerging technologies to create an informational backbone which
will enable efficient, effective and client-focused services.
The 2010 budget provides resources to establish a new office for
the Assistant Secretary for Acquisition, Logistics and Construction,
the importance of which is underscored not only by the budgets
$1.9 billion in capital funding to resource it, but by the more than
$13 billion in products, services and V.A. contracts that are handled each year. We need this office to bring all of that together in
a smart way.
There are few higher priorities before us than to ensure a seamless transition from active military service to civilian life. V.A. will
continue to collaborate with the Department of Defense on transition initiatives, including development and implementation of a
joint, virtual, lifetime electronic record, a presidential priority.
This budget request funds health care for a new and changing
veteran demographic. Women veterans, for example, are increasingly reliant on V.A. The budget provides $183 million to meet
their specific health care needs.
The budget includes $440 million to improve access to care for
veterans in rural and highly rural areas and $5.9 billion for both
institutional and non-institutional, long-term care services.
This budget makes important commitments to newly qualified
priority group eight veterans and to the expanding numbers of
combat veterans from ongoing operations. We are requesting $2.1
billion to meet the health care needs of veterans who served in Iraq
and Afghanistan.
And thanks to the leadership shown by Congress and the commitment expressed by President Obama, we will implement an expansion of eligibility to health care for priority group eight veterans
beginning in this summer through the next 4 years, implemented
over time.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01189
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1190
Our 2010 budget requests nearly $4.6 billion for expanded outreach and enhanced services for mental health and traumatic brain
injuries. This budget also provides $47.4 billion in total resources
for V.A. medical care, an 11 percent increase over the 2009 resource level.
And, importantly, it increases V.A.s investments in research, patient-centered health care, and technology to support our commitment to client-focused health care services.
The president is committed to expanding proven programs, which
include joint initiatives with other cabinet agencies and nonprofit
organizations to combat homelessness and requests $3.2 billion to
address the estimated 154,000 veterans who sleep on our streets
every night.
The $1.8 billion provided to the Veterans Benefits Administration is 25 percent higher than in 2009. Our primary focus is to
strengthen our investments in a paperless infrastructure to leverage ways to decrease waiting times for veterans claims processing.
V.A. provides continuity of care until veterans are laid to rest.
To properly honor them, the presidents budget request includes
$242 million in operations and maintenance funding for the National Cemetery Administration.
Veterans are V.A.s sole reason for existence. In todays challenging fiscal and economic environment, we must be diligent stewards of every dollar if we are to deliver timely, high-quality benefits
and services to the men and women we serve.
While we recognize that the growth in funding requested for
2010 is significant, we also acknowledge our responsibility for
being accountable and showing measurable returns on this investment.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I assure you I will
do everything possible to ensure that the funds Congress appropriates will be used to improve the quality of life for veterans and
the efficiency of our operations.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of the Honorable Eric K. Shinseki follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01190
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01191
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1191
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01192
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1192
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01193
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1193
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01194
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1194
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01195
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1195
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01196
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1196
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01197
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1197
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01198
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1198
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01199
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1199
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01200
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1200
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01201
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1201
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01202
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1202
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01203
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1203
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01204
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1204
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01205
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1205
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01206
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1206
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01207
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1207
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01208
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1208
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01209
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1209
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01210
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1210
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01211
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1211
1212
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Secretary, thank you very much.
We will begin questioning under the 5-minute rule.
Mr. Lewis, I know you have responsibilities at the Rules Committee. I dont know how tight that schedule is, but I would be
happy to recognize you if you would like to begin the questions,
which would free you up to
Mr. LEWIS. Lets go to the ranking member. Regular order is fine.
Mr. EDWARDS. Are you sure?
All right, I will begin with Mr. Wamp.
Go ahead, Mr. Wamp.
TRANSFORMATION
Mr. WAMP. Well, I just want to jump right in with what I said,
Mr. Secretary, on the transformation and exactly how you see that
playing out. You know, my history here goes back to having high
expectations with CARES and what it might lead to and had hoped
that maybe, by perception at least, some of the more antiquated facilities in places like the Northeast, where veterans still live, but
more used to live, and then they move to places like where I live,
where the land is cheap, and water is abundant, and the climate
is good, anda little Chamber of Commerce promotion there, but
we are growing in our veteran population in the southeast, in the
mountains and lakes of East Tennessee.
And we dont have the facilities that they do in other parts of the
country. And as I said to you in my office when you honored me
and came last week, we had hoped that CARES might lead to more
facilities. I know that the CBOC approach is very helpful, very
good. Super CBOCs move in more and more programs and benefits
into the super CBOCs for the veterans.
But how does the transformation, you know, from CARES to
what your plans are now going forward, how does it play out? What
are the big initiatives? How does it shape the infrastructure and
the face of the V.A. for the veteran, in terms of what they will see
and the benefits that they will actually derive?
Secretary SHINSEKI. I would say transformation is a journey. It
is hard to describe it as a destination. And I will tell you where
we are starting.
We start by looking at everything we do, every line of operation,
to make sure we understand what the relationship is to the mission we have, which is care of veterans.
And we know we have some hiccups here. We dont process
claims quickly enough; there is an inordinate amount of waiting
time for veterans.
We know thatat least in our house, I.T. is sort of the elephant.
So much of what we do is tied to I.T., whether it is electronic
health records, which has been a tremendous shot in the arm for
not just V.A.s medical services, but for folks who have also borrowed that electronic health record, it has been very helpful.
But there are so many other aspects of what we do in V.A. that
is still paperbound and caught up in processes. We dont know how
to get beyond that until we put in I.T. backbone that fully links
what we do and what we say we should be doing.
Part of looking internally is also looking at ourselves and ensuring thatI wouldnt call it efficiencies, but it is that what we do
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01212
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1213
day to day counts towards the execution of that mission. I can tell
you that, in the 3 months here since our arrivalwe cancelled
some conferences and meetings that didnt quite meet that definition.
And so we have begun to strip away some of those probably good
ideas at one time and maybe a good idea at some time in the future, but for right now, for where we are and what we expect out
of our own organization, we are challenging all the assumptions
about what we do, how we spend money, and what the payoff for
the mission is.
Internal to that look is looking at how we develop our people.
The V.A. is not unlike some of our service departments where people come in at an entry level and stay for a career, 20, 30 years.
I met a lady who was in the elevator the other day that has been
there 50 years.
The challenge to us is to understand that we have a development
process, a training program, an education effort that takes people
who are going to be with us for that extended period of time and
grow them, leader development skills, and prepare them for upward mobility in the organization so that we are gaining from their
experience of serving with us.
Nothing magical here. Good organizations do this. They invest in
their human resource element, they grow their talent, and they
benefit over time from those investments. I think that is the start
point.
We have asked questions about why 40 years after Vietnam we
are still adjudicating Agent Orange, why 20 years after the Gulf
War we are still wrestling with Gulf War illness. My sense is that
these answers are best derivedat least we think that historically
we felt that they are best derived through the scientific method,
which is collecting a lot of data, writing papers, having discussion,
and at some point agreeing that this is probably service-connected.
Unfortunately, that invests a lot of time. Veterans, on the other
hand, dont have all that time. About 3 years into their first reunion after combat operationsAgent Orange stopped being used
in Vietnam in 1970my sense is, the veterans who sat around the
table and compared personal notes realized they had afflictions
that were similar, and probably came to a conclusion much faster
that something was wrong.
It has just taken us much longer to come to the same conclusion.
And over that 40 years, we have acknowledged that soft tissue sarcoma, respiratory cancers, on and on and on, are, yes, tied to Agent
Orange.
So part of challenging our assumptions is going to be, is this the
way we want to continue to do this? Because we know where history has brought us, still adjudicating Parkinsons disease today as
a connection to Agent Orange.
If it is the way we choose to continue to do this, then 20 and 40
years from now, the injuries from this war will still be being adjudicated. And I think we owe veterans a better response, a quicker
response. And this is part of this effort to transformit is to challenge the assumptions we have been operating with for 40 years.
Mr. WAMP. I will follow up in the next round.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01213
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1214
Mr. Farr.
INTEROPERABILITY

And I want to follow up on Mr. Wamps questioning. We are really going to miss him when he leaves this committee. He really, I
think, senses where the rubber meets the road.
I just want to think through the big picture. A person cannot be
in your files in the veterans department unless you have first been
in the files of the Department of Defense, right? I mean, it is an
assumption that there is a starting point in the Department of Defense, and after you get out of the Department of Defense, you get
into the Department of Veterans Affairs.
So a lot of the initial data is really there. And it seems to me
that is the area that the VA is very much aware of, but we in Congress need to know more how we can push to make that data interoperable.
Interoperability is a big word around here. You coined it many
years ago in the military, then it got into the civilian side through
law enforcement. Essentially, it means you could have communication that works between law enforcement and fire and other kind
of first responders.
I think it is also now carried to the next phase of information
sharing. It seems to me that we have not yet made the Department
of Defenses information interoperable with the Department of Veterans Affairs.
You told us the VA is the world leader in setting up electronic
medical data, and yet when you go to get all the medical information from DoD their files wont move over.
I am really interested because, as I see Operation Enduring
Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, soldiers come backand
they are going to go back to these communities all over the United
States and in our territoriesare you assessing what that impact
is going to be on the ground? And how do you do that?
And, for example, if you decide to build a CBOC clinic that Mr.
Wamp was talking about, how long does it take to get that clinic
online? What can we do to make sure that this process can be improved? How does the V.A. handle the excesses in demands in the
meantime?
And if, indeed, we were going to provide services to priority six,
seven and eight veterans in fiscal year 2010, would there be sufficient funding for the CBOCs to handle the increased demand? And
how long would it take the V.A. to meet that demand?
Secretary SHINSEKI. Let me take the question about CBOCs. The
amount of time I think is a function ofit depends, the size of the
facility and the demand. It can be as quickly as a couple of years
start to finish in the process, where patients are being seen. I think
2 years, there is a fast-track method for doing this.
But otherwise, if it is a normal, routine decision to stand up a
CBOC and it fits into a pattern, it will go into the queue and could
be a little longer than that.
Mr. FARR. Yes. Will every veteran you receive, say, for medical
purposes have with them the military medical record?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01214
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1215
Secretary SHINSEKI. First of all, Mr. Farr, not every member of
the military leaving the service necessarily comes to enroll as a
veteran. And hence, this is part of the effortto answer your question, they do have onemy recollection of my own time, we carried
around our own paper set of records as a backup.
Both DOD and V.A. have electronic health records, but they are
not totally integrated. You can take information out of one, but
they are not totally useful in terms of passing records.
Having said that, however, Secretary Gates and I have personally been working on this issue. We have met four, maybe five
times and have set into motion the process by which our agreement
to create something called uniform registration, where a member
joining one of the military services today is automatically registered
Mr. FARR. That is cool.
Secretary SHINSEKI [continuing]. In the V.A
Mr. FARR. That is smart.
Secretary SHINSEKI [continuing]. That decision, that agreement
between us is really a forcing function for both departments to put
their assets and their brain power together to come up with that
single, joint virtual electronic record that President Obama publicly
announced here a couple of weeks ago with both Secretary Gates
and I present.
The intent is to have exactly what is being described here, and
this is the seamless transition. The problem has been that seamlessness between midnight or the day the uniform comes off and
8 oclock the next morning doesnt exist. And so we are attacking
it over time.
When that youngster puts on the uniform, some have asked, why
is the V.A. reaching so early to create this joint record? Well, when
that youngster puts on the uniform, servicemens group life insurance that is mandatory for every member in uniform, administered
by the V.A., if that youngster chooses to take out a college loan and
get education on their own, administered by the V.A., guaranteed
home loans, administered by the V.A.
So the perception that you suddenly become a veteran with entitlements to benefits and services when the uniform comes off is a
little misleading. Those entitlements are there well before that,
which argues that we ought to have this sharing of information. As
we do this, we will begin to solve some of the issues that you
are
Mr. FARR. And then to bring those CBOCs online, how long does
that take?
Dr. CROSS. There are several types of CBOCs. If we were doing
what we call an outreach clinic, which is really run by the VISN,
the regional command, so to speak, they can do that fairly quickly,
perhaps even in less than a year, and have a small part-time clinic
and a leased facility located in that area.
But typically, as the secretary said, a couple of years in the planning process, the budgeting process, hiring, setting up the clinic,
getting the outreach to our veteran population to let them know
where it is going to be situated and so forth.
And may I say, sir, I am a patient at the V.A. And you talk about
the interoperability. Progress has been made. And on my last visit,
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01215
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1216
they pulled up my military record and my lab tests from when I
was in Georgia as a soldier and compared it to my current test, and
that was very valuable.
Mr. Lewis.
HOMELESS VETERANS
Mr. LEWIS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Some years ago, Mr. Chairman, I had the privilege of essentially
chairing a piece of this committee when I was responsible for V.A.HUD. And during those days, I probably didnt have the best relationships with the VSOs as I might have wanted, in no small part
because it was my view that, while we had very fine bipartisan
support here within the Congress to get funding for veterans efforts, servicing our veterans, we had great difficulty following the
money down to where the veterans lived, to the hospitals, et cetera.
And the VSOs did a great job here with us, but the need for following to the community and insisting that there be real change
has taken a long time. I am pleased to say there has been progress
there.
It took us a long time, for example, within our committee, also,
to get the Navy and Marine Corps to be able to communicate with
each other. We have made progress there, but we are far from perfect, so that the effort that you are talking about, communicating
with those who are serving the soldier in uniform and the veteran
who overnight changes his position, is a very worthwhile effort, but
a very, very big challenge.
I must say that, in your testimony and in the chairmans comments of concern about the homeless, there is demonstration there
of an area where we might make great, great progress. In California, we made a big change, because we used to solve peoples
mental problems by throwing them in hospitals. We decided that
we would make it tougher to put people in hospitals with the promise that there would be clinics in the communities where they could
get their medication and thereby begin to rebuild their lives. We
made it tough to enter the hospitals. We never built the clinics.
This is a place where, in terms of the homeless, your administration could have a huge, huge effect, if we take our basic hospital
system and make clinics more readily available with a design to
deal with those soldiers who long served who now are in a desperate circumstance, we might get a very significant percentage of
those homeless off the street.
So I would be interested in your reaction to that. And I think you
knowit is my intention to have us work very closely together.
Thank you.
Secretary SHINSEKI. Mr. Lewis, thank you for that question.
The homeless issue is a particularly vexing one. I mean, I can
tell you that 154,000 veterans are homeless tonighttoday, men
and women, and veterans from every generation, including the
ones who are currently in operation in Afghanistan and Iraq, so
that is devastating, this area is.
Our effort is to prevent the first step of homelessness. And so it
isnt just about, going and finding the ones that are on the street
today. It is, what are we doing with VBAs home loans to prevent
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01216
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1217
foreclosures and working with veterans who are in the financial
tough times, sometimes not of their making, just the economic conditions, giving them every option to stay in their habitations? If we
can do that, we have prevented that first step.
But once we are dealing with folks who are homeless, they fall
in a category of joblessness, homelessness, depression, substance
abuse, potential suicide. Veterans lead the country in those statistics.
And in the past several years, we have been successful in reducing the homeless number. And this is an estimate; I will grant you
that. It is 240,000 down to 154,000 today.
We have made progress and we think we have some good ideas
on how to break the cycle of homelessness, 80 percent of them after
the first year are still livingafter they finish our 2-year programare still living successfully independently.
So we think we have opportunities here, and we do intend to go
after that. We are putting $3.2 billion against this area in 2010
budget. But we know we cant do it alone.
This is one of those issues that sitting in an office in Washington
with a 1,000-mile screwdriver to fine-tune something does not
work. We have to reach out and create partnerships with people in
the communities that deal with these issues. Every community in
this country has part and parcel this larger issue.
Twenty-six million dollars we are going to use to partner with
Housing and Urban Development, with Labor, with Education,
Health and Human Services, Small Business Administration to put
together a package of tools in which we get folks off the street, we
wean them off whatever substance may be there, and then we
begin the process of bettering this 80 percent record a year later.
Mr. LEWIS. I believe that the veterans base of personnel could be
a fabulous place, of course, to make breakthroughs relative to medical research, providing better service to all Americans, but particularly to veterans. Like you, veterans often come out of service and
their paperall their background stuff is in paper in a folder.
Well, it wasnt so long ago in my own veterans hospital that our
staff found that veterans were walking around the hospitals with
those same folders and there was no real information base. They
didnt get service because the records werent straight and nobody
could ever find them.
That is changed. It is very significant that we have seen that
change.
Well, I would hope that we recognize that dollars do not reflect
all of our solutions. And if we can better coordinate, as you suggest,
with NIH, with the research hospitals, as the Pettis Memorial Hospital does with Loma Linda, the work they are doing in terms of
breakthroughs for prostate cancer and breast cancer treatment, for
example, is pretty phenomenal, and it is because of the exercising
of work between the veterans being served and research hospitals.
So with that, the thrust of your testimony is very pleasing to me,
and I would hope you would exercise those pathways.
Secretary SHINSEKI. Thank you. Thank you, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Lewis.
Mr. Israel.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01217
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1218
Mr. Chairman, I would like to follow up on Mr. Lewis eloquent
words about homeless veterans. And, Mr. Secretary, I want to
thank you for visiting my office 2 weeks ago. I enjoyed the visit immensely.
You know, when we talk about 154,000 homeless veterans, I
think it is important to put a face on that, because it doesnt really
resonate. People cant appreciate the scope of the problem unless
they understand what a homeless veteran is all about.
And I told you the story, Mr. Secretary, of Joe Sukup, who came
to my office on Long Island. He had fought in Vietnam, had PTSD,
received medals from his service in combat in Vietnam, but ended
up living in a truck, and on Valentines Day, on a snowy night, decided to kill himself.
And whether it was divine intervention or maybe something else,
he decided to drive to the Northport V.A. And he went into the
Northport V.A., and he said, I was thinking of killing myself tonight. And a caseworker there said, Joe, we are going to help
you.
And to this day, he would say that is the first time somebody
from government said, We are going to help you. And they put
him on a trajectory to get help, and we got him his retroactive payments. And Joe Sukup is actually now, Mr. Chairman, organizing
clinics for veterans on Long Island who have PTSD.
So that is a story of failure turned to success, but that is only
1 out of 154,000.
I commend you, Mr. Secretary, and the administration for putting this critical focus into homeless veterans. One of the concerns
I have is that $3.2 billion, is it enough? Of the $3.2 billion, $2.7
billion is going to health care and $500 million will go to supportive
services.
In a climate of tight budgets and fiscal responsibility, I understand the pressures to make sure that we are safeguarding every
dollar. But it seems to me that homeless veterans ought to be an
absolute priority. And are there other things that we could be
doing, in your view?
Are there innovations that we should be looking at? Could you
do more if this committee or subcommittee were to increase the
level of resources that you have to make sure that all of the Joe
Sukups are being treated, identified, and put on the trajectory that
he found?
Dr. CROSS. Sir, I appreciate those remarks. There is always more
that can be done. Our view is that no veteran should be homeless,
no veteran needs to be homeless. We have the programs that, if we
can bring them to bear for that veteran, we can do something about
that.
The core issues, of course, are mental health and substance
abuse, and those are what we have to address. That is the typical
reason why they are homeless.
Two broad categories of things that we are doing relate to Grant
and Per Diem and the work that we are doing there, but particularly I want you to know that in transition housing we are moving
fromwe now have 11,000 beds and are expanding over the next
several years to 15,000 beds.
And in the HUDVASH program, our plans are right now
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01218
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1219
Mr. ISRAEL. I am sorry. The HUD
Dr. CROSS. HUDVASH, V-A-S-H.
Mr. ISRAEL. Okay.
Dr. CROSS. Expanding from about 10,000 to about 20,000 in the
near term, I think that will make a difference. And as the secretary
said, I think we have already made some progress over the past
couple of years as we measure it, and it is hard to measure it.
But this is something that we are committed to and that everyone of us, I think, on the staff feel that no veteran should be on
the street.
Secretary SHINSEKI. Mr. Israel, if I could follow up, I think the
reason that the allocation of funds goes the way described here is
so much of it what appears to be medical services, it is because
that is the first step in beginning the process of recovery.
If we cant get through the substance abuse and some of the
other mental health issues that may be present, it is hard to get
to the education, the job counseling, and the rest of this. And so
it essentially begins as a sort of a medical services issue.
Mr. ISRAEL. Well, I appreciate that, Mr. Secretary. I know this
is a front-end investment, and I am sure that most, if not all, of
my colleagues are interested in continuing to work very closely
with you so that we can grow our focus on homeless veterans from
here on.
And I thank you very much for your leadership.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Israel.
Mr. Crenshaw.
TRANSFORMATION

And, Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here today. I know that
you have got a tremendous background of dedication and taking
care of the men and women in uniform, and I know you are going
to take that same dedication and commitment in this new job. So
thank you for all of that.
And it is really good to hear you talk about transformation.
There is an old saying that change is inevitable, but growth is optional. And I think you recognize that in the sense that, change is
going to come, but it is what you do with that kind of change.
And I think the growth part is the transformational part. And I
think, as you pointed out, when you have got a big bureaucracy
like you have got, you have got to start looking at yourself and
looking from within.
And one of the things I saw that you are going to have is a new
office of the Assistant Secretary for Acquisition, Construction and
Logistics.
And so I wanted to ask you, in terms of this transformation, this
new office, this new department, can you tell us what your, view
of the role it will play. Maybe tell us what some of the functions
are that are being taken care of by existing departmentsand, obviously, some are going to be brand newand then maybe talk
about how, what kind of control you will have within that to make
sure that it is conducting oversight.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01219
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1220
Secretary SHINSEKI. This is to formalize a new office that was
stood up here recently where acquisition, logistics and construction
are co-located as a subject area.
We contract in a variety of places. We do acquisition in different
formats and different places. And we need a single point where we
can see what our priorities are, how the money is being invested,
and what the returns are. Right now, that is a little difficult to see.
And I am used to a structured acquisition process in which there
are objectives to be met prior to a decision to acquire something
and then there are deliverables over time.
When you dont have that kind of a process, you go 3 or 4, 10
years, and you find out something doesnt work. And there has
been just one too many example of that in the history of our experience. And we need not to do that anymore.
And we need to put together a disciplined acquisition process
where all of this comes together, you have to make your case for
why this is important, what it is going to cost, and then deliver.
But it is to discipline our processes.
We are looking at 16 people for thisto be added to this office,
to create this new office for the assistant secretary. And we have
provided some budget resources for them to begin to stand up the
office.
But it is to discipline our process that covers 152 hospitals, 755
outpatient clinics, 230 vet centers, and 50 mobile vans, and 57 regional offices. We need to discipline the way we see our priorities
and also how we spend money on acquisition.
Mr. CRENSHAW. So it would be fair to say right now, some of that
happens, but it is piecemeal, and this is trying to bring things together, have one office specifically review and analyze all those
projects and bring about a better result?
Well, thank you, sir. And I think that is a great program.
Mr. Salazar.
FITZSIMMONS ARMY MEDICAL CENTER

And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here. And appreciate all
your hard work over the last several years and your dedication to
this country, and always want to tell you that I appreciate your
promptness when we call you for a meeting or a phone call, as well
as Undersecretary Muro.
Let me just ask youand thank you, first of all, for the Fitzsimmons Army Hospital. I guess we will be breaking ground on
that shortly, or you have already broken ground? And can you tell
me where we are on the fiscal year 2010 budget for that facility?
Secretary SHINSEKI. This is the Denver hospital?
Mr. SALAZAR. Fitzsimmons, yes, sir.
Dr. CROSS. Sir, we have for funding for 2010 $119 million in the
budget. Future funding would be $493 million. And that is the information.
INFORMATION SECURITY
Mr. SALAZAR. Okay. I do appreciate that.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01220
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1221
And one other thing. I know that my work through the Veterans
Affairs Committee over the last several years, we have encountered
some problems in V.A. with identity theft or with identity compromise, where we had lost those computersone of the members.
With your push on I.T., what are we doing as far as cybersecurity? Could one of you address that?
Dr. CROSS. We are working closely, sir, with our I.T. colleagues
to make sure that security among our physician staff and our
nurses, where that hasnt always been the foremost concern that
they have focused on, it does become something that they think
about, that we make it a part of our culture.
And I think that is the key for us. We are making a difference
in terms of the people who use the I.T. in terms of their culture,
making this something that they think about that is a routine part
of their practice every day. And that has been a bit painful at
times, but we are working through that, and I think we have made
some progress.
Mr. SALAZAR. So are you committing certain resources to the security portion of the I.T.?
Mr. WARREN. Yes, sir. To give you a laydown on how we are approaching informationhow we are dealing with cybersecurity and
information protection at the department, there is approximately
$120 million in the fiscal year 2010 request to fund those programs, not just at the technical level of putting systems and controls into place, but also training for the staff, so having annual security awareness training and privacy training for all employees at
the department so they understand that obligation to be a steward
of the veterans data.
The approach that we have taken is fixing the liabilities that we
are aware of, the things that have been identified as a result of I.G.
investigations, of GAO audits, monitoring our systems to understand if we are in an insecure condition and what we need to do
to protect it.
So active monitoring, we have a network and security operations
center that monitors 24/7 what is happening at our perimeter, are
folks doing bad things, and then responding to that.
We are standardizing our desktop computers and our systems to
make sure that, when things get out of balance, when you have all
these different unique systems, it is hard to protect them. So standardizing those so we can put the controls in place to make sure we
are able to secure them and secure them at a reasonable cost.
We are controlling the use of sensitive data in terms of tracking
where it is and putting policies and procedures in place to make
sure that the employees understand, if you are sending something
that has personally identifiable information in it, we need to
encrypt it when you send it and you do not send it off to somebody
who is not an employee or is not authorized to access it.
Again, I spoke to enhancing training and awareness, a very active engagement with the staff, national training programs, videos,
trying to be creative in reaching out to the V.A. employees so they
understand it is very, very important to husband that information
and to protect it.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01221
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1222
We are also making sure that, as we develop new systems, that
we are building security into them, that they are not an afterthought.
Hopefully that gives you a sense of how we are taking on information protection at the department, sir.
Mr. SALAZAR. So how have you changed it from or has it been
changed from, you know, 2 years ago?
Mr. WARREN. The way we have taken on your question of what
has changed, when the incidents took place, there was a dearth of
policy, in terms of how you should approach it. It was very fragmented. So with some areas, it was understood how you need to
deal with it. In those areas, there may have been policy, but no
procedure, or even folks not doing what they needed to do.
So tremendous effort went into making sure policies were put in
place to explain to folks obligations, and then procedures to change
how we do things, and then down to the level of at the sites making the changes and fixing the systems.
I have a dashboard on my desk that tracks all the open findings
and progress made location by location, where are they, so I have
a constant update, what is happening, and if I see things going out
of kilter, being able to reach in and say, You are missing your
focus here. You need to get into that.
Secretary SHINSEKI. Mr. Chairman, I would just add a comment
here to Mr. Salazars questions. Two things: We begin our day, 8
oclock every morning, with an update on exactly these kinds of
issues. It is a daily brief on where we stand, what do we have to
do the rest of the day to assure information security and our links
are working?
If I might, let me go back to the question you initially asked
about Denver, just give you a little more information: $119 million
this year, but in the near future, in order to stay on our timelines
to deliver that hospital by summer of 2013, we will have to work
project funding for another $493 million in order to complete the
project.
Site acquisition is complete. They begin moving dirt shortly, if
they havent already started. Vertical construction begins fiscal
year 2010.
Mr. SALAZAR. Thank you, sir.
Judge Carter.
MEDICAL CARE FOR VETERANS IN RURAL LOCATIONS
Mr. Secretary, it was great talking to you in the office the other
day. When we were talking, we spoke about the possibility of adjusting the rural clinic eligibility circles, bringing the V.A. health
services to more underserved communities like Stephenville, Texas.
We also spoke about the possibility of use of part-time or mobile
outpatient clinics.
I see the budget includes a request of $440 million to continue
improving access to medical care for veterans in rural areas. Can
you talk about how that money will be spent toward the goal of
bringing services to rural veterans without having them to drive
100 miles or more? Is there a plan to utilize some of that funding
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01222
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1223
to re-analyze the VHA strategic planning process through which
the community-based outpatient clinics locations are selected?
Secretary SHINSEKI. I cant answer specifically for that location,
but I will have a better answer for you.
Mr. CARTER. Well, really I am just looking at a rural veterans
in general, and what plans do you have for those folks who are a
little outside the circle?
Secretary SHINSEKI. Yes, I just would like to tell you that the
budget includes $440 million to improve access to medical care for
veterans in rural and highly rural areas, including the use of
health resource centers that may be available out there or mobile
clinics, rural health consultants, and outreach clinics.
And the whole intent is to ensure that we are not medical centerand that has been the migration over the last decade. Great
medical centers, but then, how do we get that moved out to where
veterans live?
And there are three definitions that sort of, in the V.A., governs
the geography of this country. There is urban; there is rural; and
there is highly rural. So two-thirds of our definitions acknowledge
the fact that we are dealing with an unusual circumstance, smaller
numbers, but we still owe them the services we provide in the
urban centers, and this is part of our attempt here to close that
gap.
Mr. CARTER. I not only have an interest in this area because of
what we talked about with Stephenville, but on the Transportation
Subcommittee, of which I am a member, we discussed the servicing
of rural areas with a transportation network, up on the East Coast
and the New England area, and it is really designed to get veterans places, because they are scattered out in small counties
around everywhere. And they use a bus system.
I sat down with a map of Texas, and in reality, there would be
no profitable bus system that could go pick up one veteran in one
county in the western part of our state.
So we have got to be aware that there are a lot of veterans in
west Texas, but they are scattered out over a wide area.
I thank you for what you can do, and we discussed it at length
in my office. W have to take care of the veterans that also like to
buy land and get away from things, as a lot of them do, but we
are still responsible for their health care.
So I know you will keep that on the front burner.
I believe we have time for Mr. Dicks to finish his questions before we need to recess for three votes.
Mr. Dicks.
Mr. DICKS. Mr. Secretary, we have a great confidence in you, and
I appreciated our chance to talk the other day. And I also appreciate the fact that we put in a clinic in Port Angeles, Washington.
It is not a full-fledged clinic, but it is a partial clinic. We have one
in Bremerton, too.
A lot of veterans, though, have to get up at 2 oclock in the morning up at Clallam Bay and drive all the way to Port Angeles, all
the way down across the Hood Canal Bridge into Seattle. It takes
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01223
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1224
about 5 or 6 hours. And all they have is a volunteerto drive the
truck.
So I dont know if we can do any better than that. I think we
putI think the administration put money in here to keep working
on this rural issue. People really appreciated the clinic. We didnt
have one in Port Angeles, so for a lot of those people, being able
to go there was a big step forward.
I think there was also a clinicanother small area at the Elwha,
an Indian reservation. They just put in a new health care clinic,
and we are using that as well.
BACKLOG
You and I talked about backlog. And I know there has been a
tremendous effort to get the backlog under control. What is the
backlog on people who were trying to get in to the hospitalsand
how long do they have to wait? I am sure it is different by district
or VISN area. And I think we are VISN 21.
Do you have any idea what those numbers are?
Dr. CROSS. Yes, sir, we do. We measure nationwide. We measure
by VISN and by locality. And I can certainly have my staff or I go
over it with your staff any time and give you the very specific numbers that we have.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01224
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01225
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1225
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01226
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1226
1227
But our standards are for mental health that a new patient is
to be evaluated within 24 hours. And that may be done by phone
or it may be done in person, and that is 7 days a week, and that
is our standard.
Our second standard is that, once that is done, they are to have
a comprehensive mental health evaluation by a mental health clinician within 14 days.
We are measuring that right now. And across the board, including your area, 95 percent of the time we are meeting that standard
of 14 days.
Now, for primary care and specialty care, across the board right
now, it is running 97 percent and 98 percent, primary care 98 percent, specialty about 97 percent, meeting our 30-day standard.
Mr. DICKS. Well, that is good. I know you are working on that
and trying to keep that at a high level, which we appreciate.
HOMELESSNESS
You know, we just built or revitalized a facility at Retsil, Washington, and I know they now have a capability to handle some
homeless veterans. Do you do that a lot with the states, I mean,
when they are building their veterans homes, state veterans
homes, to have them make it accessible to homeless veterans? Or
should we be doing that?
Dr. CROSS. Well, we have a couple of programs. We have the Per
Diem program, where we work with a local community to provide
transitional housing, and then we work with the HUDVASH program to provide vouchers for what we want to be long-term solutions.
Mr. DICKS. See, this is a state veterans home.
Dr. CROSS. State veterans nursing homes are based on medical
conditions and those situations more so than being homeless.
Mr. DICKS. Well, in this one, they must have worked out some
way to do it, because they do have homeless veterans there, as
well. I think using the existing facilities, if you can, makes sense.
This was a $35 million upgrade of this facility. It is a very nice facility.
Secretary SHINSEKI. We have used a number of venues using excess capacity, and dedicating it to a homeless population is one.
Another is, we partner with some of the nonprofits out there,
Catholic charities. You know, in Chicago we have got a terrific
partnership working, and it just so happens that that homeless
shelter is next door to one of our outpatient clinics.
So the availability of health care for those homeless veterans,
good fit. And then, on a second floor, we have a vet center, which
is run by vets, and so they have this camaraderie effect. And inside
the vet center, there is a bank of computers for job searchers in
which there is a counselor helping folks with that part of it.
So dealing with the homeless issue has many hats to it. And we
find great success when we can bring to include folks in the community together to help us. We get a better return on the investment.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01227
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1228
Members, we have got about 6 minutes, but not many members
have voted yet, so we have got time to get over. We will stay in
recess until after the end of the third vote. If we could try to get
back as soon as possible, for those that can come back, we would
appreciate that.
Thank you
[Recess.]
Mr. EDWARDS. I would like to call the committee back to order.
Mr. Secretary, thank you, and all of you, for the inconvenience
of having us go vote. I have often said this job would be a good job
if it werent for having to vote. But we appreciate you staying here.
ADVANCE APPROPRIATION
I would like to begin my first round of questioning by addressing

the issue of forward-funding for the V.A. A decision has not been
made as to whether in the fiscal year 2010 budget we will also include forward-funding to fiscal year 2011, but the administration
supported that, and the budget resolution allows that.
Mr. Wamp has raised a question that I would like you to address. I think it is a legitimate and important question to ask, and
that is, what would be the impact of congressional oversight of the
V.A. budgeting process if we went to forward-funding like that?
I would like to ask you, if we are going to do this, we obviously
would need input, detailed input from the administration over the
next few weeks as to what we would propose for fiscal year 2011.
Could you say for the record where the V.A. is in that process of
looking at a budget submission for fiscal year 2011?
Secretary SHINSEKI. Mr. Chairman, I would just reinforce with
you that both the President and I feel very strongly that funding
for Veterans Affairs and the impact that has on our veterans who
come to us for health care shouldnt be hindered.
And, you know, timely budgets are a great thing, but if we look
at our history, they are a rare event. And a continuing resolution
has created a host of other issues for us. And for that reason, he
and I have agreed that advanced appropriations isyou know, is
a reasonable way to look at this.
I think you know that, within the V.A., we have a modeling process that looks forward. It is based on the Milliman model. We contracted with them. This model looks out 20 years. And I would say
year one is great. Year 20 is probably not worth much.
But we have gone and looked back at the second year of that
process, went back and looked at how the second-year modeling,
compared to what was enacted and executed, very favorable. So we
think we have the basic tools to be able to look beyond the first
year.
Timing and implementationI mean, this would be significant.
When we did take this step, we would hope that all the details had
been worked out. And what I would like to do is come back and
work with you and the committee and your staff on exactly what
that implementation timeline would be so that it would be a good
fit the first time we do it.
But in terms of modeling, the information is there. For 84 percent of, you know, what we do in VHA, that modeling is there. And
then the other 16 percent, we have to do other efforts.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01228
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1229
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. I would welcome that. And the sooner you
could do it, the better, once you have the data you need, because
if we are to implement this for fiscal year 2010 and 2011, we would
have to see those numbers pretty quickly.
In fact, you know, taking a look at those numbers might allow
us to determine which way we want to go. If we feel good about
the numbers and believe we could continue oversight with the V.A.,
despite a 2-year budget, then we might move ahead. If we feel the
numbers are rushed and not well put together, then it might cause
us to second-guess that.
And Mr. Wamp might want to have some follow-up comments on
that.
I would like to read one thing into the record that usually we
dont talk about. Mr. Muro, with Memorial Affairs and your representation of that important part of the V.A., I am very proud
and I hope everyone that works in Memorial Affairs at the V.A. is
proud of the fact that, according to the records I have, that the
V.A.s national cemetery system has received the highest rating in
customer satisfaction for any federal agency or private-sector corporation ever surveyed as part of the American Customer Satisfaction Index, a 95 out of a possible 100 points.
Is that a correct statement of the facts? And when did that rating occur, if it is?
Secretary SHINSEKI. I would just like to affirm that that is accurate, but let me let the individual who is responsible for much of
that provide some detail.
Mr. MURO. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman.
Yes, it is accurate. And we actually accomplished it two times,
in 2005 and in 2007.
Mr. EDWARDS. Well, I want to compliment you. And please pass
on this subcommittees compliments to everyone who had a hand
in earning that level of respect fromI am sure the vast majority
of those in customer satisfaction survey were family members of
veterans. And what a great show of respect to our service men and
women.
In a town where you only make the front page of the Washington
Post if you have done something wrong, how refreshing it is to be
able to at least speak publicly in this committee hearing about the
V.A. having done something that no other federal agency or private-sector corporation has done.
Thank you. And I salute you in the V.A. and its employees for
that.
My final question will be asked in the next round. I am going to
try to follow the 5-minute rule.
I would like to recognize Mr. Wamp for any questions he might
have.
Mr. WAMP. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I have basically three lines of short questions, but I want to first
read into the record quotes from the GAO study, April 29, 2009,
about advanced appropriations, just so the committee and the secretary can absorb what an independent analysis of this request
might entail.
It says the provision of advanced appropriations would use up
discretionary budget authority for the next year and so limit
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01229
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1230
Congresss flexibility to respond to changing priorities and needs.
While providing funds for 2 years in a single appropriations act
provides certainty about some funds, the longer projection period
increases the uncertainty of the data and projections used.
If V.A. is expected to submit its budget proposal for health care
for 2 years and lead time for the second year would be 30 months,
this additional lead time increases the uncertainty of the estimates
and could worsen the challenges V.A. already faces when formulating its health care budget.
It says providing advanced appropriations will not mitigate or
solve the problems we have reported on regarding data, calculations, or assumptions in developing V.A.s health care budget, nor
will it address any link between cost growth and program design.
Congressional oversight will continue to be critical.
So you make a great point, but just because the Congress has not
done its job funding programs in a timely manner doesnt mean
you have to go and change the constitutional process of annual
oversight and appropriations from the legislative branch.
I think we need to be real careful here, but I also think we need
to use this as an incentive with the leadership to remind them, relative to these most important Americans, the men and women who
put themselves in harms way on our behalf and stand between a
threat and our civilian population, the most important Americans
cannot have their needs met unless we do our work on time.
And this chairman has done that. And this leadership right now
has done that. But it has to continue or this becomes a real wedge
issue between the executive branch and the legislative branch.
And I know, when we were in the majority, I was more inclined,
obviously, to try to support the administration, all their requests,
and now you have that burden, Mr. Chairman. But I hope that you
will remember always the importance of this legislative prerogative. And it is not just a prerogative. It is a requirement. So that
is all I will say about advanced appropriations.
TRANSFORMATION
Let me go back briefly to the transformation piece that you were

talking about, because when you were answering my first question,
I got a lot of process response on the transformation, and I am really looking more for the bigger piece, like contracting. I want to
know where that fits in to any transformation you have.
And I used to think of contractingof adding options to veterans
toolbox for their benefits. And I am not talking about a voucher,
because I know that is like taboo, but I know that my veterans will
say this in Chattanooga, Tennessee: Man, we love our outpatient
clinic, and it is better than ever, and they are so needed, and we
get great benefits, and you are expanding it, and thank you, and
we love it, and we need it, and dont take that away.
And they say, And the hospital in Murfreesboro is necessary.
They do just about everything. And you have got long-term care,
and mental health services. And you talked about one of your employees. There is a person in the long-term care wing of
Murfreesboro that has been there over 60 years. A person has been
in that hospital for over 60 years.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01230
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1231
So it is an amazing benefit. So I am not talking about in any way
eroding the V.A. delivery system, because that should be guaranteed for our veterans that they have this. But there are cases
where contracting makes a whole lot more sense than driving 2
hours to get inpatient care. And it is a huge burden on the family
to have to drive 2 hours to see their loved one who is inpatient,
receiving the treatment.
And if we are not going to build new facilities because we cant,
and because the new model is, take the health care system to the
veterans through CBOCs and the new facilities, okay, I understand
that, but what about those other cases where contracting services
are creating an additional option for the veteran makes more
sense, is that part of your transformation?
Dr. CROSS. A couple of comments
Secretary SHINSEKI. I will bat clean-up here.
Dr. CROSS. A couple of comments related to that. The transformational model that will have an impact on this is the HCC, the
health care center, an example of that being in Harlingen, Texas.
And the idea is that we shouldnt have to drive 5 hours to get to
get a colonoscopy.
Mr. WAMP. Right.
Dr. CROSS. And, by the way, if you have to go through the preparation for that and then drive 5 miles, that is not a good day. So
if you are having a heart attack or something like that, in this
HCC concept, you would get it taken care of locally, because that
is a time-related element.
If you have something like a knee replacement or something that
can be scheduled, that is scheduled long in advance, you make all
of the arrangements, well, certainly we would want to centralize
that on a regional basis and take care of that for the veteran.
But it is a combination of those factors: working with the local
community, but still preserving the veteran systemhealth care
system in its regional basis, providing primary care locally, as well.
So it is primary care locally, time-sensitive things go to the local
community in that HCC concept, other things that are planned
long in advance can be regionalized.
Mr. WAMP. Are you keeping a healthy inventory of specialists in
the V.A., from radiologists to other people that you need? How is
that going?
Dr. CROSS. Well, thanks to Congress and the physician and dentist pay bill, we have been very, very successful and had the best
years in hiring for the past couple of years that we have ever had,
as far as I know. And I think last year we hired, at least for part
time, overprobably about 1,500 physicians and over 4,000 nurses.
Mr. WAMP. Wow.
Secretary SHINSEKI. Mr. Wamp, if I could just add to that, if we
were to go up 50,000 feet and look down on our health care delivery system, I hope that what you would see are, a population of
veterans and then, within that, a medical center, first-rate medical
center some place in the midst, and then a health care center that
is a step below that, and the difference being all the same services
are provided and just no inpatient care.
And then, below that, the large outpatient clinics, and then the
community-based and veterans, and thenvet centers, and then
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01231
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1232
the mobile vans, all of that intending to address the problem you
are talking about, which is access. And for the last decade-plus, the
effort has been to reach out.
In those communities where patients would have trouble making
the drive, be it in the wintertime or be it anytime just because of
the long distances to get to the medical center where specialized
and inpatient care is available, there is an opportunity to provide
on a fee-basis arrangement contracting in the community, where a
quality hospital may also provide inpatient services, and so that arrangement is there.
I guess the only hitch here is that we would try to provide V.A.
services, because we know what our standard is and we are pretty
meticulous about it. But where that standard is also available in
a community and it is to the benefit of the veteran not to have to
make that drive, I mean, that option is there. And we do, do that.
There are some communities and rural areas where they dont
have that capability. And so we try to put a larger facility in that
area or, ultimately, you know, we have to ask them to make that
long drive for just the inpatient care.
Ninety-five percent of what veterans would need on a day-to-day
basisshots, lab work, medication, x-raysis handled by any of
these other than medical center facilities. So the attempt is to address those needs and those concerns.
ADVANCE APPROPRIATION
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Farr, before I recognize you, I would like to

follow up on something Mr. Wamp said, a couple of points that I
think were very important, one on the advanced funding. I think
that is an important decision to make, and I would reiterate, we
have not made that decision. And I think we need to sit down with
our respective staffs and go through that, once we see some numbers on what fiscal year 2011 would look like, and then talk about
the question, do we delete our oversight authority?
And on the second pointthat I think is a good pointwhen you
say there is a natural tendency as a Democratic chairman of this
subcommittee to want to work with the administration, I think I
would use the analogy of a spring scrimmage for football, a college
football team. They are all on the same team, but to make themselves better, they play against each other and challenge each
other in spring scrimmage.
And so, while I have the greatest respect for everyone at this
table and have known Secretary Shinseki since he was at 1st Cav
Division at Fort Hood, what we aremaybe 90 percent of the time
we are absolutely partners on the same team, on the same side of
the line, I do take seriously, as I think we all should, the relative
balance, checks and balances our founding fathers intended in the
Constitution.
So I think we ought to be very vigorous on a bipartisan basis in
not necessarily attacking, but in challenging the administration to
show the facts, show the data.
And one area that you brought up, I think, would be a perfect
example is with some of the proposals, the innovations to bring
about transformation, you do propose several new offices. And I
would hope, at the end of the first year, there would be some
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01232
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1233
metrics by which we could judge. Do we just create new bureaucratic positions, or did they actually meet metrics of saving taxpayers dollars?
I am glad the ranking member brought up these points. I think
they are both very important points, and I look forward to working
with you on that.
Secretary SHINSEKI. Mr. Chairman, may I just add
Mr. EDWARDS. Please, Mr. Secretary.
Secretary SHINSEKI [continuing]. I would just offer to youand,
you know, to Mr. Wamps point, there is great value in the competitive arena where people with initiatives and want to compete for
funding need to come and present their case. You know, I
couldntI am a firm believer in that based on previous jobs I have
had.
But I do think that you would expect me not to take the attitude
that, if advanced appropriations were to be enacted, that there is
a bye on the second year. You would expect and you could count
on me to provide the arguments for what validates what is being
asked for in that second year. You will have a chance to look at
that. It is a competitive process.
I would also offer that, as good as we might put together this implementation plan, the second year is always challenged with the
unknowns, you know, whether it is an H1N1 virus or whether it
is a Katrina. And so I would look for an opportunity to find a way
to create a mechanism for the second year that could be adjusting
for those unknowns, unanticipated, or maybe even bonehead calls.
What we want to do is get it right for our veterans.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Mr. Farr.
VA/DOD JOINTNESS

I am very pleased to see that Admiral Dunne is here. Admiral
Dunne was the superintendent, the commander of the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey before his retirement. And what I
want to
Mr. EDWARDS. Is that in your district?
Mr. FARR. You wouldnt know that, would you? It is probably
mentioned in every hearing.
What we have at former Fort Ord is the Defense Manpower Data
Center. And I dont know if anybody in V.A. knows about it, but
it is essentially the Department of Defenses one-stop for every
kind of information need on any personnel in the Defense Department and the families of the soldiers and the defense contractors
who are maybe overseas.
And it seems to me that that I.T. is something that maybe the
veterans department could work on. I am really keen on jointness,
because essentiallyand I am working on how we can work with
you on thisI mean, the Defense Department has the luxury of essentially operating out of bases. So all the personnel are assigned
to a base, and they operate out of a base.
But when people get out of the Defense Department and go into
the veterans department, they are scattered all over the world. And
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01233
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1234
then your line of support isnt on campus, on base. Your line of support is in the community.
And I think that is the thing that Mr. Wamp and I are really
keen on, is how can we integrate more what is good in a community, sort of in the civilian sector on community support systems
and specialists that are there. Then, when veterans do need some
help, we dont have to go hundreds of miles in order to get that
help. We could find that there are resources in their own community.
And along those lines, what I would just like to have you comment on, we still have over 6,000 uniformed personnel on the Monterey peninsula either at the Defense Language Institute or the
Naval Postgraduate School, or at the Navy lab, or at the Fleet Numerical. I mean, it adds up. We have seven different military footprints on the Monterey peninsula.
We have just finished all the housing on the RCI housing, and
we are now trying to do a joint clinic with the DOD. And the V.A.
is leading the effort here.
And I would just like to have you tell us the importance of meeting this critical, unmet health care need for both the local veterans
population and the active-duty dependent beneficiaries through
using your new health care center facilities act, the private-sector
funding. I mean, I know you have mentioned that.
But what I see is, we couldnt get this facility built without using
that modality, because the line to be in the FYDP would take too
long, several years. And we are going to incur a lot of costs, unnecessary costs.
And with this critical ability to get it privately funded, it just
seems to me a win-win. And I wondered if you had any comments
now, that doesnt work in every community, but where you do have
significant Defense Department presence and a significant veterans
community living there, we ought to have that jointness.
They have the jointness when they go on to base to use the privileges of the P.X. or use the privileges of a gas station. But they
dont have that, privileges to go into a joint medical facility.
Secretary SHINSEKI. Well, I will let Dr. Cross talk about the Fort
Ord health care system. But I would just lead into this by saying,
we have a history of DODV.A. joint facilities. We do it in New
Mexico with the Air Force; Alaska with the Air Force; Leavenworth, Kansas; El Paso, Texas, with the Army; Key West, Florida.
So there are a number of these that suggest we have a history
of doing this and doing this well. And in the case of Chicago, Great
Lakes, Naval and Northern Chicago V.A. Medical Center, we have
integrated it to the point where a V.A. director and an active, serving naval captain are working together. One is the director; the
other is the vice director, if you will, fully integrated. And we hope
that that partnership is going to, you know, go forward this fall.
With that as background, we have some history here. We have
some experience on how to do this right. Let me ask Dr. Cross to
talk about the potential here.
Mr. FARR. The key to this is you have a new methodology of having private-sector funding for the facility
Secretary SHINSEKI. Right.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01234
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1235
Mr. FARR [continuing]. Which is essentially what we did with
RCI housing.
Dr. CROSS. Mr. Farr, there is good news here. And although this
project did not go forward as a JIF project for a joint clinic between
DOD and V.A., we are moving forward with this as a lease project
in the V.A. 2010 budget. And this is to make it a new health care
center, just as I was describing it for the Texas venture.
And this project will construct a new health care center to provide primary care, specialty care, mental health, expanded
diagnostics, and ambulatory surgery, and activation is expected
probably by the end of fiscal year 2012.
Mr. FARR. Admiral Dunne, it is nice to have you back on the
team.
Mr. DUNNE. It is great to be here, sir. And I would like to take
the opportunity to thank you for all your efforts to make sure that
the Postgraduate School could celebrate its 100 years this year.
Mr. EDWARDS. And, Admiral, let me assure you, he doesnt pass
up an opportunity to emphasize the assets of that
Mr. FARR. You are all invited to the celebration.
Mr. Carter.
CLAIMS ADJUDICATION

Mr. Secretary, I sent out 220,000 questionnaires to my constituents. And there was a line of that questionnaire that says, If you
arent able to communicate some of your concerns, you are welcome
to call the congressman.
Last night, I spent my time talking to these constituents, and
one of them was a veteran. In fact, there usually are quite a few
veterans who take advantage of calling me or me calling them.
And I promised him, if I ran into you all, I was going to talk to
you about this, so I will. It is just luck that it happens to be today.
He served in the military for 20 years or 30 years, and then went
to work for the Texas Veterans Commission, which helps veterans
work through the system. Now he is working a claim through the
system for himself, and he says the perception ishe believes it to
be a realitythat the people who process claims, adjudicate claims,
are working on a piecework quota system that they have to do so
many claims to get promoted to the next promotional level and
they have to meet a quota every week.
He is convinced that, when they get behind in the quota, that
sometimes they just deny a claim to get the number of cases dealt
with that week to meet their quota, which throws it into the appeals system, which then, he says, the V.A. can stretch out for a
year or 2. In his case, it was almost 2 years, to which he had only
60 days within which to reply.
He thinks that something should be done about the fact that
there is a quota on these case workers, which would cause them,
rightfully or wrongfully, to think, Well, a couple of them that I
just let slide by will be taken care of in the appellate process, but
I will be able to get promoted.
I would like a comment, maybe from you or one of the other people, about whether that system or his perception of that system is
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01235
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1236
a reality. He claims his issue was arthritis. The reason he questions this whole process is that he first went in for arthritis, they
said traumatic arthritis. He appealed it and said, I have never had
a trauma, and they did a restudy and came back and agreed with
him. And they awarded him for arthritis in both his elbows and
then later in his neck for congenital arthritis.
Then it had moved into his shoulders. When he made this request, once again, he got traumatic arthritis and was thrown into
the appeal system again. He said it was so easy to see, if they had
just taken the time to read the records, that he had been through
this whole process on his neck and both elbows, but he felt like
they just did it because they were in a hurry and not because they
were trying to deny him his claim for any other purpose, but they
were just in a hurry.
So I promised him I would raise this issue. I know it is specific
to one veteran, but it is important to him, and I gave him my word.
Mr. DUNNE. Sir, even if one soldier feels that way, we have got
more work to do. There is what is called a performance standard
for the rating representatives that work in the regional offices, but
there is also a quality standard.
And part of that quality standard is that the cases that they
work are reviewed periodically on a random basis. And if they were
to deny a claim that otherwise should have been awarded, they
would be held accountable for that. And so that information would
be back to their supervisor and factored in, as well as thesimply
the amount of cases that they do.
So from a supervisory level, simply volume itself is not enough
to achieve success. And we want to make sure that every veteran
who comes to us to get their claim adjudicated, that we do it accurately, and that we do it right the first time, and that there is no
need for our veterans to appeal because they feel that they didnt
get a righta properly adjudicated claim.
Mr. CARTER. I will call him tonight and tell him that.
Mr. DUNNE. Thank you, sir.
Mr. CARTER. You bet.
Mr. Kennedy.
MENTAL HEALTH

Welcome, all of you.
Mr. Secretary, welcome. Thank you.
Secretary Shinseki, as you know, with Mondays tragic events at
Camp Liberty underscoring the critical epidemic of mental illness
amongst a number of our military and veterans, too, climbing suicide rates and shortage of mental health professionals and broken
families seem to be common themes that are always appearing in
our newspapers for our veterans and their families.
And the stories are constantlywe cannot afford to wait any
longer to staff up and reach out to those who are in need. Could
you tell us, how, with the integration with the DOD, we are going
to make sure that every single soldier that is going to have the
face-to-face interview coming out of the Department of Defense,
and every Guard and reservist and the like, to get a face-to-face
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01236
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1237
interview, so that when they are coming into the V.A., we have a
full assessment of their needs and are able to hopefully prevent
any onset of PTSD from ever happening?
Dr. CROSS. A key point for us is, first of all, to make sure that
we have the people, the expertise in place to take care of these veterans. And that is why, over the past several years, we have added
almost 5,000 new mental health professionals. We have also expanded our vet centers.
But regarding the interview, I think that is very key. And what
we were finding was that, when they first got back from overseas,
that if we talked to them right then, didnt get much of a response.
They were focused on one thing and one thing only, and that was
going home.
Mr. KENNEDY. Right.
Dr. CROSS. So DOD actually took the initiative to do 90 to 180
days later the post-deployment health reappraisal. That was actually a very successful initiative.
We wanted to buy into that, so I have taken our local V.A. staff
and our vet center staff, but mostly our vet center staff, to be physically there, to be face to face with the individuals when the units
go through the PDHRA. We have done boatloads of those now.
They often end up making referrals right then and getting them arrangements to get them into care after that.
They are much more sensitive at that point. You have a much
better conversation, and it really did make a difference.
Secretary SHINSEKI. Mr. Kennedy, may I just add to that?
Mr. KENNEDY. You bet.
Secretary SHINSEKI. One of our efforts in establishing this relationship with DOD for the single joint electronic record is to, first
of all, have a registration for every serving member in the military.
Mr. KENNEDY. Right.
Secretary SHINSEKI. As you know, right now, not all who leave
the service come to enroll with the V.A., but this would be automatic, so we now have a population that we can identify and deal
with.
And then, between DOD and the V.A., this face-to-face interview
that you talk about is what we intend to do. Some of this may be
done prior to the uniform coming off, but certainly, for those that
have been to Iraq and Afghanistan, that is our priority, is to talk
to them face to face and to get this identification and begin the
tracking process, even if at that time there was no definite determination that PTSD was a factor. If it crops up 6 months later, at
least we have got a point of reference to look back at.
Veteran service-connected PTSD has increased from 120,000 in
1999 to today we are carrying on our rolls 344,000 folks, not all of
them Iraq-Afghan veterans. These are PTSD cases that have occurred over time. Vietnam veterans are probably the hardest hit
with this factor, just didnt know enough, and they werent being
screened, and many of them are still carrying those burdens.
Out of that number, as of February, about 53,000 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have been validated for service-connected
PTSD. So where we are able to get to that face-to-face, there are
assets in our health care system to be able to make those determinations and begin the treatment process.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01237
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1238
What we do know is, if diagnosed, we can treat. If we treat,
things generally get better. If we dont diagnose or treat, they dont.
Invariably, they get worse.
Mr. KENNEDY. Obviously, we are in the midst of health care reform. I am told that the best treatment for PTSD is prevention and
that it is really simply a matter of making sure that they dont get
PTSD. There are real known protocols to take to keep people from
falling into getting PTSD.
Rather than waiting for them to get it and then come in and get
treated, we ought to be pre-empting them from getting it by having
a welcome home strategy for them, a plan of action, where we say,
A, B, C, D, these are the things that we know work to make sure
you get yourself back on the ground and rolling, and you get yourself surrounded by loved ones and friends and community and family, and welcomed back home properly.
When you follow this protocol, your incidents of PTSD will just
drop, precipitously. And we just know that through the study of
PTSD.
But if you dont have those support systems in place, your incidence, the possibility of your suffering from PTSD is just going to
skyrocket.
Now, why we would wait, one way or another for a soldier or a
veteran to fall into one of those categories where they are lucky
enough either to have a supportive family or not so lucky enough
to end up without a job, without a supportive community, and
withoutwhen we, the V.A., and our country can, set it up to me
is beyond me, especially when it is going to becost us a fortune,
just financially, let alone, morally we shouldnt be allowing it to get
as far as that.
We should have this set up in advance, where we connect them
right away to whatever they need. We take the stigma right away
from it. We just say, You know, heres the Rolodex. Heres the one,
two, three, four. Then it is not about PTSD; it is about connecting,
these are the things that we are told that make you, have the best
chance ever of, getting your feet on the ground.
That brings me to my next question is, why dont we have best
practices for mental health in our health care system in the V.A.?
We have best practices for every other health disease group in the
V.A. health system but mental illnesses.
Dr. CROSS. We do.
Mr. KENNEDY. No, you dont. I have been to two dozen of your
health clinics, and you do not have metrics base for substance
abuse, PTSD, anything. You practice different types of treatment
for substance abuse, for everything else. You dont have a one-sizefits-all forin terms of programs that you know work that you take
to scale like you would for MRSA, for cancer, for cardiovascular disease. The same does not hold true for mental health system-wide
in your mental
Dr. CROSS. I certainly agree with you, Mr. Kennedy, that one size
doesnt fit all. That is why we do have different types of programs.
We are leading the way. We worked with the Academy of Sciences
to decide, what is the very best type of treatment for PTSD? We
are the leader in that.
Mr. KENNEDY. And it is prevention, am I right?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01238
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1239
Dr. CROSS. For treatment, it is exposure therapy.
Mr. KENNEDY. But it is prevention, to surround peoplepeople
are the best solution to PTSD, loved ones, community, and we are
doing nothing to prevent PTSD. You have got wonderful little clinics with 24 people in them. How are you going toyou can treat
people when they have acute PTSD, but we have got to prevent
them from getting PTSD to begin with.
Dr. CROSS. I certainly agree with that. And I think, actually, prevention occurs before deployment.
Mr. KENNEDY. Okay, all right. How is the aversion therapy
going?
Dr. CROSS. We trained 1,600 of our providers in this, based on
what the IOM recommended. And we are going to expand from
there. We are going to be into the thousands.
Mr. KENNEDY. Good. Well, if you could submit to the committee
how that is going and whether you feel like you are going to keep
pace with the need, that would be great.
Dr. CROSS. I would be very pleased to do that.
RESPONSES
1) Provide Rep. Kennedy a report on aversion therapy usage by VA.
Aversion therapy involves repeated pairing of an unpleasant stimulus with production of an undesirable behavior, such as giving a patient in alcohol treatment
an electric shock each time he or she tastes alcohol. The only aversion therapy we
use is the drug disulfiram (Antabuse) in VAs alcohol treatment program. According
to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (http://
www.dpt.samhsa.gov/medications/disulfiram.aspx), disulfiram is [t]he first drug
ever approved for treating problem drinkers. Antabuse (disulfiram) interferes with
the metabolism of alcohol, causing unpleasant side effects when alcohol is ingested.
Although approved by the Food and Drug Administration, its use has largely been
supplemented by other medications and therapies. However, some providers and patients find it useful. Over the past 12 months, VA filled 11,979 prescriptions for
disulfiram for 3,741 Veterans.
Mr. KENNEDY. And, Mr. Chairman, if I could indulge just one

more
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Mr. KENNEDY [continuing]. Question, are you co-locating your
TBI clinics with your other Centers of Excellence in epilepsy and
the like, neuroscience clinics?
Dr. CROSS. We are working on some new Centers of Excellence
for epilepsy. I think, in the plan that we have at the momentI
am not sure if it is the final planat least one or two of them
would be co-located with the polytrauma level one centers. Some
other ones would probably be elsewhere.
Mr. KENNEDY. The only concern we have is, obviously, make the
most of the dollars we are spending by co-locating those same
neuroscientists.
Dr. CROSS. I think that is a good point. Appreciate that.
G.I. BILL
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Kennedy. Certainly an important

area to explore.
Mr. Secretary, could I ask, where are we on the implementation
of the new G.I. Bill? Are we on time and schedule? Will veterans
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01239
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1240
that have qualified for the G.I. benefits start receiving those on
time this fall? And will they know soon enough to be able to make
their plans for colleges or universities this fall?
Secretary SHINSEKI. I am going to let Admiral Dunne provide the
detail, but, Mr. Chairman, upfront, in answer to your question,
very, very tight timeline. And I wont say lots of risk, but there is
some risk in the process. And we learn something every time we
put a new tool out there.
But I have been to the training center. I can tell you that training has gone well. Highly motivated people, I asked them if they
could do it. There was a standing, rousing applause.
So on our end, you know, between leadership and providing the
information technology that will enable us to do this first time as
a manual process, assisted by computers, we are in a good line. The
issue is, we have to keep that line going.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Mr. DUNNE. Mr. Chairman, we are definitelyit was never any
doubt that we had the right people to execute this program. And
they have been working very, very hard since last summer.
We brought on board 530 new people on schedule, and we
trained them on schedule in order to be able to process claims. We
were able to start processing claims on the 1st of May. We already
have received over 20,000 claims. They are coming in at the rate
of about 3,000 claims per day.
And so we are very pleased with the response that we are getting
from the veterans. We are doing everything possible, we think, to
communicate with them and make sure that they know it is better
to submit your application early, as the sooner we get it, the sooner
we can act on it.
And we are moving along with the testing of the other I.T. systems that we need. And perhaps Mr. Warren could add more on
the I.T. side. But our folks are performing very well at this point,
and we are pleased with the response from veterans.
Mr. EDWARDS. So bottom line is, there should be no veteran who
is qualified for the benefits who would have a problem getting approval of the funding for classes that start in the fall, unless there
are some bumps along the way between now and the fall?
Mr. DUNNE. We expect thatwe have got many challenges between now and the 1st of August, but we are on it every single day.
And if a veteran gets his application, we are going to make sure
that they get into class.
HIRING OF VETERANS IN THE CLAIMS PROCESSING SYSTEM
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Could I also ask you, while I have your
time, to address, how many people have you hired in the claims
processing system since, say, in the last 2 years? I know we have
provided enough funding, I think, to provide as manyif you count
the stimulus billit was as many as 6,000 or 7,000 new claims
processors.
How many have you hired? How many yet to go? And I might
ask also on that, are you out looking or are you exercising any outreach to look for combat veterans as potential employees, particularly wounded combat veterans, to serve as employees in the V.A.
benefit system?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01240
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1241
Mr. DUNNE. Absolutely, sir. The first increment in personnel, as
you know, was 3,100. And we started that in January of 2007, and
we have completed that phase.
For 2009, we were authorized another 1,100, and we are in the
process of hiring those now. We are about halfway through that
hiring.
In addition, as you mentioned, with the stimulus package, there
was authorization for 1,500 temporary employees. We are in the
process now of hiring those. We have got 44 who are already on
board at the regional offices, another 86 who have report dates
within the next 2 weeks. And the remainder of the jobs we are in
the process of announcing and interviewing potential personnel.
We are very anxious toat any opportunity to hire a veteran
into the V.A., because we know what good employees they are.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
Mr. DUNNE. And when we have an announcement at one of our
R.O.s, the first place they go is right to the VR&E office and see
if there are any veterans who have completed their training and
are perhaps interested in working in the R.O.
I can tell you, as an example, I went to one of the RPOs after
we hired the 530 folks for the G.I. Bill. And I asked how many in
the room were veterans. And almost everybody in the room raised
their hand. And I asked about the three that didnt, and they said,
well, they are either relatives or dependents of veterans.
So I think we can always do better, sir. We always need to make
sure we keep that focus on, that we are looking for veterans. But
I think we are doing pretty well.
VA SUICIDE HOTLINE
Mr. EDWARDS. That is good to hear.

And my final question in this round, Secretary Shinseki, would
be as a follow up to Mr. Kennedys questions about the mental
health care issues and care.
Obviously, suicide is of great concern to all of us. Could you update us on the status of the V.A. suicide hotline and how that is
working?
Dr. CROSS. Sir, it is one of our most successful ventures, quite
frankly. We have received 120,000 phone calls since it was opened
in 2007. Over half of those phone calls, however, were not veterans.
We still help them.
Now, the key thing is
Mr. EDWARDS. How do they find out the number? How do
they
Dr. CROSS. The numberwe tie it inwe decided not to go it
alone with this. We tied in with Health and Human Services into
an existing phone system. And so when you call up the number,
273TALK
Mr. EDWARDS. How do you get that number? I am having a problem. I am literally thinking about committing suicide. How do I get
that 273TALK number?
Dr. CROSS. We put it on the Internet. We put it on the buses.
We put it on the Metro. We put it out to the VSOs. We put it on
public service announcements. We have got Gary Sinise from Forrest Gump doing public service announcements, Deborah
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01241
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1242
Norvilleevery way that we can, we are getting that number out.
And it must be working, because 120,000 people have called.
So they call the main number. And then it says, If you are calling about a veteran or you are a veteran, press one now. So
120,000 people pressed one.
Then, out of that, the key number I would like you to remember,
we have done over 3,000 rescues. What that means is, while the
veteran was on the phone, while the caller was on the phone, we
sent an ambulance or police to the location where they were at that
very moment.
And I have justif you would bear with me for a moment
Mr. EDWARDS. Please. Take whatever time you need on this.
Dr. CROSS [continuing]. The most spectacular thing happened
about 2 weeks ago. We got a call from a mother, and she was talking to her son through her computer using, I think, a program
called Skype. And she was very upset, because her son told her on
the computer he was going to commit suicide, had a gun in his
hand.
And she called the hotline, the V.A. hotline in Canandaigua, New
York. And they called the Pentagon. The Pentagon worked with the
local Red Cross and their contacts. And 20I think it was roughly
about 23 minutes later, she watched or heard while a person arrived, talked to her son, took the gun out of his hand. The soldier
in this case was in Iraq.
Mr. EDWARDS. Oh, my God. What an incredible story. Thank you.
Thank you for that. And I am so glad to know that the hotline is
being used and literally saving lives. Thank you for that.
Mr. FARR. Can you just call 911 and get the same response?
Dr. CROSS. Well, they would get the police. But many of these
cases that call the hotline are not calling because they are immediately suicidal. Some of them just want to talk. And then we put
them in contact with our suicide prevention coordinators that we
have now located at every one of our medical centers and sometimes several of them.
I think our hotline is the best, because weinstead of using volunteers, we use psychologists, social workers, nurses who have
mental health experience. These are people who are very experienced.
The second reason why we are the best, I thinkand I admit my
pride in thisif it is one of our patients, we can pull up their
record electronically while they are on the phone, and that has actually helped us save lives at times, because sometimes they didnt
want to tell us exactly where they were at or what their situation
was. And with a little detective work, we were able to trace that
back.
Mr. EDWARDS. Well, thank you for that. I hope those kind of positive stories of saving Americas veterans and, in this case, an active-duty serviceman, those kind of stories need to be told.
Mr. Wamp.
CLOSING OF CEMETERIES
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01242
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1243
My final question of the day is on the cemetery front. And, Mr.
Muro, the chairman rightly gave you a high compliment earlier
based on the customer satisfaction.
And it is such a well-stewarded recognition, these national cemeteries across the country of the sacrifices that have been made. And
they are solemn places. I will be there in 2 weeks to keynote the
commemoration at Chattanooga National Cemetery for Memorial
Day. And I am there often, several times a year.
But our cemetery, which has Civil War soldiers and many, many
storied internments there, is set to close on your schedule in 2019,
which I used to think 2019 was a long time from now, but I used
to think 2009 was a long time now, and it got here really fast.
So that is a short period of time. Now, they have done studies
of ways they could change things around and extend that somewhat, but there is also 15 acres that could be available next to it.
And it can only grow in one direction because of streets and rightof-ways.
I dont know if you specifically know about this issue, but I am
interested overall in what the posture is of the V.A. This is something that, at a time of war, people are really keyed into. Are we
going to guarantee this ultimate resting place? And I dont mean
in the next state over. I mean in the area. I know you have like
100-mile, 120-mile circumference of each
Mr. FARR. Seventy-five miles.
Mr. WAMP. Seventy-five miles. Okay, 75-mile circumference of
where these could be. But this is obviously a national cemetery in
Chattanooga, Tennessee, that would want to keep open and preserve.
Can you give me an update about where we are with the study?
Assistant Secretary Turk was very, very helpful, in the last administration. He came and physically toured the site. The city is willing to cooperate in any and every way to take the lead on assembling any land.
4) NCA should reach out to the local Veteran community to explain its plans for
extending the service life of the Chattanooga National Cemetery.
NCAS OUTREACH PLAN
In the summer months following Memorial Day 2009, NCA plans to hold a series
of Town Hall type briefings for the local community and stakeholders to explain the
preplaced crypt process being implemented at the cemetery. This process will gain
an additional 25 years service from the existing cemetery property, extending burial
availability to the year 2044.
In addition to cemetery and Memorial Service Network (MSN) staff, Subject Matter Experts from the NCA Office of Field Programs and Office of Construction Management will attend the briefings to explain the process and to answer community
questions and concerns.
I have almost seen a posture around the country as I have studied this that you wait until you are 5 years away from closure to
begin to act. And, obviously, that is not the way to do business, in
terms of long-term planning. It is much more beneficial to begin
the process much in advance of closure so that you can take the
necessary steps to actually secure the available land.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01243
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1244
Plus, if there is available land, you would want to secure it while
it is still available before somebody goes and builds a new building
on top of it.
Do you know anything about the Chattanooga Cemetery expansion.
Mr. MURO. Yes, sir. Right now, we actually have, because of our
new burial policy and practice of pre-placed crypts, we actually
have enough land to last an additional 25 years above 2019 before
we have to worry about looking for other land in the area.
So we are good 2019 plus 25. And we are already going to start
planning the process to install the crypts there so we dont run out.
We try to staywe have changed our policy. We are trying to stay
2 to 3 years ahead of closure orso that we expand so that we
dont close the cemetery.
And if we are going to close because there is no further land to
use, then we are looking for land. And last year, there was appropriation for funds for that. So we are trying to stay ahead of it.
Mr. WAMP. Well, I appreciate that. I would say, with the VSOs
in the room, that I hope you will communicate effectively with the
VSOs so that their membership will understand what you are
doing, because usually they dont find out except after they make
enough noise and their member of Congress then engages as to
what any policy may be that you were in the middle of enacting.
And I can assure you that the veteran community that lives
there, they dont really believe this extra 25 years within the fence
because your stated closure date was 2019, and then, all of a sudden, kind of miraculously, well, they can start pulling rocks out of
the ground and make room for more.
So help us, if you will, convince the veteran population that you
are going to stand behind keeping this cemetery open at all costs,
because that is basically all they care about. Please assure them
of that.
And then, if there is any way to go forward to secure that land
or even allow the city to hold the land until which time you need
it, that would be wise if there is any possible way within your
budget constraints to do so.
We appreciate your cooperation on that, and I yield back, Mr.
Chairman.
Mr. Farr.
Mr. FARR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am amazed that Mr.
Wamp and I have had the same questions on all day. I want to talk
about veteran cemeteries. I want to also thank you for your career
in this field and for your public service.
Mr. MURO. You are welcome. Thank you.
VA CEMETERIES
Mr. FARR. I would really encourage you, Mr. Secretary and staff,
to look at this 75-mile policy. It has been in concrete for so long,
and it is a dumb, dumb policy.
The population of California lives along the coast. So in this wisdom of developing a 70-mile radius, and because of congressional
earmarks, you are building your veteran cemeteries in the middle
of the San Joaquin Valley. There is no history of military in the
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01244
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1245
San Joaquin Valley. You are building three of them. One of them
is already there. It is in Santa Nella, which is a truck stop, no hotels, no people, no town, no mayor, nothing.
And we are within 75 miles of that, the Monterey peninsula, the
oldest piece of military real estate in the United States. It started
with Spanish occupation, the Presidio of Monterey. And Fort Ord,
the land was acquired for the military in 1919, still has a military
presence there and a huge veterans presence, and that is why you
are going to build a clinic there.
But we cant build a cemetery. We have had to go to the state
of California. The state of California says, We dont do state cemeteries. So we are going to a third process, is we are going to try
to get a private developer to put up money, we are going to give
him some of the cemetery land, put enough money in the pot so
that the state can file for a state application.
Now, I want to just think outside the box a little bit, because I
understand thatand I am sort of interested in thisthat of the
128 cemeteries that you maintain in 39 states and Puerto Rico, as
well as 33 lots and monument sites, it is the Department of Army
that maintains two of the cemeteries, Arlington National Cemetery
in Virginia and the U.S. Soldiers and Airmens Home National
Cemetery in Washington, D.C.
There are also a number of state cemeteries. And the Department of Interior maintains 14 veteran cemeteries. If I knew I could
go to the Department of Interior and the Department of Army and
maybe gotten them to build a cemetery, I would have done that,
but I didnt know.
I dont know why it is that, one, that all of these cemeteries
arent under just oneyou know, under your department. Maybe
administratively they are, but why are they being maintained by
the Department of the Army and the Department of Interior?
And why cant we think outside the box to figure out a solution?
The land is there. The title is in the Department of Defense. The
feasibility study for it is there. It is going to take us forever to find
a third party to put up enough money to build the cemetery.
You have got the Presidio Monterey, the Naval Postgraduate
School. It is a destination, tourist area. People want to be there.
There are a lot of people that are holding ashes in their home waiting for this cemetery to be built.
And, I mean, this is where California history began. It began
with military history. And it is still there. And I would like to try
to see if we could work some way to work in a cemetery by your
department or whether I have to go to the Department of Interior.
Mr. MURO. Let me try to answer some of your questions, Congressman.
First of all, San Joaquin Valley, when that cemetery was built,
the national cemetery system could only build on property that was
either donated or transferred from DOD. We didnt have the funds
at that time to purchase land, so San Joaquin Valley, San Joaquin
National Cemetery was a donated piece of property and
Mr. FARR. The Bureau of Reclamation?
Mr. MURO. Correct. So thathopefully that answers that one. In
reference
Mr. FARR. When President Kennedy, his uncle, was president.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01245
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1246
Mr. MURO. Oh, all right.
Mr. FARR. It had nothing to do with anything functional for a
cemetery. It was just federal land in the middle of nowhere.
Mr. MURO. Right. And it was donated.
The other question, in reference to the Fort Ord cemetery and
the state project that we worked with the state to build the other
one, which is up in Redding, California, we are working closely
with the state, and they do have an application in right now for
that. So they are working with that organization to try to get it.
Mr. FARR. For which?
Mr. MURO. For Fort Ord.
Mr. FARR. They have an application to you?
Mr. MURO. Yes, they have got the pre-application in right now,
and we are waiting on state legislation to pass it. And then we
Mr. FARR. No, wait a minute. State legislation passed it, saying
that they have to put the money up into an account with the state
before they will exercise it. And the Shasta veterans department,
that was a state senator. He insisted that they couldnt pass a state
budget unless they made that his cemetery and up in little, old
Shasta County. In a weak moment, the legislature and the governor signed the bill, and then they hired him as the secretary for
veterans affairs in California.
So it was a real sweetheart deal. And the state said they would
never do it again. And Schwarzenegger says they wont do state
cemeteries, unless, in this case, the money is put up by the private
sector.
Mr. MURO. The other question was in reference to how V.A. received the cemeteries that we have. In 1973, Congress passed a law
and transferred certain cemeteries over to V.A., was where we
started, and keptArmy kept DOD in the Soldiers Home.
Mr. FARR. The Interior Department doesnt run any cemeteries?
Mr. MURO. They runyes, they have 14 total cemeteries. Two
are open for internments; the rest are closed. They are Park Service.
Mr. FARR. We will work on something, okay?
Mr. MURO. Okay.
Mr. Kennedy.
NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE BENEFITS

If we could go back, Mr. Chairman, your question about mental
health, extent of services. The concern I have is the Guard and Reserve, because their benefits really arent as great as, obviously, the
standing military.
When they come out, they often dont have the access to the
TRICARE benefits. When they go back to their job and so forth,
they dont have access to the same benefits. And, of course, their
dependents, their family dont have any access to benefits.
And so thethe real question is, a lot of those families and
Guard and Reservists are getting their services through states,
through their community mental health centers and the like.
What I am interested in is what we are going to do as a committee, given the fact that states are shedding all of their mental
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01246
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1247
health services because they are all in a free fall economically,
what are we going to do as a committee to respond to the need at
these community mental health centers of those veterans who go
into those community mental health centers looking for services?
Because there are no services for them at the V.A., because they
are weekend warriors, but they arent. They are now part of our
total force. But because of the nature of them being Guard and reservists, they dont enjoy the same package of benefits that the regular service does.
So can you all kind of answer for me, what are we going to do
about this whole new group of veterans that may not have all the
service-connected injuries and the like that are going to allow them
to get access to the V.A.? How are we going to manage to make
sure they get the necessary health care that they need?
Dr. CROSS. I strongly agree with you that, yes, that is a real concern of ours, that the Reserve and National Guard come back, they
dont go to a military post. They dont stay with their active-duty
colleagues. They go off into the small communities across the nation and the cities, and that is where they live, and trying to return
to their previous lives.
Congress, working with the V.A., just fairly recently created a
new benefit, and that was that returning from a combat deployment automatically granted 5 years of eligibility.
Mr. KENNEDY. Right.
Dr. CROSS. That was a tremendous help. And we really appreciated that.
It did several things. It also expanded the dental capability by
our timeframe, as well, from 90 to 180 days. That made a difference, because it gives time now for that new veteran to try and
obtain eligibility through the C&P process, they have got plenty of
time.
They are still covered for their health care. They can still be seen
and taken care of, as long as it is anything that is even quasi-related to their service overseas. And I want to thank you for that.
Mr. KENNEDY. Secretary Shinseki was talking about back in the
Vietnam War, there was always a challenge to Agent Orange because there was a question, was this a real thing or not? With this
war, the combination of TBI, post-traumatic stress disorder, being
the signature wound, are we going to have a bureaucratic process
of challenging veterans when they come in and saying, prove it?
Or are we going to have an assumption that, if they have been
to three tours of duty, they have been out in their combat, they
have been out on the driving outside the Green Zone every day,
which we know would take any normal person, knowing that they
are taking their lives in their hands every day when they drive outside that Green Zone, that that is going to put any normal person
in a position where they could suffer from post-traumatic stress
and say that they are going to be eligible for veterans benefits, access to the health care system?
Dr. CROSS. For the health care component, we are happy to see
them. It is not a matter of trying to prove that they need to be
seen. If they say they need to be seen, they need to be seen. And
then, during that 5-year period, they have the eligibility to do so.
Mr. KENNEDY. Okay.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01247
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1248
Dr. CROSS. And I think, as I mentioned earlier, that gives them
time to engage with my colleagues in VBA, as well, to start the
process.
I will ask Admiral Dunne.
Mr. DUNNE. From the benefit side, we are, of course, charged
with evaluating the need for compensation based on the medical
evaluation that is provided.
Mr. KENNEDY. Right.
Mr. DUNNE. And we are looking very carefully right now at the
process that we go through towhen a veteran claims PTSD, the
evidentiary requirements that are in place, we are evaluating those
to make sure that they are sufficient to ensure that, during the
time period when they have straight access to VHA, that we are
able to complete the medical evaluation that is required so that, if
necessary, we can ensure that they get their compensation benefits
in a timely manner.
VOUCHERS
Mr. KENNEDY. One of the concerns I hear about homeless vets is

that, while we are increasing the number of permanent vouchers
and thank God. Finally we have permanent vouchers instead of
these temporary vouchers for these endemically homeless vets.
We need more support services for these vouchers. In other
words, we need administrative personnel. I hear there are a lot of
vouchers in a lot of these different places because there arent
enough staff on hand in various places to administer these vouchers and get the support services wrapped around these veterans
who need these vouchers.
One case in point, my cousin, Bobby Shriver, is on the council
out in Santa Monica, says that there is a number of excess vouchers. I had a hard time believing it, knowing the number of homeless veterans out there. And he says it is because there are not
enough veterans, staffed to help administer those vouchers. So
maybe you could take a look at that.
Secretary SHINSEKI. Let me take a look at that and then come
back to you with an answer on
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01248
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01249
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1249
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01250
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1250
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01251
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1251
1252
Mr. KENNEDY. And if you could
Secretary SHINSEKI. I was not aware of excess vouchers.
Mr. KENNEDY. Okay. If you could also look at what percentage
of our V.A. medical centers, what the timeline it is for folks to get
help for mental health services and what the shortage is for mental
health professionals in all these outpatient clinics and mental
health centers.
We had those. There was a big study fromMcClatchy did a couple of years ago about how long it took for someone to get served
in a V.A. clinic. And in some places, it took X number of days.
Other places, it took just a few days. And it would be nice to know
kind of how that has gotten evened out, now that we have plused
up the accounts.
Secretary SHINSEKI. Sure.
Mr. KENNEDY. Thanks.
HEALTH CARE STANDARDS

Members, I think we are getting close to a series of votes. And
I only have two other quick points.
One, I would like to ask Secretary Shinseki, either you or Secretary Warren, whomever is appropriate, to address the question
of, as you are trying to develop DOD and V.A. medical records that
can communicate with each other and be passed seamlessly back
and forth, how does that work in with the country trying to set up
some sort of national standard for private profit and nonprofit hospitals?
I assume we wont have V.A. and DOD accepting one standard
and the rest of the country going another way, because we need
records to be able to transfer from a V.A. hospital or DOD hospital
to a private hospital.
And is the development of a national health care reform bill and
a standard, does that slow down the DODV.A. process in coming
up with a medical records, electronic record systems?
Secretary SHINSEKI. This is an important question, Mr. Chairman. The agreement that Secretary Gates and I have made and
which the President publicly announced, that there would be one
standard, now begins the hard work of exactly what is an electronic
record, what is the electronic health piece of it and what is the
electronic administrative or personnel piece of it, what does it look
like, and make that come together.
There is great interest in doing this quickly. And part of the interest is to be able to come to an agreement on exactly that requirement and be able to share perhaps with HHS, Here is, you
knowthose of us who have been at this for a while, heres a good
start point for you, so that there would be some synchronization,
some linkage between the opportunities that they will have to decide for the rest of the country and the work that V.A. and DOD
has already done for a couple of decades.
A lot of hard lessons learned, some disappointing ones, but we
have come a long ways here. And so as we create this single, joint,
virtual electronic record, I think it is important for us to link in
with the secretary at HHS and just offer up a model to consider.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01252
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1253
HEALTH CARE INNOVATION

And my final point would be this. We dont do earmarks in the
V.A., in many ways that is very fortunate. But what happens as
a result is that some of us, perhaps because we serve on this subcommittee, have private entities, entrepreneurs come to us and say,
Heres a great idea that can help the V.A. provide better medical
care at a less cost to taxpayers.
We dont really have the ability to evaluate whether those make
sense. And maybe 9 out of 10 of those proposals wouldnt make any
sense, but 1 out of 10 might be the one that could save the V.A.
millions of dollars and help save lives and provide better care.
Does the V.A. have a system for evaluating good ideas and separating those from bad ideas, in terms of health care innovation?
And, secondly, on that same point, is there a system by which you
can fund innovative ideas that might help the whole country without taking that money out of the hide of the O&M budget of the
local V.A. hospital or the VISN?
I could see that if I am a VISN director, and I dont want to take
money out of my VISN or out of my hospital to fund what could
be a national pilot program that could help the entire V.A. health
care system.
I havent found a thorough process. Maybe I heard it at some
point the secretary for health has some kind of a discretionary
fund, but is there any kind of a formalized process for you?
Mr. KENNEDY. Effective research. We should have it in our CMS,
too.
Mr. EDWARDS. Do you have a system of comparative effective research at the V.A.?
Secretary SHINSEKI. Actually, I am interested in what the acting
undersecretary for health is going to say to answer this question.
Mr. EDWARDS. Dr. Cross.
Secretary SHINSEKI. But it isjust to eat into this, it is part of
the reason why I am hoping that we will get your support in setting up an office for an assistant secretary for acquisition, so that
we will have a single place where good ideas can come and be vetted and, you know, avoid being dissipated or being discouraged or
frustrated, but where it gets a professional vetting, because right
now these things do go on, but they go on in multiple places in the
V.A.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right. And is that, Mr. Secretary, where these
ideas would be placed in the future, when you create that office?
Secretary SHINSEKI. In the future. If we were able to stand up
this office, this is where this kind of innovative thinking, creative
thinking would have an opportunity to be aired, evaluated, and
then shared.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Secretary SHINSEKI. Let me let Dr. Cross answer what we do
today.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Dr. CROSS. I am looking forward to hearing what I am going to
say, as well. [Laughter]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01253
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1254
No, seriously, sir, there is some formal process. And let meit
is a little bit different from what you might expect.
We do a lot of innovation, in terms of pharmaceutical, new drug
treatments, new surgical treatments, vaccines, the herpes zoster
vaccine, the shingles vaccine, worked with civilian medical schools
and the V.A. to make that a reality. And it is now FDA approved
and out there and used every day.
We worked with DARPA. And you may have seen the 60 Minutes TV show recently where they talked about the DARPA arm
that the V.A. is working with them on a new prosthetic, far more
advanced than anything that we have seen before, an ability to manipulate objects.
So in terms of research, we do a great deal tooyou know, but
particularly on the health side, it is really pharmaceuticals, new
treatments, new devices. You know, sometimes
Mr. EDWARDS. What office evaluates those under the present system, without the new acquisitions office in place?
Dr. CROSS. What
Mr. EDWARDS. Is that the undersecretarys office? Do you have
particular staff that do that? Or do you subcontract that out to various parts of the country within the V.A. system? How do you
evaluate that?
Dr. CROSS. The kind of things I am talking about go through research protocols.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
Dr. CROSS. And our research office handles that.
Mr. EDWARDS. What if it is not a new drug, you know, it is somebody coming in with a system for telephoning veterans to be sure
they take their drugs this morning and, if they dont call back
that is one that came into my office, for example. I have no idea
whether it made sense or not.
But, you know, and if the veteran doesnt call back, then it keeps
calling them until they call back and say, Yes, I took my prescription drug this morning. I mean, how about that kind of device or
other projects that arent, you know, the kind that you mentioned?
Dr. CROSS. I think I know that project, by the way. Two ways
that that happens. Number one is they go to the local facility, local
VISN, and say, Listen, Id like to try this out locally. Would you
be interested?
Number two, they come to the central office and talk to some of
my staff and say, Listen, I have got this great idea, this great
product. Can I get a briefing? We do accept those briefings, and
we do accept some of these proposals after the staff have looked at
them to see if it makes sense.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. In the future, will that go through the office
of acquisitions? If, in the future, somebody like this calls our offices, who should we refer them to?
Secretary SHINSEKI. That would be my preference, for all of this
to come into one location, and then from there to be shared with
the experts elsewhere on the staff.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
Secretary SHINSEKI. A discipline process for evaluating the goodnessthey are all good. They are well-intended. But where is the
fit?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01254
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1255
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Thank you for that answer.
Mr. Wamp, do you have any additional questions?
Mr. Kennedy.
SERVICE DOGS
Mr. KENNEDY. Yes, Mr. Chairman, really cutting-edge piece of

high tech, and that is dogs. We talked about, Mr. Chairman and
Mr. Secretary, these dogs that help our veterans, particularly, not
only the guide dogs for those who are physically impaired, but also
those who are suffering from PTSD, that take them out, so they
have to go out for a walk, help them calm their nerves when they
are feeling an anxiety attack and the like, that they can be trained
in the prisons by prisoners.
What is your feeling about us expanding the use of these kinds
of animaluse of animals to help out those many, many veterans
that you have identified as, having issues, anxiety issues and
PTSD issues?
Dr. CROSS. The answer I am going to give you is a little bit
mixed, in terms of how we are responding to this. And so I want
to be frank that this is how we are approaching it right now. I
dont want to paint a picture that is different from reality in any
way.
Guide dogs have been part of our program for a long time. Everybody knows that. We will accept it and often support it.
So now we are talking about a different category of dogs called
service dogs. Service dogs, we support them in a limited fashion for
physically and hearing disabled veterans under a case-by-case
basis.
We have worked with an organizationI believe it is called the
Assistance Dogs International. And we have an information letter
that we drafted to inform the field that only these accredited dogs
organizations who do not charge for the dogs or their training
should be utilized. V.A. then, in that circumstance, will pay the
veterinary bills and any hardware the dog may require while performing the designated tasks.
I dont know how many that we are supporting at this time. I
dont think it is a large number, Mr. Kennedy, certainly not compared to guide dogs. But I would be happy to have our staff talk
to you about this.
Mr. KENNEDY. That would be great. I would love to get a briefing
on that. Thank you.
3) Provide Rep. Kennedys staff a briefing on the dog assistance program for Veterans. (PCS)
Thank you for your inquiry of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regarding
the provision of service dogs to our countrys Veterans. The Prosthetic and Sensory
Aids Service will be happy to provide a briefing at your staffs convenience. Please
coordinate this request through VAs Office of Congressional and Legislative Affairs
office. Below is a summary of our service dog program.
VA has provided guide dogs specifically for the blind since 1961. In 2001, Public
Law 107135 provided VA the authority to provide service dogs for physically and
hearing disabled Veterans. Over the past seven years, VA has studied the effectiveness of service dogs versus assistive devices. These studies focused on a dogs effect
to a Veterans health, function, mobility, and independence. These studies also focused on industry standards for service dogs, how the dogs are trained, and how
a Veteran best learns to work with a dog. On January 14, 2008, the Secretary of
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01255
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1256
Veterans Affairs signed a decision memo approving a plan for the provision of service dogs to our nations physically and hearing impaired Veterans.
VA is working with an international accrediting body, Assistance Dogs International, to help develop standards for the provision of these dogs. In the interim,
individuals are reviewed on a case-by-case basis and may be provided a service dog
if they are able to demonstrate that a service dog would effectively perform a task
that cannot be achieved through assistive technology or daily living aids. To remain
consistent with the existing model of procurement in attaining guide dogs for the
blind, VA will acquire service dogs through non-profit agencies who do not charge
for their animals, services, or lodging. VA will provide veterinary care and hardware
required for the dog to perform its tasks such as a harness or a backpack.
Mr. EDWARDS. Well, with that, let me thank you all for being
here.
Secretary Shinseki, we look forward to working with you and
each of you, Admiral Dunne, Dr. Cross, Secretary Reed, Secretary
Muro, Secretary Warren. Thanks to each of you for your dedication
to our veterans.
And we may have finished our formal questioning, but one of our
colleagues who has done so much on behalf of veterans, Mr. Buyer,
from Indiana, who is the ranking member on the Veterans Affairs
Committee, former chairman of the V.A. authorizing committee.
And it is good to see Mr. Buyer here. And even saw in the Washington Post, I believe, today about new legislation you have introduced, Mr. Buyer, to help widows of those who have served in combat and given their lives for our country. We are glad to have you
here and welcome you to this subcommittee any time you are here.
So thank you for coming and what you do to support our servicemen and women, and particularly the members of the Guard.
Thank you. We are honored to have you all here.
With that, we will stand adjourned.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
[Questions for the record submitted by Chairman Edwards]
CONSTRUCTION COMPETITION/PRICING
Mr. Secretary, a recent New York Times article highlighted contract saving being
experienced in the highway sector of the economy. In part, the article noted:
Construction companies, hungry for work in the dismal economy, have slashed
their prices to try to win the first round of public works projects being paid for by
the federal stimulus package.
Pennsylvania officials said contractors competing for their first round of road and
bridge projects had offered bids 15 percent lower than the state had expected. Utah
officials said some of their bids were coming in 25 percent lower than expected. And
a bid to build a 4.7mile extension of Interstate 49 from Shreveport, LA, toward the
Arkansas state line came in at $31.1 million, about $4.7 million less than the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development had estimated the project
would cost.
Officials in many states see the low bids as a sign that they are in a buyers market. A few years ago transportation officials in Utah, concerned that there was little
competition for their construction work, put together a team to try to entice more
companies to bid for the jobs. Now, as the first stimulus projects get under way,
they are getting a half-dozen bids for each joband many are coming in at 25 percent below their estimates.
Question. Is the Department finding similar competition for construction jobs and
a similar increase in the number of bidders on contracts? And are bids coming in
at lower than your estimates for the work?
Response. VA has been experiencing increased competition by firms competing for
major construction contracts in about one-half of the markets where we have awarded major contracts during this fiscal year.
The increased competition has produced favorable pricing which has enabled a
contract award of the full design without taking any deductions. In some cases,
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01256
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1257
where designs had been restrained to accommodate the prior robust economy, we
are able to consider restoration of items previously deleted from the design.
These recent experiences, coupled with periodic analysis being done in the markets where we will be planning to procure major construction services, have informed the estimates developed for the FY 2010 budget. For the estimates used in
the FY 2010 budget, we have included significantly less escalation than would have
been used in the FY 2009 budget, for example.
TRANSFORMATION REVIEW
Question. The budget submission includes funding for several programs that you
have identified as part of the Departments transformation process. It is my understanding that the transformation review is still ongoing. It is likely that, as this review moves toward completion, additional issue will arise and changes to Departmental operations will be identified. How do you think this will impact the 2010
budget request?
Response. The comprehensive organizational and management reviews in process
will generate additional transformation initiatives. Departmental leadership will
apply conclusions from these activities that may result in adjustments to the budget
request within the 2010 topline during the next several months. The results of this
ongoing management decision-making processin partnership with Congresswill
be a budget that starts VA down a path toward becoming a 21st Century organization.
SUSTAINABILITY
AND
ENERGY
Question. The fiscal year 2009 budget request and subsequent appropriation included funding within the Construction, Major Projects account for sustainability
and energy projects. This year there is no budget request for this effort. Can you
tell me why there is not a budget request and what that tells us about the Departments energy efficiency program?
Response: VA did not request this line item in FY 2010, as the sustainability and
energy efficiency/renewable energy requirements of major projects are now factored
directly into the project design and construction costs.
The Departments Energy Program is very robust and continues to grow each
year. For example, since 2006 VA has added approximately 90 facility-level energy
engineers to serve all VA facilities. VA benchmarks its medical and benefits office
facilities quarterly using EPAs EnergyStar Portfolio Manager, and is one of the few
organizations doing so via electronic data transfer. Twenty-seven VA medical centers have earned EnergyStar labels since 2002. Five VA facilities have won energy
or water management awards since FY 2005.
VA is committed to expanding the use of renewable energy and energy efficient
technologies. In FYs 2009 and 2010, VA plans to obligate approximately $126M for
the following types of energy projects:
Renewably-fueled cogeneration
Solar photovoltaic
Wind
Geothermal/ground source heat pump
Energy infrastructure improvements
Facility metering
Environmental management systems
In addition, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 provided the
Department with $1 billion in the medical facilities account (for non-recurring maintenance projects). Approximately $400M (40%) of these funds will be dedicated to
projects that feature an energy efficiency or renewable energy component.
DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION
Question. The budget request for Departmental Administration has an increase of
over 17% compared to the fiscal year 2009 appropriation, and an increase of about
6% in the number of full-time equivalent personnel. Included in personnel increases
are increases of 45% in the Office of Policy and Planning and 31.5% increase in the
Office of Congressional Affairs. What would justify such significant funding and personnel increases in administrative offices?
Response. A significant portion of the funding and staffing increases in General
Administration are needed to directly support a number of vital transformation initiatives. VA will create a reliable management infrastructure that expands or enhances corporate transparency at VA and places much greater focus on improved
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01257
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1258
client services and enhanced responsiveness to the needs of Veterans and all VA
stakeholders.
Transformation initiatives supported by the 2010 budget are:
$8.5 million and 6 FTE to expand the VA-DoD Joint Collaboration Office in the
Office of Policy and Planning. This office will provide oversight for the joint governance and strategic planning process, and provide analytical information to support
analysis of policy and program issues that affect VADoD collaboration efforts, including joint responsibilities in the continuum of care and services from service
member to Veteran status.
$1.5 million and 9 FTE to establish a Corporate Analysis and Evaluation function that would analyze investment options for the Secretary and provide an analytical basis for making investment decisions on current programs and new initiatives.
$645 thousand to fund the new Office of Acquisition, Construction, and Logistics
which is responsible for overseeing the resources, services, and projects that comprise VAs capital facilities program, and directing the Departments acquisition and
logistics activities (Supply Fund). The necessity of this office is highlighted by the
$1.921 billion in capital funding in our 2010 budget request.
To implement VAs Paralympic program pursuant to Public Law 110389, $5.5
million is budgeted for grants to local providers to help implement the program and
for direct subsistence payments to participating Veterans and service members. This
program will be administered by the Office of Public and Intergovernmental Affairs.
$2 million for Enterprise-wide training and Corporate-level HR programs in the
Office of Human Resources and Administration. VAs Corporate Senior Executive
Management Office is being established to recruit, develop, and retain a cadre of
people-centric and results-oriented senior managers committed to serving Veterans
and VAs mission. VA will also move forward on establishing a Human Resource
Corporate Consulting Center. The corporate approach will allow VA to move from
a transactional based process to a consulting center that provides expertise on training, adult learning, workforce and succession planning, performance measures and
evaluation, and VAs business acumen.
$2.8 million and 24 FTE for crises management exercises and VA readiness programs in the Office of Security and Preparedness. This funding will allow VA to prepare and validate VAs ability to perform mission essential functions during crises;
provide for a Personnel Security and Suitability Office to strengthen background investigations; strengthen VAs police inspections program; provide for a Personal
Identity Verification (PIV) program office at Central Office; and strengthen VAs
special access program for classified information.
$1.7 million and 12 FTE for the Office of Congressional and Legislative Affairs
to be able to respond to Congress in a more timely way to the increasing number
of requests from Congress and stakeholders.
FEDERAL RECOVERY COORDINATORS

Question. Witnesses at the House Veterans Affairs Committee hearing on April
28th indicated that there was a great need for the assistance of Federal Recovery
Coordinators for our seriously injured veterans even after they had transitioned
from the DoD health care system to the Veterans Health Administration.
1. Can you tell me if the fiscal year 2010 budget submission includes funds for
additional Federal Recovery Coordinators?
Response. The FRCP received over $4.4 million from Patient Care Services (PCS)
for Fiscal Year 2009. The funding from PCS enables FRCP to increase its budget
should the need arise. This is the first year that FRCPs budget has been tracked
independent of the PCS budget. As such, by the end of FY 09 we will know the total
costs of this program, including travel and training. Right now, it would appear that
FRCPs current funding of over $4.4 million is more than sufficient to support its
current operations.
Currently, FRCP has 14 Federal Recovery Coordinators. We are in the process of
hiring a third FRC to fill a current vacancy in the National Naval Medical Center,
Bethesda. This will fill all slots that are currently in place for the program. FRCP
is constantly assessing its workload and with a weekly census of its clientele, is able
to closely monitor if the program will need more FRCs. The funding permits such
hiring should it be deemed necessary.
2. Can you tell me if you plan to provide Federal Recovery Coordinators for all
seriously injured veterans?
Response. The program is designed to assist severely wounded, ill or injured recovering service members, Veterans, and their families access the care, services, and
benefits provided through the various programs in the Departments of Defense and
Veterans Affairs, other federal agencies, states, and private sector. Program eligi-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01258
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1259
bility criteria were approved by the Senior Oversight Committee and include those
service members or veterans who are:
1. Receiving acute care at military treatment facility;
2. Diagnosed with:
a. Spinal Cord Injury,
b. Burns,
c. Amputation,
d. Visual Impairment,
e. Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), and
f. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD);
3. Considered at risk for psychosocial complication;
4. Self referred based on perceived ability to benefit from a recovery plan; and
5. Command referral based on perceived ability to benefit from a recovery plan.
In addition, the program has a strategy to reach out to those who went through
the system prior to the programs inception and who might still benefit from a recovery plan and care coordination.
MEDICAL RESEARCH
Question. Mr. Secretary, I note that the budget request includes a substantial increase of $70 million this year for medical research, an increase of over 13%. The
recent review of the Medical Research account by the VA Office of Inspector General
confirmed that the research areas funded by the Department relate strongly to the
diseases and injuries most prevalent in our Veterans population.
1. Can you please discuss the Departments plan for the $70 million increase for
Fiscal Year 2010 and how it relates to our Veteran populations? How do you measure the success of VA research?
Response. VAs Office of Research and Development (ORD) funded studies are relevant to our Veteran populations and address research questions related to improved understanding, treating, and preventing diseases and injuries, as well as improving healthcare delivery and services. The additional funding requests are specifically targeted for areas of high importance in which further studies are necessary
for specific needs including:
New research initiatives are planned that are related specifically to the newest
Veterans returning from Afghanistan and Iraq (Operations Enduring Freedom
(OEF) and Iraqi Freedom (OIF)), and VA requests $20 million above the current
base spending of $279 million for this component. These initiatives will be directed
towards further understanding and treating physical and mental health problems
prevalent in OEF/OIF Veterans including National Guard and reserve populations;
however, many of these studies will provide results that can be generalized to all
Veterans, e.g., if a new therapy is shown effective for PTSD or TBI.
New initiatives are planned to increase research to improve access to healthcare
and to better address rural healthcare needs. This effort will be relevant to all veteran populations who need readily available access to healthcare services wherever
they live. This request represents a $14 million increase above the current base
spending of $24 million.
Personalized medicine research initiatives represent an additional $14 million
above the current base of $40 million. These studies will also be relevant to all veteran populations, as results will better inform both the basis for disease and an individuals treatment response to drugs that consider genetic make up. Discoveries
from personalized medicine research will transform health care in the very near future, and research in this area will have a direct impact on the health of all Veteran
populations.
The remaining $22 million of the requested increase will cover pay raises and inflationary costs associated with conducting medical research.
VA research success is measured both internally and externally. Internal evaluations include competitive renewals of programs that have been evaluated as successful, research audits, and inspections, e.g., recent OIG finding that VA research is
strongly relevant to Veterans needs. Examples of external evaluations include peer
reviewed publications and evaluations by the Office of Management and Budget. An
example of success from VAs research program is improved health care options for
Veterans. Following ORD supported research on PTSD among women Veterans,
VAs Office of Mental Health Services is now supporting a national rollout of training in a therapy called prolonged exposure therapy, which has shown real results
in treating women Veterans who suffer from PTSD. Women who received this therapy were more likely to no longer meet PTSD diagnosis criteria and were more likely to achieve total remission.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01259
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1260
2. The Department of Defense has recently received significant increases in research funding for TBI, PTSD and prosthetics. What mechanism exists to ensure
the two Departments leverage their research dollars to achieve the maximum impact in shared areas of interest?
Response. While there is no formal mechanism for leveraging funding between the
Department of Defense (DoD) and VA, both agencies have benefitted immensely
from a close collaboration on research efforts in the areas of TBI, PTSD and prosthetics, which is fostered through regular meetings of VA and DoD research leadership and investigators alike. The following are some key examples of these collaborations, which are intended to prevent overlap in research funding and extend, as
far as possible, the valuable resources allocated to the respective agencies for research:
VA ORD staff serve as advisors to the DoD research offices, developing requests
for proposals in the area of TBI and PTSD, as well as provide advice for identifying
key priority areas for funding announcements. VA has worked closely with DoD
Center of Excellence for TBI and Psychological Health (DCOE) and Congressionally
Designated Medical Research Programs (CDMRP) on developing research programs.
VA ORD staff serve as advisors on the Executive Advisory Board for the newly
funded DoD Clinical Consortium and is thus informed about new clinical trial proposals and potential areas for collaboration. The Director of the Executive Advisory
Board is a VA scientist.
The Deputy Chief of Research and Development serves on the Board of Directors for the Armed Forces Institute of Regenerative Medicine.
Key DoD research leaders participate actively in meetings of the VA National
Research Advisory Council.
VA staff have attended the strategic planning meetings for the DCOE, including
serving in working groups to develop research targets and goals.
VA staff regularly participate as reviewers for DoD scientific proposalsas peer
review committee members, as secondary level reviewers, and as Integration Panel
members. All of these roles serve to integrate the research efforts between the funding agencies.
VA and DoD have jointly sponsored large integration conferences for TBI and
Psychological Health (PH). One recent effort was a conference designed for eight
working groups to develop recommendations for common data elements for TBI and
PH, so that data definitions and measures are more standardized across studies.
The results of this conference will be available during FY2010.
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROCUREMENT

Question. Please provide the Committee with an assessment of the state of procurement at your department.
Response. VA has implemented several significant steps to improve the state of
its procurement operations. As of May 1, 2009, VA is midway through a process to
implement several major organizational changes, many of which are derived from
the results of a comprehensive study conducted by Pricewaterhouse Coopers (PwC).
As a result of the study, VA is implementing a plan to improve both the efficiency
and effectiveness of the acquisition function within VA. The major tenets of this
plan are as follows:
Leadership: In an effort to consolidate one central authority for all VA acquisitions, the Secretary created the Office of Acquisition, Logistics and Construction. In
addition, the Secretary has requested legislation to establish an Assistant Secretary
who will oversee all Department-wide procurements.
Personnel: While not directly attributed to the study, VA established clearer
lines of authority within the VA Central Office buying units. In addition to existing
offices in Austin, TX; Hines, IL; Denver, CO; and Frederick, MD, a Technology Acquisition Center (TAC) in Eatontown, NJ was established to focus primarily on
managing information technology (IT) contracts.
Training and Development: In August 2008, VA launched the first civilian acquisition academy, whose size and scope is second only to the Defense Acquisition
University (DAU). Using OMBs Federal Acquisition Certification (FAC) standards,
the Academy will focus on all aspects of acquisition workforce training which include: Contracting Officers, Contracting Officers Technical Representatives (COTR),
and Project and Program Managers (P/PM).
Further, in FY 2010, VA will launch a Competency Assessment Center (CAC) as
a precursor to any training and development. Ultimately, a key measure to assess
effectiveness is the degree to which an acquisition professional closes a specific competency gap(s). The Office of Personnel Management is working closely with VA to
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01260
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1261
develop the CAC since the concept revolutionizes the way VA (and government) targets training opportunities and tracks the competency of the workforce.
Technology: VA has enhanced its contract management systems with state-ofthe-art technology in two primary areas. The first area is the contract writing system, which systematically guides contracting officers (CO) through the development
of all contractual documents. COs are mandated to use this system for all contract
actions over $25,000 and cannot issue a contract unless several key data fields are
entered. These changes alone will significantly improve the quality of contracts and
ability to track performance.
The second change is with reporting capability. By adding business intelligence
capability to the system, VA now has the ability to:
a. Measure process efficiency (e.g., timeliness),
b. Assess compliance with acquisition laws and policies, and
c. Predict whether a specific program is behind schedule so corrective action
can be taken.
These enhancements are being used successfully to manage and report progress
on over 1,300 separate procurement actions under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009. In FY 2010, the technology and process changes will
be expanded to all procurements managed by VA. In the future, VA will integrate
the contract management system with the Departments financial management systems to ensure that proper reconciliation is done between commitments and obligations.
Structures and Processes: As the second largest civilian federal agency, VA employs over 1,300 GS1102 contracting officials, obligates over $15 billion annually,
and processes nearly five million contract actions.1 Since 2003, VA has experienced
exponential growth (see Table 2) in both contracting actions (98 percent) and obligations (280 percent).
1 Based on FY 2007 data from the Federal Procurement Data SystemNext Generation
(FPDSNG).
2 It is noteworthy that continued growth in dollar obligations and transactions is anticipated
given the importance of VAs mission to serve Americas growing Veteran population.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01261
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
Insert offset folio 2556A here 50526D.096
Conversely, the total number of GS1102s has increased at a significantly lower

rate.2 This growth in volume and obligations without an equivalent increase in the
number of contracting officials has put a significant strain on the workforce and on
the acquisition system.
Therefore, VA has instituted aggressive strategies to change its internal structures and processes to improve workflow efficiencies and to implement a staffing
and workflow plan that improves the quantity and competency of its workforce. The
primary goals are to ensure that:
1. VA COs are highly competent and qualified to manage the burgeoning workload.
2. VA is structured in a manner that reduces process inefficiencies and workload
redundancies.
Given that the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) manages nearly 80% of all
procurements within VA, one task in the PwC study was to recommend an optimum
1262
organizational structure to improve the quality and efficiency of VHAs procurement
function. Of the several recommendations provided by PwC, VA adopted the one
that realigns VHAs acquisition management function from a largely decentralized
structure to a more centralized model. Under this recommendation, VHAs leadership hierarchy will consist of seasoned acquisition professionals.
Headquartered in Washington, D.C. the new structure will have three regional directors with line authority over VHA field activities (e.g., Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISNs)). This is a significant departure from the former decentralized
organizational structure where the VISN procurement officers reported directly to
local leadership. Under the new model, the Departments Senior Procurement Executive delegates all authority and has oversight responsibility over VHAs procurement operations.
By creating a contracting-centric organization and reporting structure and requiring that senior VHA leaders be well trained and experienced in the procurement
field, the quality of acquisition within VHA should improve significantly.
In addition to the organizational realignment in VHA, VA realigned procurement
operations within the VA Central Office (VACO). To help attract talent from those
non-VA procurement professionals who may live in the Maryland area and do not
want to commute into Washington, VACOs operations are being transitioned to our
Center for Acquisition Innovation co-located with the VA Acquisition Academy facility in Frederick, MD. Table 4, submitted in response to question number 3, shows
each buying unit, the FTE count, and the major customers.
Eventually, all buying for VACO customers will reside in that facility. In addition,
the aforementioned TAC in New Jersey will focus primarily on IT purchases, an
area that will experience significant investment and growth over the next several
years. The addition of the TAC will help to relieve the significant IT workload which
currently resides in Austin, TX and the Cleveland Business Center.
Under the realignment, the National Acquisition Center (NAC) in Hines, IL, will
continue to focus on purchases for medical and surgical equipment through delegated federal supply schedule authority granted by the General Services Administration. The NAC supports the needs of VA hospitals as well as the Departments
of Defense and Health and Human Services. Further, through a world-class intern
program, which hires up to 30 interns annually, VA firmly believes that building
a new generation of acquisition professionals is the soundest long-term strategy.
This new talent will receive high quality training, development and on-the-job experience. The goal is to teach the interns new and innovative ways of managing procurements. More importantly, they will be nurtured and molded for increasingly
complex leadership roles in the future.
The major changes to the structures, processes, measurement systems and information technology represent transformational steps toward improving how goods
and services are procured in VA.
Question. I understand that some of the procurement offices (Austin and Cleveland) have stated that they will not handle any new information technology procurements for the remainder of FY 2009 because they do not have the capacity. Is this
true?
Response. Historically, program offices have randomly assigned work to various
acquisition offices without prior planning and acquisition strategy. A consolidated
strategy has been developed to meet the priority information technology procurements for the remainder of FY 2009. The Center for Acquisition Innovation (CAI),
in Austin, TX, is slated to execute 111 contract actions for an approximate total of
$355M for the remainder of FY 2009. However, executable requirements packages
have not yet been received for some of these actions, jeopardizing the timely award
and obligation of funds. CAI Austin, in coordination with interns from the VA Acquisition Academy, will additionally award several simplified acquisitions in support
of the Office of Information Technology. CAI Austin does currently have 16 vacancies and recruitment efforts are underway to identify and retain qualified contracting professionals. As requirements continue to emerge, there is a real possibility that we will need to work with GSA to accept contracting requirements to execute on behalf of VA.
Question. For the record, please submit to the Committee a list of all procurement
offices, which offices they service, as well as the number of filled positions and vacancies for each.
Response. Profile of VA Workforce
Table 3 shows the distribution of the GS1102 operational contracting officers/specialists across the Department and the planned number of new full time equivalent
(FTE) positions.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01262
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1263
TABLE 3TOTAL NUMBER OF GS1102S BY FISCAL YEAR (200308)*
Category
2003
2004
Total GS1102 Workforce .......................

% increase from previous fiscal year ....
766
..........
786
2.6
2005
2006
808
2.8
2007
851
5.3
2008
909
6.8
Total increase
between
20032008
1167
28.4
Total projected for

2009*
+401
52.3
1407*
17.1*
*Includes 160 new positions at the TAC, 30 additional interns and approximately 50 positions in VHA.
Table 4 provides a breakdown of the total number of contracting officials. Note

that VHA represents over 65 percent of the total GS1102 workforce and approximately 82 percent of total dollars obligated.
TABLE 4DISTRIBUTION OF THE GS1102 WORKFORCE (AS OF MAY 1, 2009)

Number of
authorized GS
1102s
Administration/Office
Number of
vacancies
On board
VACO 1 .........................................................................................................
VHA 2 ...........................................................................................................
CFM 3 ...........................................................................................................
VBA 4 ...........................................................................................................
NCA 5 ...........................................................................................................
407
871
17
24
19
192
739
15
23
16
215
132
2
1
3
TOTAL GS1102s ................................................................................
1,338
985
353
1 Includes
VACO staff offices, OALC Field elements (i.e., National Acquisition Center, Denver Acquisition and Logistic Center, and the Centers
for Acquisition Innovation), VBA, VHA, and most major systems procurements for OIT.
2 Includes purchases for energy, local medical center procurements.
3 All major construction VA-wide.
4 Most buying is within the simplified purchasing threshold and orders under IDIQ contracts.
5 Manages services to support the national cemeteries and non-recurring maintenance.
Question. I understand that an effort is underway to assess and prioritize IT procurements. What is the status of this effort, and what is the way forward to ensuring that crucial IT procurements are handled expeditiously?
Response. As a result of recent meetings between the Office of Acquisition and Logistics (OAL) and the Office of Information Technology (OIT), we have identified 625
OIT requirements for an estimated $896M for FY 2009 execution. OIT Development
has prioritized its requirements and continues to work with the OAL to ensure that
all priority one requirements are assigned and executed. Joint acquisition planning
and execution efforts are ongoing, and OAL is pursuing additional capacity through
assisted acquisitions.
Question. What is your FY 2010 request for the Office of Acquisition, Logistics,
and Constructionhow many new positions are you requesting? Is this adequate
given the continued emphasis on complicated information technology procurements?
Response. The Office of Acquisition, Logistics and Constructions (OALC) FY 2010
budget request is $50.7 million. Of this amount, $645 thousand is to support the
Office of the Executive Director OALC, and $50.1 million is to support the Office
of Construction and Facilities Management (CFM). The requested budget authority
is an increase of $5,485,000 from FY 2009 and adds 16 new FTE. The additional
staff is to support the increased major construction and leasing workload in CFM.
The Office of Acquisition and Logistics (OAL), which has the primary responsibility of supporting the information technology procurements, is funded through a
self-sustaining revolving account known as the Supply Fund which is non-appropriated funds. The FY 2010 budget reflects that the Supply Fund will support 662
FTE, an increase of 30 FTE over 2009. The increases are primarily due to the establishment of the Technology Acquisition Center and additional acquisition interns at
the VA Acquisition Academy. These resources are adequate to meet our current information technology program and mission needs.
TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION CENTER

Question. I understand that your Department is working with the Department of
Defense to establish a Technology Acquisition Center. Would you please give the
Committee a brief overview of this new Center? What do you hope to gain from this
activity, and when will it be fully operational? What is its missionwill it handle
only IT-related procurements?
Response. VA has recognized for some time the need to increase its contracting
officer population and has taken significant steps, both near term and long term,
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01263
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1264
to accomplish this. In addition to enhancing its recruiting activities to draw from
the ever-shrinking pool of trained contracting professionals in the Federal workplace, VAs most significant near term solution to increase quickly its number of
seasoned contracting officers is both resourceful and unique.
VA is establishing a Technology Acquisition Center (TAC) near Fort Monmouth,
New Jersey. The U.S. Army post, Fort Monmouth, New Jersey, will be closed in
2011 under the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 2005 implementation plan.
Fort Monmouth is home to one of the premier Contracting Centers in the Army.
This contracting workforce contains an experienced core of contract specialists and
other acquisition professionals that are dedicated to the acquisition of IT. VA has
moved swiftly to hire the current Army acquisition staff that desire to remain in
the area and continue their Federal service. By creating the TAC in Eatontown, NJ,
VA will acquire the skills and abilities of 167 acquisition professionals (over 80 of
which are contract specialists) in a very short period of time. This initiative is expected to be fully staffed by August 2009 and the TAC will have three distinct functional areas. These areas include contracting; an Acquisition Rapid Response Office,
which will assist in the development of acquisition documents; and a Program Management Office, which will assist VA Program Managers in the management of their
programs. The staff will support the entire acquisition lifecycle, not just the contracting piece as is traditionally found in procurement organizations.
OFFICE
OF INFORMATION AND
TECHNOLOGY HIRING FREEZE
Question. Would you please tell the Committee why there is a hiring freeze, when
it was instituted, and what impact it is having on the Department?
Response. There has been a hiring freeze within OI&T beginning in early February 2009. The hiring freeze was implemented within OI&T because funding for
payroll was insufficient to cover on-board staffing through the end of the fiscal year.
As a result, VA requested a reprogramming of $28 million within the IT Systems
appropriation to support payroll requirements. We appreciate the Committees support of VAs reprogramming request. The Department could not maintain its strong
commitment to Veterans to provide high quality and effective IT operational services and development without obtaining the $28 million reprogramming and lifting
the hiring freeze.
Question. For the record, would you please submit to the Committee a list of all
offices within OI&T, as well as the number of filled positions and vacancies for each
office?
Response. The organizations within OI&T are as follows along with the current
staffing on-board as of April 24, 2009, and current critical vacancies associated with
each that have not been filled:
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Information & Technology: 1 staff, 0
vacancy
Office of Quality, Performance & Oversight: 200 staff; 2 vacancies
Office of Information Protection & Risk Management: 580 staff; 29 vacancies
Office of IT Enterprise Strategy, Policy, Plans & Programs: 44 staff: 7 vacancies
Office of IT Resource Management: 92 staff; 2 vacancies
Office of Enterprise Development: 879 staff; 53 vacancies
Office of Operations & Field Development: 4,965 staff; 250 vacancies
Question. I am slightly perturbed at hearing about this hiring freeze, because we
tried to help you last year. Last year, our Committee pointed out to VA that OI&T
had a staffing requirement to hire 1,990 additional FTEs, most of these in the field
providing IT support in the many medical centers. However, in responses back to
the Committee, the Department stated that VA only needed to hire an additional
247 staff in FY08 . . . and you requested only 94 additional FTE.
Response. The 2010 budget request includes funding to support an additional 800
FTE. In addition, OI&T, as part of VAs transformation to the 21st Century review
process, is completing a staffing analysis to determine/validate the staffing needs of
OI&T. See Table 1 below.
Question. I understand that your FY 2010 request includes funds to hire 600 more
IT people for the field, and another 200 IT for the VA Central Office. Does your
budget include enough funds to hire these 800 new people? Is 800 new staff enough?
Response. As shown in our budget submission to Congress, 600 FTE will support
Enterprise Operations and Field Development IT support. Other field personnel include field development staff as well as field security and information protection
staff. 25 FTE of the 800 FTE is attributable to VA Central Office. Sufficient funding
is included in the FY 2010 budget request to fund 800 additional FTE as well as
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01264
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1265
correct the payroll funding shortages (correcting the base) experienced in FY 2009.
In addition, OI&T, as part of VAs transformation to the 21st century review process, is completing a staffing analysis to determine/validate the staffing needs of
OI&T.
TABLE 1OFFICE OF INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY

[FY 20092010 FTE Distribution]
Enterprise Operations and Field

Development (EOFD) ...............
Enterprise Development ...............
Information Protection & Risk
Management (IPRM) ................
OI&T Corporate Administration ....
Total OI&T FTE ....................
FY 2009 BA
FTE
FY 2009
FTE reimb.
4,747
801
1,781
64
620
370
6,538
FY 2009
total
FY 2010
total
Total increase/decrease
FY 2010 BA
FTE
FY 2010
FTE reimb.
4,925
865
5,347
912
178
64
5,525
976
600
111
0
0
620
370
684
395
0
0
684
395
64
25
242
6,780
7,338
242
7,580
800
HEALTHEVET INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN

Question. What is the status of this effort and when does VA expect to have a
comprehensive Integrated Master Plan (IMP)?
Response. For over 18 months, the Office of Information and Technology (OI&T)
and Veterans Health Administration (VHA) have worked closely to develop a
HealtheVet integrated program plan (IPP). In the wake of the issues that arose
from the Replacement Scheduling Application (RSA), VA is engaging in a full review
of all HealtheVet modules, materials, and plans. The outcome of this evaluation will
provide VA sufficient information to establish authoritative completion dates for an
Integrated Master Plan (IMP).
Question. Do enhancements and modernization projects allow for more modular
services or SOA type approach allowing for best of breed modules which could be
internally developed or purchased and then integrated?
Response. VA recognizes the many benefits of implementing Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) as part of enhancements and modernization projects, and moreover, is in the process of incorporating SOA into VAs planning and implementation
activities. Implementing a service oriented architecture offers VA significant benefits from both a business and IT perspective. Among the major advantages of using
SOA at VA are greater flexibility and efficiency, as well as quicker reactions to
changing governance and compliance requirements and business processes.
VA is currently in a strategic and sequential process of moving to a service oriented architecture. The first major instance of VAs use of SOA is within the longterm efforts of the Post-9/11 GI Bill implementation, commonly called the Chapter
33 program. The Chapter 33 program will be the first reference implementation of
SOA. VA is currently developing a detailed roadmap and plan for SOA implementation. VA anticipates completion of this roadmap by December 2009.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM CHAIRMAN EDWARDS: INFORMATION

QUESTIONS
AND
TECHNOLOGY
Question. What projects are underway that define the VAs approach to moving
to a new hardware platform?
Response. OI&T has projects underway on several fronts to replace the legacy
hardware platform for the Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology
Architecture (VistA). There are three primary components of the solutions which
will be addressed separately. These are the application servers, those on which client sessions run, database servers, those which fetch data and return it to the client
applications, and the storage platform which holds the patient data. Efforts to modernize these platform components are tightly integrated into the National Data Center Project (NDCP), and the sequencing of these initiatives is coordinated with the
migration of VistA systems into the NDCP.
The specifics of these projects to upgrade this hardware platform are as follows:
Application Serverstesting has been completed on commodity x86 server technology running both LINUX and Windows. Production systems running Windows
are in place in VISN 23 and being finalized for testing in the data center environment in Region 4. Production systems running LINUX are in limited operation in
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01265
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1266
the Sacramento Data Center. Regardless of the operating system chosen to run on
these platforms the commodity nature of x86 platforms has been validated as providing exceptional stability and performance for this component of the VistA hardware solution.
Database Serverstesting is underway for the migration of this component off of
end-of-sale HP Alpha and on to Itanium technology. This strategy will allow OI&T
to continue to leverage the OpenVMS operating system which offers the least complicated path for migration. A production instance of VistA at the Cleveland VAMC
has been brought online with Itanium and is being evaluated. The results are early
but impressive. OI&T has begun to explore alternative platforms for this hardware
component to verify the best technology to provide this solution. Current plans are
to continue with Itanium while analysis is completed.
Storagethe current storage infrastructure utilized for VistA spans a series of
mid-life and end-of-life technologies, based on when the last facility-based technical
refresh was executed. These disparities will be addressed as VistA systems are migrated into data centers. The current storage platform in the data center solution
is mid-life and has support and capacity for expansion, but is mid-tier and cannot
effectively scale to meet future demand. Testing has been completed on an enterprise-class storage platform and funding to begin the implementation of this more
technically appropriate solution has been budgeted in FY10.
Question. What is the Plan to modernize VistA, and will this plan help coordinate
software development efforts that would enable reuse of existing legacy VistA components deemed valuable to the organization?
Response: HealtheVet is the technological plan to modernize VistA. Joint efforts
between the internal Office of Information and Technology (OI&T) and Veterans
Health Administration/Office of Health Information (VHA/OHI) have been established to validate and document the scope, business architecture and Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) for the HealtheVet System-of-Systems. These collaborative
efforts are assisting with the development of a comprehensive strategic plan that
will execute this major IT program, including cost models and respective Integrated
Master Plan/Integrated Master Schedule (IMP/IMS) necessary to manage and sustain HealtheVet projects/products. Items in this plan will not only allow the organization to understand the necessary development efforts, but it will also eliminate
duplication of functional services, ideally maximizing the resources at VA and of
HealtheVet. At this time, we have identified some improvements to Vista Legacy
to support the immediate and critical needs, as well as continue to define the future
direction of HealtheVet.
Question. Is the VA looking at commercial best practices for implementing clinical
systems and integration of disparate systems in the private healthcare sector?
Response. Yes. HealtheVet targets commercial best practices for implementation,
integration and evaluation.
Question. What is the incremental technology roadmap, starting in 2009, for sequencing modernization of the hardware and software for IT modernization supporting VHA?
Response. The slides at attachment 1 present a high-level technology roadmap for
modernizing the software supporting VHA.
Question. What is the plan for improving VHAs ability to acquire needed services
like systems integration and customization for VistA enhancement as well as modernization?
Response. VAs strategy for improving acquisition of systems integration and
customization is shifting to address not only the acquisition process itself, but also
new approaches to development and program management. VA is working to establish project management methods that center around agile development, frequent
testing, and substantial end-user involvement. Several pilot projects are underway
that utilize these processes, and initiatives like the HealtheVet governance model
and HealtheVet Acquisition Strategy include heavy involvement from both technical
and business staff.
VA continues to face acquisition and staffing challenges, both of which impact program timelines. OI&T is working to adopt an Integrated Project Team approach to
software development, which features not only technical, engineering, and business
involvement, but also representatives of key functions including human resources
and acquisitions. This approach engages acquisition staff earlier in the development
process, facilitating a more strategic approach to the acquisition process that will
help mitigate some of the challenges faced to date. Challenges to IT acquisition remain, however, and VA continues to investigate better and more permanent solutions to these issues.
Question. What VA contract vehicles and VA contracting officers are available to
support maintenance and modernization efforts for hardware, software and services?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01266
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1267
Response. Available VA contracts: Currently, VA has few internal contract vehicles for the procurement of information technology (IT) hardware, software, and
services. In accordance with federal acquisition regulations, VA makes maximum
use of existing Government-wide Acquisition Contracts (GWACs) and the General
Services Administrations (GSA) Federal Supply Schedules. Recently however, VA
has determined that the award of enterprise wide contracts would enhance our ability to leverage our acquisition workforce and provide us the opportunity to establish
better terms, conditions, and pricing than are generally available through existing
non-VA contracts. VA intends to begin the process of developing these new contracts
in fiscal year 2010.
Current VA contracts include:
a. Ten Global Information Technology Support Services (GITSS) Contractsordering contracts for a full array of IT services
b. Blanket Purchasing Agreement (BPA) awarded under GSA IT Schedule 70 for
lease of desktop computers, monitors, maintenance and installation services
c. Eight BPAs awarded under GSA IT Schedule 70 for VistA Contractor Services
to maintain and support VistA legacy systems
In addition to these VA-awarded contracts, VA makes significant use of the following GWACs and GSA contracts/schedules in acquiring IT hardware, software,
and services:
a. GSA Veterans Technology Services (VETS) GWAC, which is a preferred
source for acquiring IT services per VA policy
b. NASA Solutions for Enterprise Wide Procurement (SEWP) IV GWAC, which is
a mandatory source for acquiring VA hardware, software, maintenance and installation services per VA policy
c. GSA Federal Supply Schedule 70 for IT equipment, software, and services. This
is probably the most widely used IT procurement vehicle throughout the Federal
government.
VA contracting Officers: VAs Office of Acquisition and Logistics (OAL) is the principal contracting activity within VA for the procurement of hardware, software, and
information technology (IT) services. Within OAL the main organizations focused on
the procurement of IT are the Center for Acquisition Innovation (CAI), Austin,
Texas campus; and the newly created Technology Acquisition Center (TAC), located
in Eatontown, NJ.
VA has recognized for some time the need to increase its contracting officer population and has taken significant steps, both near term and long term, to accomplish
this. In addition to enhancing its recruiting activities to draw from the ever-shrinking pool of trained contracting professionals in the Federal workplace, VAs most
significant near term solution to increase quickly its number of seasoned contracting
officers is both resourceful and unique.
The U.S. Army post, Fort Monmouth, New Jersey, will be closed in 2011 under
the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 2005 implementation plan. Fort Monmouth is home to one of the premier Contracting Centers in the Army. This contracting workforce contains an experienced core of contract specialists and other acquisition professionals that are dedicated to the acquisition of IT. VA has moved
swiftly to hire the current Army acquisition staff that desire to remain in the area
and continue their Federal service. By creating the TAC in Eatontown, NJ, VA will
acquire the skills and abilities of 167 acquisition professionals (over 80 of which are
contract specialists) in a very short period of time. The TAC is expected to be fully
staffed by August 2009. The TAC will have three distinct functional areas. These
areas include contracting, an Acquisition Rapid Response Office which will assist in
the development of acquisition documents and a Program Management Office which
will assist VA Program Managers in the management of their programs. The staff
will support the entire acquisition lifecycle not just the contracting piece as is traditionally found in procurement organizations.
Through the VA Acquisition Academy (VAAA) in Frederick, MD, VA is training
a cadre of acquisition interns for the future. The first class of interns has successfully completed its first year of intensive acquisition training, while VA is in the
process of selecting suitable candidates for its second intern class which is slated
to start training during the Summer of 2009. The VAAA has made significant
progress to ensure that future VA contract specialists/contracting officers have the
requisite training and certifications to support critical program execution. In addition to the FACC training, the VAAA is developing a project and program management development program that exceeds the minimum FAC-Program/Project Management (FACP/PM) requirements. The VAs FACP/PM program will be applied
learning based and address all levels of expertise with an expanded set of competencies to ensure the VAs project and program managers are capable of delivering
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01267
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1268
the best value to the taxpayer. The VAs FACP/PM program is addressing information technology project/program management issues first.
The combined strength of the CAI and TAC contracting activities will exceed 220
acquisition professionals focused on supporting the IT requirements of the Department. In conjunction with VAs continued recruitment and retention initiatives, and
the development of its future acquisition workforce through the VAAA, this number
is considered adequate.
[Questions for the record submitted by Ranking Member Zach

Wamp]
TRANSFORMATION
Question. How will this transformation occur? Will transformation occur in-house
using policy directives set by you, or will you be working with this Committee and
the authorizing Committee on legislative proposals to transform the VA? What role
will Veterans groups have in the process?
Response. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has begun to lay down the
groundwork for transforming into a 21st Century organization that is Veteran-centric, results-driven and forward-looking. The approach used to transform VA will
employ leadership directives, suggestions from Veterans and their families, Veteran
Service Organizations, employees, unions, and work with Congress and its key committees to develop and enact legislative proposals to accelerate and support transformation. Laying the foundation for transformation began during the presidential
transition period in listening to the concerns and ideas from Congressional committee staff, Veteran Service Organizations, and VA employees. It continued in February when VA started developing a new vision statement with valuable input from
key stakeholders. VA interviewed Senate and House authorizing and appropriating
committee staff, conducted focus groups of Veterans and their family members, and
surveyed over 16,000 VA employees to learn more about their vision and expectations for a transformed Department.
Numerous ideas have been proposed by employees and other stakeholders. Several of these insights have been inserted into the work of the Transformation Task
Force (TTF). The TTF drives the transformation initiatives through the VA governance process using an iterative approach so that each proposal can be discussed, improved, and ultimately approved. The governance process is a transparent method
allowing every organization in the Department to participate in the decision making
process on transformation initiatives.
Question. Give us an example of something as it is at the VA today, and what
it would look like under transformation?
Response. The development and implementation of a joint, virtual, lifetime electronic record, which will ultimately contain administrative and medical information
from the day an individual enters military service throughout their military career
and after they leave the military. Today, VA relies on reams of paper, which is difficult to locate, housed in various locations, and is not integrated with data owned
by the Department of Defense.
This disparate and inefficient approach leads to negative experiences when Veterans interact with VA and the possibility for inaccurate responses and decisions.
In the future, regardless of where a Veteran is located his or her complete record
would be available for use by the Veteran, VA, and DoD.
Question. Your testimony says that resources are included in the budget for this
transformation that will take more than one year to complete. How much is in this
budget that is directly tied to the transformation and what does it get us?
Response. The FY10 budget request submitted to Congress includes funding to
begin developing VA into a 21st Century organization. This includes $144 million
to continue moving toward the Presidents goal of reforming the benefits claims
process to make VAs claims decisions timely, accurate, and consistent through use
of automated systems. It will strengthen service to Veterans by providing them the
capability to apply for and manage their benefits on-line. It will also reduce the
movement of paper files and further secure Veterans personal information. As additional transformation initiatives are identified as a result of the organizational and
management reviews, more funds within the budget topline will be denoted as part
of the VA transformation over the next several months.
Question. Does transformation buy us a new Assistant Secretary for Logistics, Acquisition and Construction? Is this just another layer of bureaucracy?
Response. The FY2010 budget request contains funding for new approaches to
meeting emerging needs that will change the way VA does its work. Funding for
the new office of the Assistant Secretary for Acquisition, Logistics and Construction
is one of these new approaches. Currently, VA contracts for goods and services in
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01268
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1269
a variety of places, using a variety of methods, which leads to little available enterprise data about the use and purpose of funds. The new office of the Assistant Secretary for Acquisition, Logistics and Construction is designed to minimize added bureaucracy by elevating an existing office that is charged with managing this portfolio for the Department. Establishing the new office of the Assistant Secretary
brings the needed discipline to VAs acquisition, logistics and construction processes,
harvests efficiencies to spend VA budget dollars more effectively, and improves management results for all organizations in VA who use contracting services.
ADVANCED APPROPRIATIONS
FOR
VA MEDICAL CARE
Question. When does the administration plan to submit its advance appropriations
for medical care proposal to the Congress? What is the current thinking on what
the proposal would be?
Response. The VA is currently working to finalize the details in its plan for advanced appropriations. We will work with the Congress to execute the plan this
year.
VA INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RISKS

Question. How do you reconcile the substantial request for IT with the testimony
the IG provided to this Committee just a few weeks ago that we should be concerned
about VAs ability to effectively identify and manage its IT capital investments, and
ensure that annual funding decisions make the best use of available IT resources?
Response. VA will address OIG concerns through the implementation of an IT
Multi-Year Programming Process. Our IT Multi-Year Programming Process begins
with the Chief Information Officer (CIO) publishing official multi-year Programming
Guidance, over his signature, to key business stakeholders and subordinate deputies. The Programming Guidance addresses investment priorities based on the VA
Secretarys strategic goals and objectives in the respective out-years.
Once new program or increased investment proposals are submitted to the Office
of Information Technology (OI&T), the CIO convenes the Programming and LongTerm Issues Board (PLTIB), comprised of both business stakeholders and OI&T
staff members, to deliberate and provide a Program proposal to the IT Leadership
Board (ITLB), chaired by the VA Deputy Secretary. Once the ITLB approves the
Multi-Year Program, budget year guidance is provided to the Budget and NearTerm Issues Board (BNTIB) to develop the VA Secretarys budget request for IT to
the Office and Management and Budget (OMB). The BNTIB is comprised of essentially the same organizations (business stakeholders and OI&T staff members) as
the PLTIB.
This process lays out a capital investment planning process that provides a multiyear view, involves all stakeholders in the process, and ensures the oversight of the
senior leadership in the Department regarding all long-term IT investment decisions.
Question. If you could pick one, what is the highest priority increase in the VA
IT Budget?
Response. Providing post-9/11 GI benefits by August 2009 and supporting this initiative in FY 2010 remains the top IT priority. However, the funding request for
Paperless Delivery of Veterans Benefits is the highest priority increase in the FY
2010 request, as the funding increased from $1.5 million in FY 2009 to $143.68 million in FY 2010, the largest funding increase for any single initiative in the budget
request.
Question. Do you believe that the proposed increase to the VA IT account will
right-size the IT budget request and that you will not require a reprogramming
of funds into IT in fiscal year 10?
Response. At this time, the increase will support VAs OI&T budget requirements
for FY 2010. The Secretary has initiated a transformation process to prepare the
Department to operate in the 21st Century. This transformation process will take
place over the next three months, and may identify a potential reallocation of resources to support new initiatives.
Question. How does this budget request better meet the IT needs of VA?
Response. With the resources requested for FY 2010, VA will strengthen collaboration with the Department of Defense with the goal of improving patient safety and
care, and expediting benefit claims processing; automating the educational benefits
assistance system to handle the expanded benefits passed in the Post 911 Veterans
Educational Assistance Act of 2008; continue to develop Financial and Logistics Integrated Technology (FLITE) as the next generation core financial management system; and strengthen our IT workforce as well as our aging and fragile IT infrastructure.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01269
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1270
VA IT STAFFING (FTE) QUESTION
Question. How long will it take to hire, train, and fully integrate 800 new FTEs
into the VA IT organization?
Response. It will take approximately a year to first hire, and then train and fully
integrate 800 new FTEs into the VA OI&T organization.
VA BENEFITS CLAIMS BACKLOG
Question. Mr. Secretary you have been at the helm of the VA for a few months
now, and undoubtedly you have heard from various constituencies about the claims
backlog at the VA. Part of the issue is there seems to be an inconsistent definition
of what a backlogged claim is exactly. We have put funding in this bill over the last
two years to hire an additional 3,000 claims processors. What is the current claims
rating backlog? Have you been able to establish a common definition?
Response. The Veterans Benefits Administrations entire inventory of disability
claims is frequentlyand incorrectlyreferred to as the claims backlog. While
there are approximately 400,000 claims in our inventory, the majority of these
claims are not backlogged. The pending claims inventory is dynamic rather than
static. It includes all claims received, whether pending for just a few hours or as
long as six months. Completed claims are continuously removed from the inventory
while new claims are added. We are averaging over 82,000 new claims added to the
inventory each month during FY 2009.
VBAs strategic target for completing disability claims is 125 days. The target allows for necessary time awaiting evidence or expiration of statutory requirements
including the Veterans Claims Assistance Act. VA defines claims backlog as the
number of claims that have been pending longer than the 125day goal. As of the
end of April 2009, 138,415 claims (34% of the inventory) had been pending longer
than 125 days and should therefore be considered backlogged.
Since 2007, the number of field claims processing employees has increased by
more than 3,400 FTE. The increased staffing level is having an impact, and performance improvements are being achieved. The average days to complete claims
Fiscal Year To Date (FYTD) 2009 is 164 days, the lowest level since the hiring initiative began in January 2007. In April, we completed over 86,000 claims in an average of 156 days. Our production this fiscal year is 10 percent above the same period in FY 2008. However, while we are completing more claims, the incoming
claims volume through April 2009 is up 13 percent over last year.
SPECIALTY MENTAL HEALTH CARE
AND
RURAL HEALTH OUTREACH
AND
DELIVERY
Question. Why does the budget request propose to eliminate bill language in the
Medical Services account that sets a spending floor of $3.8 billion for specialty mental health care and $250 million for a rural health outreach delivery and initiative?
Response. A spending floor of $3.8 billion for specialty mental health care was not
requested by the VA in the FY 2009 budget request, but was inserted by Congress
in Public Law 110329. The VA would prefer not to have a specific spending floor
established in law but rather to ensure that the policies established in the Uniform
Mental Health Services in VA Medical Centers and Clinics Handbook are extended
to every Veteran to whom we provide mental health care. The FY 2010 budget request of $4.564 billion is our current estimate of the cost of that care.
The bill language of $250 million for rural health was also not requested by the
VA in the FY 2009 budget request but was inserted by Congress in Public Law 110
329. The VA would prefer not to have a specific spending floor established in law
but to increase access to rural health services for those Veterans who live in rural
and highly rural areas. The FY 2009 funding is available for obligation until September 30, 2010 (two year funds), and the VA anticipates that $60 million of this
amount will be obligated in FY 2009. The balance of $190 million will be obligated
in FY 2010. The VA has requested an additional $250 million in the FY 2010 budget
request, for a total of $440 million available for rural health initiatives in FY 2010.
RURAL HEALTH OUTREACH
AND
DELIVERY
Question. Please provide the Committee with the status of the Rural Health Outreach and Delivery program that was funded at $250 million for FY09.
Response.
December 2008: Office of Rural Health (ORH) allocated $21.75 million to Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISNs).
On May 21, 2009, VA announced that it had provided $215 million in competitive funding to improve services specifically designed for Veterans in rural and high-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01270
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1271
ly rural areas. After a careful review, the Office of Rural Health selected 74 programs, many of which were either national in scope or affected multiple states. The
press release for the award of these projects is at attachment 2.
Question. How much of the funding has been allocated? How much do you plan
to allocate this fiscal year?
Response. VA allocated $21.75 million in December of 2008 and will allocate the
$215 million by mid-June 2009. We plan to obligate $60 million of the $250 million
by the end of FY 2009.
Question. For the record, please provide FY 09 funding allocations by state and
provide a short summary of Rural Health outreach and delivery initiative projects
that have been/will be funded for FY 09.
Response. The $215 million for the rural health initiatives at attachment 3 was
distributed by Veterans Integrated Service Network (VISN) and Program Office. A
short summary of the Rural Health outreach and delivery initiative projects is at
attachment 4. A state-by-state breakdown is not available at this point.
Question. How do you justify increasing this program by 663 percent in fiscal year
2010 when you only expect to spend about $60 million out of the $250 million appropriation in fiscal year 2009?
Response. The Departments budget reflects the obligation of FY 2009 appropriated funds for rural health initiatives over a two-year period. VA appreciates the
operational flexibility Congress has provided to ensure the most effective use of
these funds. VA is using a two-year execution process to allow for deliberate planning and execution. In FY 2009, we expect to provide $237 million to the VISNs
and Program Office which represents 95 percent of the appropriated amount of $250
million. The remainder of $13 million (5 percent) will be provided to the VISNs and
Program Office in FY 2010. However, we anticipate the VISNs/Program Office will
only obligate $60 million of the funding they receive in FY 2009 and will obligate
the remaining $190 million in FY 2010.
Question. Does the VA have the capacity to effectively grow this program by such
a large amount? Why has it taken so long to launch the FY09 program?
Response. Yes, ORH has this capacity, as shown by the fact that the office has
completed the establishment of a rigorous selection process for rural health initiatives.
The FY 2009 program took more time because the office had to create the process
to ensure VISNs and VAMCs, as well as VHA program offices submit projects and
programs using very strict established guidelines. ORH also created a very rigorous
review to identify the most innovative projects to enhance the health care of rural
Veterans. Now that ORH has a proven process for selection, FY 2010 obligation/execution will begin earlier in the fiscal year.
CHATTANOOGA CBOC REPORT
Question. The VA completed a report that said that the VA (TVHS) was going to
initiate efforts to re-establish contractual relationship with local hospitals for some,
if not most inpatient services in the Chattanooga area. I know that the target date
for the issuance of that solicitation was October 1, 2008 but that slipped to April
3, 2009. Can you tell me what the current status is of the solicitation and has the
contract been finalized? Please provide the contract deliverables for the record.
Response. The contract has not been finalized; however, the contract proposed
statement of work and other initial documents were completed on April 3, 2009.
Currently, the solicitation is under development, and once completed will go through
the required review process for legal and technical approval prior to being issued
for bids. The anticipated release of the solicitation is in August 2009.
POST-9/11 GI BILL IMPLEMENTATION QUESTIONS; SUBMITTED

WAMP
BY
RANKING MEMBER
Question. What are the issues that caused the delay?

Response. During a National Training exercise conducted on March 25, 2009, the
Chapter 33 Front End Tool (FET) returned error messages which caused many
users to lose access to the system. The errors began when the number of concurrent
users exceeded 400. Modifications were made to the server and database the
evening of March 25. On March 26 two additional exercises took place. In the first
exercise, error messages which caused many users to lose access to the system
began when the number for concurrent users reached 500. Further modifications
were made to the server and database before the second exercise that afternoon.
During the second exercise, the number of concurrent users peaked at around 560.
Only isolated error messages were reported.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01271
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1272
Question. How is the VA working to resolve those issues or have they been resolved?
Response. The issue has been resolved.
Question. Has the testing of phase 1 development and deployment been completed?
Response. Phase I of the Front End Tool (FET), was successfully deployed on
March 9, 2009, to the four Regional Processing Offices (Atlanta, Buffalo, Muskogee,
and St. Louis) delivering the capability to accept applications and electronically
store eligibility and entitlement information that claims examiners enter manually.
Phase I of the Front End Tool was completed on April 10. Beta testing was complete
on April 17.
Question. What were the results?
Response. The deployment was successful. The performance issue with the FET
Phase I was resolved and tests show response times within or below the acceptable
range of 58 seconds.
Question. Is there a comprehensive staffing plan in place?
Response. Yes, there is an Integrated Project Team in place.
Question. When will the Long Term Solution be put in place for distributing these
benefits?
Response. The Long Term Solution is scheduled to be put in place for distributing
benefits by November 2010.
Question. How does the budget request better meet the VAs needs in meeting the
processing needs under the new GI Bill?
Response. VA recognizes the difficult economic choices our Veterans must make
every day and seeks continued improvement in providing quality service and secure
access to our Veterans. As such, implementation of Chapter 33 strives to ease the
reentry of new Veterans into civilian life by providing timely and accurate decisions
on education claims and continue payments at appropriate levels to enhance Veterans and service members ability to achieve educational and career goals.
The IT solution for the Chapter 33 program is of critical importance to VA. The
budget request will ensure that resources can be consistently and seamlessly applied to the programs initiatives, which is on target to meet the interim solutions
August 1, 2009, deadline. With the funding included in the budget request, VA resources and the Chapter 33 IPT will continue to work to ensure that the long-term
solution is deployed in FY 2011. Planned accomplishments for FY 2010 include developing and testing the long-term solution.
VA/DOD INTEROPERABILITY PLAN

Question. What are the key interoperability issues facing VA and DoD at this
time?
Response. The key interoperability issues facing VA and DoD include working to
meet the mandate for full interoperability required in Section 1635 of the National
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Additionally, VA and DoD are working to build
upon the already significant progress achieved toward sharing electronic health information. This work includes enhancing the types of clinical information shared
through current data exchanges, such as the Bidirectional Health Information Exchange (BHIE). This work also includes identifying and implementing more robust
data standards that will support sharing interoperable information.
For the long term, VA and DoD are working to implement the Virtual Lifetime
Electronic Record to improve the integration of health, benefits and personnel data
to better support the full continuum of DoD and VA shared operations (e.g., health
care, disability adjudication and claims processing, personnel and pay issues). This
work will rely in part, on updating existing infrastructure and technology, and identifying and implementing a common services and architecture approach.
Question. How are you working with the DoD to resolve them?
Response. To resolve key interoperability issues, per the mandate contained in the
2008 NDAA, VA and DoD formed the DoD/VA Interagency Program Office (IPO) in
2008. The IPO is operational and providing joint management oversight of health
and administrative interoperability activities. The IPO works closely with the execution offices within the departments to identify potential risks involving the coordination, approval and development of information sharing requirements and key interoperability activities, including development and implementation.
In addition to the coordinated working relationships between VA, DoD and the
IPO, the departments remain fully aligned with the national efforts led by the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Coordinator for Health
Information Technology. VA and DoD partner with both government and private
sector resources to identify and/or define information standards that will support
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01272
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1273
nationwide interoperability of health information. Additionally, the departments

continue to provide staff to key working groups within standards development organizations and industry led panels to ensure that VA/DoD accomplishments are fully
leveraged in national efforts.
Joint initiatives that are identified and approved are managed at the highest levels of both Departments by the DoD/VA Joint Executive Council and the Joint Strategic Plan (JSP). The JSP contains those milestones and measures by which senior
leadership can ensure the Departments continue to make forward progress toward
achieving interoperability goals.
Question. Has there been any progress in hiring the Director and Deputy Director
at the Integrated Program Office?
Response. Yes, in VA, the formal hiring solicitation for the Deputy Director closed
on April 17 and resulted in the identification of several qualified candidates. VA officials are now convening a Senior Executive Panel that will conduct interviews and
select a final candidate.
Question. Will the VA and DoD have full interoperability by September 30, 2009
as required by law?
Response. Yes. VA and DoD are on target to meet the September 30, 2009, full
interoperability target mandated by the FY 2008 National Defense Authorization
Act, Section 1635. VA and DoD have already achieved a level of health information
interoperability unprecedented by other providers. To define full interoperability,
VA and DoD formed an interagency board of VA and DoD clinicians to identify the
capabilities necessary to support the full continuum of health care between DoD and
VA. This board, the Interagency Clinical Informatics Board (ICIB), determined that
DoD and VA are already sharing almost all essential health information in viewable
electronic format through existing data exchanges (e.g., FHIE, BHIE and CHDR).
To achieve full interoperability, the ICIB determined that six additional capabilities must be achieved. Of the six capabilities, VA and DoD have achieved the initial
capability for two; the other four capabilities are in progress.
Initial capability completed:
Social Historybegin sharing the social history data that is currently captured in the DoD HER with the VAinitial capability completed.
Separation Physical ExamsProvide initial capability to share DoD electronic health record information that supports the separation physical exam
processes with the VAinitial capability completed.
Remaining capabilities on target:
Expansion of Questionnaires/Self-Assessment Toolsprovide all Periodic
Health Assessment data stored in the DoD electronic record to the VA in such
a fashion that questions are associated with the responsesrequirements completed.
Expansion of Essentris implementation in DoDDoD expansion of
Essentris to at least one additional site in each military medical department
ongoing.
Demonstration of initial Trusted Partnership Gateways (Secure Network to
Support Health Data Exchange)Demonstrate the operation of the Partnership
Gateways in support of joint DoD-VA health information sharingmigration to
two gateways completed.
Document Scanning (initial capability)Demonstrate an initial capability
for scanning medical documents of service members into the DoD electronic
health record and forwarding those documents electronically to the VAongoing.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01273
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01274
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
TUESDAY, MAY 19, 2009.

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
WITNESSES
ROBERT F. HALE, COMPTROLLER
WAYNE ARNY, DEPUTY UNDERSECRETARY OF DEFENSE (INSTALLATIONS AND ENVIRONMENT)
STATEMENT
OF THE
CHAIRMAN

order and want to thank Secretary Arny and Secretary Hale for
being here. We know how busy you are these days.
I think the subject matter of this hearing is very important to
discuss: the Department of Defense fiscal year 2010 budget request
for military construction, family housing, BRAC, and other programs under our jurisdiction.
I want to thank you both for your long-time service to our country and our military and our military families.
And, Secretary Arny, I dont know if we know how much longer
you are going to be in your position, whatever time period it is, you
spent a lifetime here, with 40 years of service to our military and
our country, and I want to thank you for that.
And through this position and your previous position overseeing
installations and the environment for the Navy, you literally have
done something many of us dont do in Congress most days or most
lifetimes, and that is leave a lasting impact that will improve the
quality of life for some great Americans 20, 30, 40 years from now,
when we are old men on canesso if that is not what public service is all about, I dont know what is. I think it is.
So thank you for that. And I wanted to say that today.
At this point, I would like to recognize our ranking member, Mr.
Crenshaw.
STATEMENT
OF THE
RANKING MINORITY MEMBER (PRESIDING)

And thank you both for being here today.
And I will dispense with most of my opening statement, but I
wanted towhen I read, Mr. Hales testimony, the points that you
didthe FY10 budget is going to be talking about, one, reaffirming
commitment to take care of our all-volunteer force. I think that is
great.
Rebalancing programs to institutionalize and enhance capabilities to fight todays wars and defend against scenarios we are likely
to face in years ahead.
(1275)
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01275
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1276
And, finally, reforming how and what we buy with a fundamental overhaul in the way that DoD makes procurements and acquisitions and in contracting.
And I want to ask you a little later on, you know, exactly what
that means and what the impacts are, but the one thing, Mr.
Chairman, that I am concerned about andI think it is probably
something you are concerned about, too, that we have all these
projects that we are going to consider today, but we dont know
how they fit into the so-called FYDP, the future years defense plan.
And as I understand it, this may be the first time that we have
had to consider projects that we are going to consider for this years
budget, but we dont know how they are going to fit in long range.
So I am going to ask the witnessesand I think they will probably
tell ushow all that fits in, because what we dont want to do is
end upI would hate to see a project today that we dont see as
part of a 5-year plan or a future plan.
So we are looking forward to the testimony, looking forward to
working with you all. And, again, thank you for your service. And
this subcommittee is committed to getting our work done on time
and meeting the needs of our military. And thank you for the role
you play in that.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Crenshaw. And I do look forward
to getting into the issues that you raised.
I wont offer a long introduction, but since this is Secretary
Hales first visit to our subcommittee in his present position, let me
just mention, by way of background: he served as the Assistant
Secretary of the Air Force for Financial Management and Comptroller, 1994 to 2001, led the national security division of the Congressional Budget Office for 12 years, and served for 3 years in the
Navy as an active-duty officer, and former executive director of the
American Society of Military Comptrollers, graduate of Stanford,
and holds an MBA from George Washington.
And in terms of introducing Secretary Arny, this is his third appearance this year before our subcommittee. The only thing I am
going to add to what I have said is this: Thank you for continuing
your legacy of your familys service to the country, with your two
sons serving in the Navy.
Where are they stationed right now?
Mr. ARNY. The oldest is here in town getting ready to go to Warsaw as a naval attache in a year-and-a-half, and the other is in the
pipeline to be the commanding officer of
Mr. EDWARDS. That is great. I have two sons and hope I can be
as proud of them someday in their career choices as you have a
right to be of your sons.
Both of your testimonies will be submitted for the record, but I
would like to recognize each of you for an opening statement for
any summary comments you care to make
STATEMENT
OF
ROBERT F. HALE
Mr. HALE. Can I start by associating myself with your remarks

about Mr. Arny? Wayne has been very helpful for a lot of years,
but also in the last few months. And I appreciate his staying
around, particularly appreciate him being here today with all the
knowledge he has.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01276
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1277
I want to start by thanking the committee for all the things you
have done on behalf of the men and women in our armed forces.
We really do depend on members of Congress to get the resources
we need to meet our nations national security requirements, and
it is appreciated.
I am going to provide just a very brief overview of the overall
budget with a focus on military construction, and then I will ask
Mr. Arny to give you a few more details.
As you know, the Presidents base budget asks for $533.8 billion
of discretionary budget authority, a $20.5 billion increase or, 4 percent, which after you adjust for inflation, amounts to a 2.1 percent
increase.
This is a reform budget. I have worked with defense budgets for
a long time now, several decades, and I know we sometimes use
that term loosely or other similar terms, but I believe this budget
is one of a handful that really does qualify as a reform budget. If
it is enacted, I think it will change the way we do business in the
Department of Defense.
The base budget puts into action the three key themes that Mr.
Crenshaw mentioned. Let me just add a little meat to them. It does
reaffirm our commitment to take care of people, particularly the
all-volunteer force, clearly, the highest priority of Secretary Gates
and the chairman.
For example, it fully funds personnel costs of a larger force in the
base budget, avoidingor minimizing the kind of more volatile
wartime budget. Second, the budget reshapes priorities to focus on
the kinds of wars we are fighting today, especially regulation and
conventional, but maintains a balance of conventional capability.
We have added personnel to special operations with significant
increases in intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. And, of
course, there is a cost to those initiatives. The budget does complete the program of record and terminates production of the F-22
and C-17 aircraft.
And, third, it reforms what we buy and how we buy. There is a
personnel side to that, and we can talk more about this, but increasing the capability of our Acquisition Corps is a key theme in
this budget, as well as moving the pendulum back in terms of the
focus or the use of contractors; therefore, we have an in-sourcing
initiative in this budget.
And there is a hardware side to changing kind of what we buy,
looking at troubled programs, and we havewhere we felt we had
enough information, chosen to terminate a number of them, and do
some major restructurings, like the missile defense program and
Future Combat Systems.
Turning to military construction, the Department requests $23
billion for MILCON and family housing. I think this request assists
or supports all of the themes, but perhaps particularly taking care
of people and the reshaping and modernizing.
Overall, the request represents an 8.4 percent decline in military
construction. That sounds ominous, but it really reflects successful
achievements in the Base Realignment and Closure account as well
as housing privitization. The BRAC request is down by 14.8 percent, and family housing is down 38 percent, as a result of housing
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01277
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1278
privatization success. If you take out those two categories, there is
a 3.1 percent increase in the MILCON, portion.
The Departments base budget meets our key goal for military
construction: investing in facilities that support and grow the force.
We are close to completing that goal. The force has grown. The
Army and Marine Corps have their target end strength, barracks
brigade complexes, and quality-of-life projects funded in this request.
The request also includes significant investment in recapitalizing
medical facilities and schools, and a substantial investment in
what we call a global defense posture, which includes moving 8,000
Marines from Okinawa to Guam.
Before I leave the base budget, let me mention the FYDP issue.
We want to provide a FYDP; however, we dont have a plan beyond
fiscal year 2010, and this is not without precedent. It happened in
2001 and also in 1993. We need to complete the Quadrennial Defense Review and the fall program budget review in order to develop a 5-year plan. We will submit one next year in its entirety,
but for the moment we dont have one. I also wanted to talk about
a couple other portions of the budget.
The overseas contingency operations, or OCOI like to call it
Washingtons newest acronymwe are asking for $130 billion for
overseas contingency operations. This is part of the budget. It is
not a supplemental. We do not plan on submitting a supplemental
in fiscal 2010. But if policies or the wartime situation changes, we
need to retain the authority to recommend one, if we need it.
The OCO budget includes $1.4 billion for military construction,
all for projects in Afghanistan. Given the limited pre-existing infrastructure over there, we need to do a lot, construct facilities to sustain, protect and house the troops. The request funds operational
facilities, runways, parking aprons, and the like.
I also want to express my gratitude to the Congress for the $7.4
billion we received in the American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act, ARRA, easier to call it the stimulus bill; $4.3 billion for facilitiesand modernization, $2.2 billion for military construction,
homeowners assistance program, and some energy investments, as
well.
This funding will allow us to improve facilities we wouldnt have
been able to do otherwise. And I am happy to report that there are
4,200 projects identified for stimulus funding in DoD in all 50
states, a few territories, and the District of Columbia. All the
projects have been identified, and we are moving as quickly as we
can to implement them.
Projects will not only stimulate the economy; they will also improve, we think, quality of life and let us catch up on some of the
backlogsor reduce them, I should saythat we wouldnt have
otherwise been able to do.
And lastly, Mr. Chairman, I remind the committee that we recently submittedand now both houses have acted on or the House
has acted on in the supplemental requestcovering the remaining
expenses of the war effort for 2009.
There is $0.9 billion in MILCON in there for Afghanistan and
another $1.4 billion for a variety of critical construction improvements, such as more warrior in transition complexes.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01278
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1279
We stand by to assist members and staff however we can on the

supplemental and on the fiscal 2010 request. And to help our
troops, we ask that you enact it by Memorial Day or as soon thereafter as you can.
Again, on behalf of the men and women of the department, let
me thank all of you for your strong support and thank you for the
opportunity to testify. After Mr. Arnys statement, I will be glad to
try to answer your questions.
[The prepared statement of Robert F. Hale follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01279
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01280
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
Insert offset folio 2811 here 50526E.001
1280
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01281
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1281
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01282
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1282
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01283
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1283
1284
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Hale, thank you very much.
Secretary Arny.
STATEMENT
OF
WAYNE ARNY
Mr. ARNY. Chairman EdwardsI am honored to appear before

you today. I am just going to make some summary comments.
In the last 10 to 20 years, the Department has come a long way
in improving the facilities and infrastructure in which our military
and civilian workforce and their families work and live. And we
could not have progressed as far as we have without the continuing
support of Congress and in particular this subcommittee.
Today, we manage over 500,000 facilities worth over $700 billion
located on approximately 29 million acres. In comparison, about 10
years ago, we had 115,000 more facilities, which is in part a testament to our continuing efforts to right-size the Departments infrastructureto match our operational needs.
The principal program that has allowed us to do that has been
the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) authority. And using
that, over the entire round, we have closed 121 major installations
and realigned 79 major ones after five rounds.
In the 2005 round alone, we affected over 800 locations that included 24 major closures, 24 major realignments, and 765 lesser actions. As of the fiscal year 2010 request, BRAC represents a $35.2
billion investment just over the period 2006 to 2011 and $4 billion
in annual savings after full implementation.
However, it is not enough just to close bases and move functions.
At the same time, we have to try to focus on how we conduct business so as to become more efficient caretakers of the taxpayers resources.
An excellent example of our efforts towards efficiency is joint basing. As part of BRAC 2005, we were required to form 12 new joint
bases from 26 separate existing locations so that installation management functions will be provided by one component, not two or
three, as it is currently.
The joint basing implementation process is complicated. Almost
50 different areas of responsibilities on these bases have been identified for consolidation, including food services, environmental management, child and youth programs, facility maintenance, and
many others, but I can report that we are well on the way to
achieving success.
In January 2008, we began issuing a series of joint basing implementation guidance documents and, for the first time, established
a set of common definitions and standards for the installation support to be provided at each joint base.
We established a schedule that was divided into 12 planned
bases, joint bases, into two implementation phases. Each joint base
will develop a detailed implementation plan, including the personnel and financial arrangements for the combined base.
Five joint bases involving 11 installations were placed into phase
one with an October 2009 milestone established for full implementation, which includes the transfer of personnel and funds to work
the joint base.
The remaining seven joint bases, involving five installations,
were placed into phase two with an October 2009 Initial Oper-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01284
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1285
ational Capability (IOC). The services have assigned implementations for all five phase one installations. We have reached IOC on
those installations and are scheduledon schedule for reaching
Full Operational Capability (FOC).
The remaining seven joint bases will reach IOC this October and
meet FOC milestones in October 2010, way ahead of the statutory
deadline in December 2011.
And this is just the beginning of where I see the Department
going in the application and full funding of common levels of service across all our bases and between all the services.
Switching to housing, a decade ago, we maintained over 300,000
family housing units, two-thirds of which were deemed inadequate
by the Military Departments. At the time, most people felt that
onlyServices could provide housing that our families needed, but
with your help and vision, we put housing privatization authorities
in place.
The private sector responded by delivering modern, affordable
housing and, with appropriate oversight, we ensured the federal
governments needs are met. With this years request, over 98 percent of DoDs housing inventory in the United States will be funded
for privatization.
With regard to barracks, it was about 17 years ago that the Military Departments began an ambitious modernization program to
increase the privacy and amenities in permanent party bachelor
housing funding. Using military construction funding and a traditional government-owned business model, much progress has been
made, but there is still a need for almost $15 billion to complete
the permanent party buyout.
Even at the current program end state, a single familya single
member quarters will pale in comparison to family housing, due in
part to building designs that do not have the space and amenities
of comparable private-sector housing and also due to the challenges
in adequately funding facility sustainment.
For these reasons, we are looking to see how we can leverage the
success of family housing privatization by tapping into private-sector experience to build, revitalize, operate and maintain our bachelor housing.
We have seen recent innovative concepts where the Army has
added bachelor officer quarters and senior enlisted bachelor quarters to its existing family housing privatization efforts at Fort
Bragg, Fort Stewart, Fort Drum, and Fort Irwin. A fifth project is
planned for Fort Bliss.
In contrast to the Army, the Navy is mainly focused onfocusing
itson company housing privatization efforts to bring shipboard
junior enlisted sailors ashore using a special pilot authority.
The first unaccompanied housing project was awarded in December 2006 in San Diego. The second was executed December 2007
in Hampton Roads, Virginia. And a third project is underway in
the Jacksonville Mayport area that is under consideration.
Both of the awarded Navy projectspilot projects have demonstrated that, with the authority to pay junior enlisted members
less than full housing allowance, privatization of single junior enlisted housing is less costly on a life cycle basis than a traditional
government-owned model.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01285
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1286
I view this as just a starting point and ask for the subcommittees support in the departments continued progress in shifting towards those models.
This years budget signals another banner year for installations
with about $23 billion in military construction and about $8 billion
in facility sustainment, restoration and modernization. The $23 billion in military construction program is very robust, especially compared to the $8 billion to $9 billion levels we were receiving just
about 10 years ago.
Similarly, our sustainment budget this year is also more robust
as compared to 10 years ago. In those days, we used a percentage
of unsubstantiated maintenance and repair backlog to come up
with our budget request, but it didnt work.
Although much remains to be done, we have already made
steady headway over the last decade to improve the overall condition of our facilities inventory by using a programmatic model. The
development and use of the facility sustainment model has given
us a sound target to measure our sustainment budget, and we have
been able to defend for the first time our requirements and increase overall funding in spite of significant competing demands.
Recapitalization is more challenging. We moved away from believing a single recap rate expressed in years applied across a myriad of categories could provide a funding level that was rational or
defendable. We witnessed separate initiatives, like whatwhen I
was the Navy secretary, I personally observed the inaccuracy of the
recap rate as Hurricane Ivan hit Pensacola, Florida.
The sudden infusion of restoration funds skewed the recap rate
for the Navy to a lower number than the targeted 67 years, and
yet we all knew that the condition of the rest of the Navys facilities across the board did not improve.
Since I was dissatisfied with the previous 67-year metricand
others were, as wellI asked my staff to go back to basics and reopen the dialogue on facility condition indices that the Federal Real
Property Advisory Group mandated federal agencies including their
real property records. These quality ratings, or Q ratings, represent
the health of our facilities. And I firmly believe they have been long
ignored.
This summer, my staff will be working with the Military Departments and Defense Agencies to set up program guidelines for determining which facilities require priority for funding, reassessing
how Q ratings are conducted and their frequency, and, most importantly, re-establishing how the department views and uses master
planning at the installation level.
Also, in cooperation with our policy secretary, the Joint Staff, the
combatant commands, and the services, we hope to initiate joint installation master plans at each overseas COCOM region, as well.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, I sincerely thank you for this opportunity to highlight the Departments management of installation
assets. And we are ready to take questions.
[The prepared statement of Wayne Arny follows:]
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01286
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01287
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
Insert graphic folio 2823 50526E.005
1287
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01288
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1288
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01289
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1289
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01290
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1290
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01291
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1291
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01292
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1292
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01293
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1293
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01294
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1294
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01295
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1295
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01296
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1296
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01297
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1297
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01298
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1298
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01299
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1299
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01300
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1300
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01301
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1301
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01302
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1302
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01303
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1303
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01304
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1304
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01305
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1305
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01306
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1306
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01307
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1307
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01308
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1308
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01309
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1309
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01310
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1310
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01311
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1311
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01312
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1312
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01313
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1313
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01314
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1314
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01315
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1315
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01316
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1316
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01317
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1317
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01318
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1318
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01319
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1319
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01320
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1320
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01321
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1321
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01322
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1322
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01323
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1323
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01324
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1324
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01325
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1325
1326
FYDP
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you. Thank you, Secretary Arny. Thank

you for all your work leading to so many of the improvements that
you referenced in your opening comments.
Secretary Hale, let me begin by asking you, do we not have a
FYDP because the administration wants to propose a reformed defense budget and, therefore, it didnt want to basically put into
place the FYDP? Obviously, there is a FYDP within the system
that the administration could have projected in this budget proposal.
Is it you are afraid of locking inwas the administration
Mr. HALE. No.
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Not wanting to lock in to the status
quo and that is why it didnt put forth a FYDP?
Mr. HALE. No. I mean, the problem is, we feel we need to go
through the quadrennial review and the program budget review in
the fall in order to develop a FYDP. We dont have a plan beyond
fiscal 2010 that is worked out. Obviously, we have extrapolations
off last year that we are using as a base, but none of them accord
to either fiscal guidance or the out-year policies of the secretary. So
they dont represent current administration policy.
You know, there is a time element to this, to be candid with you.
It takes 6 to 9 months to do this typically. We had about 3. You
have a choice. Either dont do a very good job, to be honest, or an
in-depth job, and this secretary clearly wanted to make changes.
And that meant, I think, we needed to focus on fiscal 2010.
As I mentioned, the same thing happened in 1993 and 2001,
where there was not a current FYDP submitted. I understand it is
a problem. If I had it, I would be glad to give it to you. It is not
that we are trying to withhold it. We dont have it.
Mr. EDWARDS. Does the law not require it, 10 U.S.C. Code 221?
Mr. HALE. It does, and I like to obey laws. But I just dont have
a plan. I mean, I suppose if we were pressed hard enough, we
would say, go back to 2009. You have that one. It is just that it
doesnt reflect current policy or fiscal guidance. That is the best we
have.
Mr. EDWARDS. We are going to have to work closely with the administration then. Because it makes it difficult when you have a
request for, you know, $800 million for an NSA project, we dont
know what the end cost is or what future requests are coming in.
It does create some problems.
Mr. HALE. We can certainly try to work with you on a projectby-project basis. I mean, I think MILCON is an area where it is
particularly helpful to have a FYDP for a variety of reasons. If I
had one, I would give it to you.
Mr. EDWARDS. As well, there are certain areas that changes are
going to be made. There are other enduring installations where you
know what you are going to do, regardless of what the Quadrennial
Defense Review
Mr. HALE. I think we can work with you on a case-by-case basis
and try to provide information.
Mr. EDWARDS. All right. All right.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01326
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1327
Let me ask you about BRAC, Secretary Arny. The original proposal was $21.1 billion. The proposal you mentioned today, the
budget number is at $35 billion-plus. Why did we go from $21 billion to $35 billion?
Mr. ARNY. Yes, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. By the way, as you are looking at those numbers,
I saw in the testimonythe written testimony that it said the
model used for projecting the original costs for BRAC wasnt intended to be a budget-accurate model. I dont recall ever being told
that in the process.
Maybe we ought to put a huge asterisk on BRACgoing to say,
Here is our budget projection. This is the cost we will use to determine a cost-benefit analysis, but this isntwe know there always
has to be fine-tuning. We live in the real world, and we respect
that, but to go from $21 billion to $35 billion is
Mr. ARNY. Let me explain
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. A huge increment.
Mr. ARNY. A lot of thatit does not have to do with the Cost of
Base Realignment Actions (COBRA) model. Now, the COBRA
model is not budget level in that a particular billwhat it is designed to do is compare apples to apples in a short period of time.
So when the folks studying BRAC say, Okay, I am going to build
an admin building, so the model gives them, you know, an admin
building, and they can say, Okay, if I go to this base, I need this
kind of admin building. If I go to another, I need another one.
They can compare apples to apples.
Now, because when you look at adjusting COBRA for the model
output for inflation, of the $14.3 billion, that was $1.3 billion. So
we had a problem in that COBRA locked us into, I think, 2003. So
by the time we gotwhen we are working the 2006 budget, those
numbers were 3 years old. So we had regular inflation to account
for.
Also, the building that we designed with the COBRA model
doesnt have the refinements of location that, when the engineers
go out to actually design the building, we will get cost increases because of that.
But let me hit the big number. Of the $14.3 billion, $10 billion
of the numberso almostprobably 70 percent of itwas for the
construction of additional facilities that were not included in the
initial BRAC we had.
We had the forces coming back from Europe, which were not included in BRAC, plus, for instance, at Bethesda, we added almost
$1 billion to Bethesda for wounded warrior and items like that that
were not part of the original BRAC model.
So I can give you the specifics. We had program management
costs that are not included in BRAC. It was like $600 million. And
another thing we do not include is environmental, because we
never include environmental in making a decision of whether or
not to keep a base open or to close it for a couple of reasons.
One is, we have the responsibility of cleaning it up no matter.
Secondly, we dont want people toyou know, you could envision
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01327
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1328
where they might try to pollute a base in order to have to get it
to keep it off the BRAC closure list. So we just take that out.
And there wasI think the environment wasenvironmental
restoration was almost $500 million. And we had extraordinary
construction industry inflation, if you recall, during that time, especially at some of the Navy locations down in the southeast that
amounted to another $1 billion.
But, again, $10 billion out of the $14.3 billion was because we
added construction for other capabilities to the BRAC bill that were
not part of the BRAC decisions.
Mr. EDWARDS. Well, it makes me wonder if we underestimated
the facilities that were needed. And I want to go on. We are going
to try to stick as close to the 5-minute rule as we can.
But one of the things I might ask you in the second round or
third round of questions would be, what lessons learned do we
take? Maybe we will be digesting BRAC 2005 for the next decade.
And there may not be another round in the next decade. Who
knows? But if there is, it seems a lot like this is fresh in our mind.
We can come up with all the rationales, but we ought to bill those
changes into future BRAC models so thatI mean, if you are going
to do aif BRAC is based on a cost-benefit analysis and your costs
are off by nearly 100 percent, then, you know, that would change
even some of the decisions you would make.
So I would welcome your ideas, having gone through this process,
or your suggestions for the future.
Mr. Crenshaw.
Let me just go back with the FYDP. My concern is that we end
up having projects in the Presidents request that, by the time you
finish the FYDP, they are not part of the FYDP anymore. So I
guess the question is, are you fairly certain that all the projects
that are in the request this year will still be in thatplan?
Mr. HALE. Well, first, it is my understanding that, for projects
that are in 2010, the budget documents will give you the full outyear costs of them. And if they dont, then we will supply those.
Are you thinking of phase-funded projects, Mr. Crenshaw?
Mr. CRENSHAW. No, just in general. I mean, as longwell, there
will bethe future requirements will be part of the
Mr. HALE. If we started somethingand especially if it is phasefunded, that, I thinkplans for the out-years. And, yes, I would
anticipate we will finish it. I mean, we are not going to stop in the
middle.
The problem isand I know you used the FYDP, and it is good
that you used the FYDP to look for the changes you might make
not that we advocate those changesbut if you are considering
them, I understand that is a problem. And the only thing I
Mr. CRENSHAW. Well, how do you decide what the requests are
this year?
Mr. HALE. For 2010? Well, we went through a full review on fiscal 2010 in all parts of the budget. And if you would like, I can go
through that process, but it certainly included military construction.
So what you have in fiscal 2010 is worked out. It is consistent
with the administrations priorities. It is consistent with the budget
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01328
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1329
guidelines. So that is done, and we hope you accept it. But it is
2011 and beyond that are the problem.
Mr. CRENSHAW. But if you looked at the 2009 FYDP, are there
projects in your request that were not part
Mr. HALE. I am sure there are. I mean, there are always lots of
puts and takes.
Mr. CRENSHAW. So I would assume there are not some things
that were in
Mr. HALE. Yes, I am sure. I am sure. I mean, itunfortunately,
the 2009 FYDP isI just cant sit here and say it is consistent with
the administrations policy, not necessarily.
Mr. CRENSHAW. I understand. Everything is going to
Mr. HALE. On the other hand, there are some projects in there
I am sure that we will go forward with, too.
Mr. CRENSHAW. But you are going to overhaul
Mr. HALE. We will make changes.
Mr. ARNY. But, also, Congressman, there wereand I dont know
the specifics, but I will venture a wild guess that there were
projects in the 2010 column of the 2009 FYDP that those of us who
were putting the budget together before the administration came
in, changed when it went to 2010, as well.
So I am convinced we probably did not accept the 2010 column
when we moved it from the 2009 FYDP to the 2010 FYDP.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Could we just, for the record, have thosethe
projects that were in the FY09 FYDP that arent included in the
FY10 budget and then that are included that were not in?
Mr. HALE. What I can give you is the 2009 FYDP.
Mr. CRENSHAW. No, just for the record.
Mr. HALE. Well, but if what you had in mindI mean, there
were some notional plans done at the end of the last administration. And those are just that, notional. And I think those are predecisional, in our view. So that information I wouldnt want to supply.
We can give you the 2009 FYDP. We will give you the out-year
costs of anything that is in the 2010 budget. If it is phase-funded,
we owe you, I think, a description of how the phases would be carried out, because, after all, we are asking you to approve the first
phase.
Beyond that, the only thing I can suggest is if you have particular projects, come to us and we will try to give you our best
sense.
Mr. CRENSHAW. The only thing I am trying to get at is if there
is going to be an overhaul of what we have bought and how we buy
it and how that affects the MILCON projects. Can you give us an
example of this?
WORKFORCE
Mr. HALE. I actually was thinking about that last night when I
wrote this. And I dontit is not MILCON that we are primarily
looking at in terms of process.
It is more the Acquisition Corps. And there is a people side of
it, as I mentioned. We need to rebuild or reinvigorate our Acquisition Corps. We are going to add about 20,000 government civilians
over the next 5 years to the Acquisition Corps, so I am adding
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01329
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1330
about 9,000, adding to its size, the rest replacing contractors. And
we are also looking at an in-sourcing initiative.
Although contractors are and will always remain important to
the Department, we think the pendulum swung too far in terms of
their use. So we are for contractor support services moving back
from the level of about 39 percent today to more like 26 percent.
I am not aware of any significant MILCON process changes
Mr. HALE [continuing]. That are being considered.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Great.
Well, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Farr.
SUPPORT TO ALLIES
Mr. FARR. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Congratulationsfilling some incredible shoes in the history of
that job.
Wayne Arny, thank you for coming back and being here today.
I just wanted to make a comment that we have one of the
projects at the Defense Language Institute that is on that FYDP.
It has fallen off, but in discussions with your staff, there is perhaps
a way of getting it back on.
I want to shift to something else. I have been consistent in all
my hearings here with all of the combatant commanders on several
programs that I am interested in, and a lot of them are based at
the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California.
We have this incredibly equipped military force that can go anywhere at any time and do anything that it needs to do, but has a
very difficult time winning the hearts and minds.
One of the programs that we do have in this country that is very
impressive is the International Military Education Training program, where we bring foreign officers over. For example, the king
of Jordan had a semester at the Naval Postgraduate School.
That program, I didnt know until this year, is not funded
through DoD, yet it only benefits the Department of Defense,
NATO, and our allies around the world. It is educating foreign
military officers.
It is funded under State Department, which is a very underfunded budget.
And according to the people who administer IMET, a lot of poorer countries are not able to participate. If you are a wealthier country, you pay full scale to come. If you are a poorer country, we subsidize it. Unfortunately, there are just fewer and fewer foreign military officers because of lack of financial resources, not because of
lack of interest in the program.
And I wondered if there was any way DoD budget could provide
additional resources to IMET, if there has been any thought about
transferring some DoD money over to the State Department?
Mr. HALE. Well, I can answer the question broadly. I cant go to
the specifics; I will need to take that one for the record.
The International Military Education and Training (IMET) Program is one of the
State Departments foreign assistance programs. Specifically, it is a security assist-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01330
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1331
ance program authorized by the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, and
funded through Department of States annual Foreign Operations Appropriation.
Like other security assistance programs, IMET is funded by the Department of
State (DoS) and executed by DoD.
Without specific authority, DoD cannot transfer money to DoS for the IMET program. Such authority currently does not exist. DoDs ability to transfer funds to
other agencies for non-DoD missions is very limited.
However, DoD can use its own limited authorities and appropriations to conduct
specific training and education for foreign military personnel in certain areas such
as training and education provided under the Combating Terrorism Fellowship Program (CTFP).
As Secretary Gates has said on many occasions, the United States should provide
more resources to the State Department for programs like IMET. IMET is very important at multiple levels throughout DoD. Your effort to increase funding within
the IMET account is the best way to accomplish this objective.
It is imperative that we make every attempt to tie DoD programs, such as CTFP,
to DoDs mission, which is narrower than that of DoS under the IMET program.
I recommend you support the Department of State in securing additional resources for IMET and to support funding for DoD programs that support capacitybuilding required to maintain Combatant Commander missions and other DoD objectives.
But the Secretary of Defense, Secretary Gates, has been emphatic in saying that he believes there needs to be more funding
on the state side. He is thinking not so much IMET, but more
broadly in terms of support to our allies who are working with us
in our various wartime activities.
And he went so farI believe he made a callhe is proud of saying this, so I dont think he would mind repeating it during the
budget resolution, asking that the budget be protected. I think he
was at least partially successful.
On IMET, I need to take that one for the record. I am not
aware
Mr. FARR. I am not even sure why it is in the State Department.
It seems like it ought to be a DoD function. But, anyway, it is
Mr. HALE. Well, I think we execute it, obviously, or do the training. It must be on a reimbursable basis. Is that
Mr. FARR. It is a highly successful program, and it is suffering,
and we shouldnt let it suffer in this time of international friendship building.
The other thing that I wanted to talk to you about was a program to train civilians. We have a lot of civilian capabilities in the
military reservists.
And General Petraeus talked about using those Reserves and
Guardsmen who have specific skillsskills that would help in Iraq
and Afghanistan.
Is there any program being developed in DoD to use the Guard
and Reserve force, first of all, and secondly, how you would coordinate them with the civilians that the State Department and other
federal agencies are putting together as part of a whole of government stabilization and reconstruction effort?
Mr. HALE. The answer there is yes, and in particular with regard
to Afghanistan. We are actively looking at using some Reserve personnel and perhaps some of our own civilians towe call it the civilian surgeto provide assistance in Afghanistan and everything
from agricultural support to financial support.
I am trying to figure out the numbers and working with the
State Department on kind of who pays what
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01331
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1332
Mr. FARR. So you are coordinating that? There is going to be
some transfer? You have a soldier going in there because of the security issues, but the win-win can be the soldier and that civilian
surge.
Right behind that soldier is somebody coming out of the State
DepartmentUSAID or other appropriate federal agencieswho
could assume those responsibilities. Is there beginning to be a coordination of those
Mr. HALE. We think that is starting to happen. I mean, I notice
a great deal morecertainly, there is a lot more of what we call
soft-power funding now that really didnt exist when I was in the
building the last time. And consequently, I think we are starting
to work more closely with the State Department.
We have a ways to go, to be candid, in terms of full coordination.
And some of that debate is being played out with regard to the
Pakistan counterinsurgency fund right now in the Congress.
Mr. FARR. But what I
Mr. HALE. We are committed to doing it better. And I think we
are moving in that direction.
Mr. FARR. I would really appreciate it if you would look into this
and see if additional resources are needed for this transfer to civilian agencies. The manpower DoD is providingthe military reservists who are carrying out the civilian surgeneed to transition to
civilians being coordinated by the State Department.
Mr. HALE. Right. Just if I can add one more point that may be
relevant here. On the military side, my understanding isand we
will use this authoritythat we can pay reserves to provide civilian skills. We can pay those out of the DoD budget.
There are civilian employees. I think, unless we got specific authorization, we would probably need to be reimbursed by the State
Department.
But we are working with them. I am meeting later this week, actually, with some of my counterparts at the State Department just
to try to, frankly, get to know them better and to try to build up
our capability to work with them financially. And, of course, our
policy organization works a lot with the State Department.
Mr. FARR. But we need some interoperability.
Mr. HALE. I hear you. We have a ways to go. I mean, your point
is well taken.
Judge Carter.
Gentlemen, thank you for being here. Thank you for what you do
for our country.
Mr. Arny, the DoD guidance for Homeowners Assistance Program, HAP, to permanent change of station, PCS, or BRAC-related
military home sales require soldiers to have purchased their home
prior to July the 1st, 2006. When I asked about this issue during
the March 12th family troop housing hearing, the response I received was that the stimulus request was put together in a short
amount of time and that issues like this could be resolved in the
rulemaking process.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01332
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1333
However, it appears as though this criteria has survived and is
now part of the guidance portion of the DoD HAP Web site. This
is of great concern for numerous soldiers at Fort Hood who have
to sell their homes to move to Fort Carson with the 4th Infantry
Division. I am sure the problem will also detrimentally impact
other BRAC-affected installations and numerous soldiers, sailors
and airmen throughout the DoD who have to PCS.
Can you explain the rationale for using the date? And how many
BRAC- and PCS-affected soldiers do you anticipate this criteria
may exclude from HAP assistance?
Mr. ARNY. The date that we were given was statutory, so we had
no control over that, although I believe it was kind of the peak of
the market, but I am not sure. I would have to get back to you on
why they chose that date, but it was the date
July 1, 2006 is the cut-off date identified in the statute. The Standard & Poors
(S&P)/Case-Shiller and the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Home Price
Indices indicated a sustained, rapid, and steep decline from peak home price levels
in early 2006. People who bought homes before this date were buying during a rising or stable market and could not reasonably have known how or when home
prices would decline. Conversely, individuals who bought homes starting in July
2006 knew (or should have known) that the national home market was in a broad
and steep decline.
Mr. EDWARDS. And if I could clarifylanguage DoD gave the

Congress in putting together the bill, so Congress
Mr. CARTER. Was it?
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Wrote in the date and statute that
suggestion
Mr. CARTER. From DoD?
Mr. ARNY. I will check on it, because there is, if I recall, in the
many briefings we have had on this, there was a logic to that.
What we tried to do in allocating the funding for that is to
prioritize the recipients. Priority one was wounded warriors and
surviving spouses of military personnel killed in action. Second was
BRAC.
Now, the HAP program has been around for a while. It was used
in prior BRAC rounds, was my experience with it. But in those
rounds, in order to qualify for HAP, you had to prove that the
downturn in the market was caused by the BRAC decision.
In this round, because, first of all, the markets were down all
over, so youthe lawyers would not attest that a particular downturn was due to just BRACit may have been due to the general
marketso there was confusion there.
Secondly, in prior rounds, most of our closures were due to a
base being closed. I mean, most of the market impact was due to
a base being totally closed. This was the first round where we had
a number of movements from a base that stayed open to another
base that was already open. So this, I think, helps bring some equity within the BRAC range.
Then, third priority was people on Permanent Change of Station
(PCS) orders. Now, you will notice in the HAP regulations for PCS
orders only, I think the deadline was December? December 31st is
the deadline for the move. So the system is not perfect. There will
be some haves and have-nots. But we tried to catch people who
were affected in those three areas.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01333
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1334
You have to be in a market using a general standard that is acceptable acrossyou have to be in a market that dropped by 10
percent over that period of time. And surprisingly, some markets
did not. And your own home has to have gone down by 10 percent
before you qualify.
Now, we do not make up 100 percent. We make up 90 percent
of the loss, and that loss goes from the price you bought it to the
price you sold itother aspects of that.
Because we retain money toin the pot to make sure we cover
all the wounded warriors and their surviving spouses and also
BRACwe will get the PCS orders first.
I will also say that this iswe have no numbers to go on. These
are just pure estimates from the Corps of Engineers who does the
HAP program for the department. They are the executive agency.
So a lot of this is guesswork in terms ofcalculated guesswork.
I was givenhere are the numbers. We think there will be 540
again, pure estimatesin wounded warriors and surviving spouses,
3,000 for BRAC, and 4,500 for PCS.
Now, what we have also said is we are going to continue meeting
on a monthly basis and taking a look at the corps data as they
begin to execute the program to see if we are meeting trends or exceeding trends. And we will come back to you to let you know
which way it is going. We are trying to do our bestthe program.
And, again, I will come back to you on the 2006 date.
Mr. CARTER. Well, I think I understand your analysis of it, but
I am going to start with that date of July the 1st, 2006. How can
you make an estimate of a markets decline or increase, where the
peak is, in this so-called recession we are in right now, it just hit
Texas about 2 weeks ago, okay?
So, if you are going to set a deadline based upon what happened
on the East Coast, Florida, and the West Coast, then that day
would have been so askew to have anything to do with Texas, because it would have been about 8 to 10 months off.
We are just now starting to feel the effects of this economic decline that we are seeing in the country right now. Someone should
do a market analysis on a regional basis, to make a determination
of a drop-dead date, because there is no way you can compare the
West Coast real estate market with anybody elses real estate market in the United States.
It is just so skewed on the West Coast. Florida is close to the
same position. The real estate market in Florida goes through the
ceiling and sometimes it goes through the floor. It went through
the floor a long time before we had any reduction in cost in central
Texas, where Fort Hood is located, which is what I care about.
Secondly, you are talking about these soldiers who are standing
up in harms way on our behalf, you are talking about their credit
rating. You are talking about what it does to their next possibility
of buying private housing at the next stop.
With the analysis we made with our presentation to BRAC, there
is a substantial difference between the housing market at Fort
Hood, Texas, than Fort Carson. It is like a 20 percent or 30 percent
difference in the market.
So those who qualify in Texas with decent enough credit to qualify, they are looking at a 30 percent increase to even attempt to
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01334
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1335
qualify in Colorado. Then if they fall after the drop-dead date, they
have credit issues.
I just wonder how we are protecting those soldiers and how they
cannot be worrying about themselves and their families while they
are standing over kicking in doors in foreign country.
Mr. ARNY. Well, as to youras to the problem with going from
one area to another, there is a higherI faced that as a junior officer. We all wrestle with that.
But in terms of your credit rating, what we have tried to do as
fairly as we could is provide some relief, becauseand it was surprising to meif a soldier goes bankrupt, declares bankruptcy,
then he is in danger of losing his clearance, which I find amazing.
I am working to try and get that changed. I mean, it is a legal
proceeding. You go into it. You should not lose youras a matter
of fact, I would think if you are that close to bankruptcy, you need
to use those legal procedures in order to protect yourself and your
family, that should not be a detriment to you andin your clearance and stuff.
So we are trying to prevent that from happening and also trying
to change those rules.
Let me ask the Corps of Engineers to come over, and we will
come over with them, to give you a specific briefing on how we got
that. We know it is not perfect, and we are going to have to refine
it as we go along, but we thought it was at least a good start at
trying to protect some of the soldiers and sailors
Mr. CARTER. Because it looks like to me that maybe you could
work out some kind of recapture of the departments money if you
more liberalize this program, because ultimately, I am talking to
realtors who are telling me that we have thousands of soldiers that
are going to be affected by this at Fort Hood because of that date
and that the real boom of the market in Texas came after that
date.
Our soldiers were closing and getting into those houses after that
date. They cant do anything with it. It would seem to me, those
houses are going to be stagnant on the market for a while, but it
is not going to be forever.
When that market comes back and those houses are resold,
maybe the department could figure out a way that would capture
some of the money that they used to protect the soldier, as he made
that move. It is not his fault that they made a decision to move
him to Colorado. That decision certainly wasnt his.
I think it is a crime to create a class of people to whom we would
be automatically saying, Congratulations, you are in the Army.
You get to go bankrupt.
When we fight a war, we recruit soldiers, but we retain families.
Mr. ARNY. Well, we will look at the Fort Hood situation, because
Mr. CARTER. I am not just talking about Fort Hood. I just happen
to live there and am dealing with that. I know our market very
well.
I am sure that market isnt the same in Florida, because they
have real issues in the Florida market. You can buy condos now
for about $125,000 that sold close to $1 million a while back.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01335
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1336
There is a lot going on in the world, and we need to start thinking about how we are going to really care about what happens to
our soldiers and our military.
Mr. ARNY. I was reminded that date is statutory, so we will take
a look at the effect.
Mr. CARTER. As the chairman points out, that statutoryprovided by the Department of Defense.
Mr. Bishop.
SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION FUNDING
Mr. BISHOP. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And let me
welcome you gentlemen to the committee.
Mr. Arny, once again, I am still concerned about BRAC and the
impact that it has on our communities living at Fort Sill, Fort
Bliss, Fort Bragg, Fort Lewis, and, of course, Fort Benning that I
represent, among the many that will be impacted upwards, in
terms of BRAC and the influx of personnel and dependent children
for schools.
Mr. Arny, when you were here before, I think it was after I had
left the room. You were asked about DoD and the authority to pay
for community improvements such as schools. You did not believe
that DoD had any authority to do that.
You were going to verify that. Have you found that to be the
case?
Mr. ARNY. We do not have the authority.
Mr. BISHOP. I respectfully disagree with you. I believe the law is
found at 10 U.S.C. 2391(b)(2) for community impact assistance.
And the funds do flow through the Office of Economic Adjustment
to communities, as long as DoD gives the money to OEA.
The authority is there. In fact, it has been done in, with respect
to Kings Bay in the fiscal year 1991.
That bill contained $10.3 million for construction of off-base
schools at the Kings Bay submarine base. It resulted in approximately $60 million of construction. There was extensive testimony
by then-Representative Lindsay Thomas before the Armed Services
Committee justifying that.
In your BRAC account for the 2005 closure, you reduced your request from 2009 of $9 billion to $7.5 billion, roughly. We are very,
very concerned about the impact on communities affected by this
influx.
I dont know how you reconcile the lack of authority with that
particular code section and the precedent.
Mr. ARNY. Well, sir, because I did check on the Kings Bay, and
that was done strictly through special legislation that was in addition to 10 U.S.C. 2931, 2931s grant authority, which we use quite
frequently for planning money for communities all over the country, but we are not allowed to build schools.
Mr. BISHOP. Sir, it says the Secretary of Defense may make
grants, conclude cooperative agreements, and supplement funds
under federal programs administered by agencies other than the
Department of Defense in order to assist state and local govern-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01336
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1337
ments in planning community adjustments and economic diversification.
Mr. ARNY. I agree with you on that. And
Mr. BISHOP. Not just planning money.
Mr. ARNY. Grants forand most of that was economic planning
andto the adjustment, but not to build schools. Kings Bay was
specificallyif it is put in legislation, we will build it. But Kings
Bay was specifically put in legislation that we did not request.
Mr. BISHOP. Are suggesting that we simply need to get the authorizing legislation?
Mr. ARNY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BISHOP. I am
Mr. ARNY. I understand. And I have gone through this a number
of times with my folks. And the Kings Bay one was the only one
we found where we built the school outside of the DoDEA system.
And that was onstrictly done by legislation outside of our normal
process.
Mr. BISHOP. We will revisit that, sir, because there are a number
of communities across the country that are impactedthat are very
concernedwho have come to us and said, This is something that
the Department of Defense has visited upon us. We are not complaining, but we need help. The Office of Economic Adjustment
was set up to provide that help.
Mr. ARNY. Yes, sir, it was. And they work for me. But they are
set up toand they provide tons of grants to communities for planningbases that are closed, but bases that are realigned. And
thatlike I say, their money is quite extensive.
Mr. BISHOP. But (b)(2) says community impact assistance or special impact assistance is not otherwise available, meaning they
cant pay. It says it is not just for planning.
Mr. ARNY. I believe it is historically what we have done is mostly
planning and getting ready for the
Mr. BISHOP. But it is not that you didnt have the authority.
Rather, you interpreted planning in that limited way so that you
didnt have to do it based on your interpretation, not that it
couldnt have been
Mr. ARNY. We havein a number of situations of which I am familiar, we have provided land for schools. We have allowed community schools to build on our bases. But we have never built those
schools, unless they were in the DoDEA system, both in the United
States and obviously overseas.
Mr. BISHOP. Except in the case of Kings Bay.
Mr. ARNY. Which we had special legislation.
Mr. EDWARDS. Any additional questions?
Mr. BISHOP. No, sir. We will probably need to revisit that and
work with the authorizers to make sure that we can collectively
with the appropriate subcommittees and authorizing committees
get the necessary legislation. This is a big problem not just for our
area, but for a number of areas across the country.
Mr. EDWARDS. In fact, I might follow up, Mr. Hale, and say that
since this is your first time before our subcommittee in your position, this is an issue that has come up repeatedly.
And, obviously, communities that are upsizing are thrilled, but
I saw in years past when I represented Hood before Congressman
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01337
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1338
Carter started representing it, that you had literally the local communities that have a low income tax base, and they were at the
state mandated maximum for the local property taxes.
So even if they were willing to double their local taxes, they
couldnt raise their taxes one dime. And a lot of the impact aid,
particularly part A, if it is on post, starts reimbursing at a significant amount once the students start the school there, there is just
not the help there for these communities to build the schools.
And it seems to me that the Pentagons approach is then, you
know what? That is the communitys responsibility. But the problem is that people who pay the price are the service men and
women, many of whom are on their third tour of duty in Iraq and
Afghanistan, when they move to a base that has been BRAC increased.
And if I were such a parent and all of a sudden my third-grade
kid were put in a classroom with 45 students or put in some makeshift classroom, it would certainly impact my morale. And somehow
we have to just stop kicking this can down the road and take action. We would like to do it with the administrations help and
ideas.
What would be a rational approach? You know, you could perhaps even maybe forward-fund impact aid, which comes through to
primary education, and perhaps the school districts have to repay
that over time. But they need the upfront help on the construction
costs.
I think Congress may just take the initiative and move ahead on
this. But if I could just say, if we could get cooperation from the
administration, we would like to do this in a rational, reasonable
way. We dont want the Pentagon building every new school at
every military installation, but there are certain circumstances.
When you have Bliss going fromwell, more than doubling or
tripling in size, you have Benning increasing in size, it seems to
me we could put parameters around it, and that is where we would
welcome your help. Without that help, we may just do what Congress does, take the initiative, do the best we can.
But I think we could do a better job
Mr. BISHOP. Mr. Chairman?
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. So if people could work with us on
that, we would welcome that.
Yes, Mr. Bishop.
Mr. BISHOP. Mr. Chairman, the particular law that was cited
does have some parameters in terms of the number of personnel
that are added to extend the size of the bases, which provides some
degree of definition regarding how much of an impact there has to
be in order for the Office of Economic Adjustment to step in, in
these circumstances.
As the chairman correctly suggests, if we were to work closely
and cooperatively with the department, I am sure that we could
formulate some workable criteria by which we could do that.
Mr. EDWARDS. If you will take that responsibility, grab any other
members that have a direct interest in it, lets see if we can work
cooperatively with the administration and get some help there. But
either way, lets try to move forward.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01338
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1339
Mr. HALE. I understand your point. I mean, I would ask for parameters. There are limits on what we can spend, so if we spend
it here, we are going to have to do somethingsomething somewhere else.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right. Well, we look forward to working with you.
We dont want to keep putting this off, because the BRAC bases
are about, you know, about to explode.
LESSONS LEARNED FROM BRAC
So, Secretary Arny, let me just take a minute-and-a-half or so in

the time I have remaining on my second round of questions, go
back to BRAC and lessons learned. What lessons could we apply,
in terms of the factors that caused this to go from $21 billion to
$35 billion on the BRAC estimates?
How can we apply those lessons to any future BRAC rounds? We
need a 20 percent, you know, fudge factor to say, historically, the
real costs have been 20 percent more than the COBRA model. I
could see us a few years from now just going back to the COBRA
model and making the same mistakes again.
Mr. ARNY. One point I missed in my earlier discussion is that the
decisions were based on the military value, not on the cost particularly. Cost was secondary to the military value of the particular
base.
Mr. EDWARDS. Was cost ignored or cost a factor?
Mr. ARNY. No, cost was not ignored. It was a factor, and it is
compared, because you do look atyou know, will you save something by going from X to Y? I wont name the particular bases, but
a friend of mine who ended up being significant in the BRAC called
about a particular base and said their military value is higher than
another base over here. And I said, But the problem with Base A
is it is not in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.
So it is location. It is the militaryit is the
Mr. EDWARDS. Sure.
Mr. ARNY [continuing]. Military value for the services. And,
again, I go back to, of the $14 billion increase from the $21 billionI mean, to the $34 billion or whatever, $35.4 billion, is $10
billion of that was cost that we added to it that you should take
out of your comparison, because they were things that not
Mr. EDWARDS. What, were they training facilities needed that
werent in BRAC? Or were they administrative offices, those
Mr. ARNY. No, they wereif we had doneif we had taken the
$10 billion out, it would haveand built thatwhat the $10 billion
was for, a huge portion of that was for forces coming from overseas,
which are not part of your BRAC discussion.
BRAC is only in the 50 states and the territories of the United
States. So we
Mr. EDWARDS. But you are saying the overseas movement, that
all those costs are included in the $35 billion figure?
Mr. ARNY. Yes. Yes, sir, that we did during thisfor this part
of this round. We may move other things outside of that, butand
I could probably give youI know we have plenty of data. I could
show you which of those moves were.
Mr. EDWARDS. In fact, could you send us the list of what specific
facilities add up to the $10 billion?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01339
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1340
Mr. ARNY. Yes, sir.
The FY 2010 Presidents Budget request will reflect an investment of $35.2B over
the FY0611 implementation period ($34.2B for appropriation within the BRAC Account, $0.8B funded by the Army and National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency from
outside the Account, and $0.3B for the FY09 supplemental request). This is a
$14.1B (67%) increase over the original $21.1B estimate which supported BRAC
2005 decision making.
While the dynamics causing the $14.1B delta overlap and are, therefore, not discrete, they can be characterized/estimated as follows:
Adjusting the COBRA model output for inflation ............................................ $1.3B
Additional inflation from slower implementation of this round compared to
the faster profiles of the previous rounds assumed in COBRA ...................... 0.5B
Extraordinary construction industry inflation since 2005 .................................. 1.0B
Environmental restoration not included in COBRA ........................................... 0.4B
Program Management Costs not included in COBRA ........................................ 0.6B
Additional O&M to support fact of life cost increases ........................................ 0.2B
Construction for additional facilities to enhance capabilities and/or address
deficienciesBRAC as a recapitalization engine ............................................ 10.1B
Total ................................................................................................................. 14.1B

A breakdown of the $10.1 B where BRAC is used as a recapitalization engine by
improving facility configuration, equipment and capabilities is as follows:
The Army increased its implementation investment by about $4.0B, about half
to recapitalize infrastructure to support larger Army units, training ranges, and
Quality of Life with the remainder for furnishings and information technology. Adjusting that amount to correct for double counting the factors above yields an actual
increase of about $2.9B.
When the Army submitted its FY10 Budget Estimate Submittal, it reflected the
need for an additional $800M in FY10 MilCon construction. Reasons for this cost
growth include: an increase in unit costs (42 percent); and increase in construction
scope (21 percent); additional requirements (14 percent); and, other increases associated with land acquisition and the shifting of MilCon projects between fiscal years.
They subsequently added an additional $53M in new MilCon requirements for Fort
Lee.
The Navy and the Air Force added approximately $0.8B and $0.4B, respectively, to support facility scope increases and operations and maintenance activities
(such as funding information technology improvements, and equipment purchases).
Defense Agencies experienced similar facility and support cost increases:
WHS added about $0.8B for scope and additional facilities for relocating
OSD organizations to Fort Belvoir (parking, remote delivery facility).
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency added approximately $0.7B for specialized equipment and facility outfitting costs.
DLA added approximately $0.5B for information technology improvements,
additional storage facilities, and disposal of excess inventory.
TMA increased its funding by $2.4B for larger, specialized medical facilities
and their outfitting costs in the NCR and the San Antonio medical complex.
Scope increases to enhance and accelerate the schedule for the Walter Reed
initiative add $0.7B, primarily for construction/renovation at Bethesda and Fort
Belvoir.
Mr. EDWARDS. In fact, if you had the information on just the full
cost overrun, how much was inflation. You know, I am not here to
beat up anybody. BRAC is an imperfect process. And you are right:
Military strategy drives it. But I dont think we can ignore the cost
factors, and you are not suggesting we should.
But, for example, it is close to home to me. You have Fort Hood
that is an underutilized installation. And if we knew what the
fulland the BRAC commission knew what some of the full costs
were of making some of these changes, who knows? It might have
saved taxpayers a few billion dollars by fully utilizing the present
installation rather than expanding some others.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01340
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1341
And could I ask, why are they now considered BRAC-related and
funded through BRAC as opposed to regular MILCON, the overseas budget items?
Mr. ARNY. What my counsel says is that the BRAC round preparedbecause we knew they were coming, and so we prepared for
it, but they werent actually part of the BRAC decisions. So we
knew the forces were coming in, so that we were to prepare the
bases. And let me get you a more specific
Mr. EDWARDS. I am not here to beat up on anybody for what happened in the past. A lot of good things have happened from BRAC.
But I think we need toas the military often does, lessons learned
and apply that.
Mr. ARNY. And I do believe that one of the lessons learned is we
have towe have to go into it understanding that the COBRA
model is going to be 2 or 3 or 4 years late in terms of inflation and
those factors, and just because of when you freeze the model to
make your decision and when you actually have to start building
buildings.
We have another factor ofI think it was $500 million, in that
we made assumptions in the planning that we would do construction early. But in order to fit it in properly, the construction moved
a couple years later. So there is another $500 million just because
you delayed. It wasnt money you didntyou know, you had to
spend more because inflation had caught up with you.
And I will give you those factors. But I really do think that the
$10 billion represented decisions that were made that were not in
those continental states and territory issues where you are bringing forces in.
You know that the basethat the BRAC commissionor the
BRAC in the building is looking at, are we going to have room at
these particular facilities to bring them? But those facilities were
not included as part of the U.S.
Mr. EDWARDS. So you are saying we had, in effect, $4 billion
Mr. ARNY. Yes.
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Cost run in BRAC rather than $14
billion or $15 billion?
Mr. ARNY. And of the $4.3 billion, $1.3 billion was adjusting the
model for inflation from the time we froze it until the time we did
it.
Mr. EDWARDS. I think OMB dictated a ridiculous inflation factor
that didnt pass the laugh test. Does OMB still determine inflation
factors for military construction?
Mr. HALE. Yes, they do. Unfortunately, we have solved that problem, though, Mr. Chairman, with the recession, I am afraid.
Mr. EDWARDS. Yes.
Mr. HALE. At least temporarily, but, yes, I mean, we generally
follow OMBs inflation factors. What is extraordinary
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Of the time when oil prices were $4
a gallon, and that drove everything else up, and it didnt even pass
any
Mr. ARNY. What we have done is worked with them to get them
to allow us to do more parametric planning before we put our stuff
in the budget and accept that inflation.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01341
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1342
And, again, part of the problem during BRAC was, we hadnt
done a lot of parametric. We were doing stuff on the fly. And so
they said, look, you can only useunless you have hard data, you
can only use a flat inflation rate. And that hurt us in some
Mr. EDWARDS. If I could ask, if time permits and resources permit, if before you leave your present position, if you could do a
summary, to give us a sense of your lessons learned so that we can
benefit from the next BRAC round, if there is one. Thank you.
Mr. Crenshaw.
And, Mr. Arny, you would probably be disappointed if I didnt
ask you a question about Naval Station Mayport, which is in my
district.
AFRICOM
But before I do that, just a quick question about AFRICOM. In

fiscal year 2008, we put $20 millionthey were going to fix up
some of the facilities at Stuttgart. And that was going to be headquarters for AFRICOM.
And I have heard rumblings that was going to be moved to Africa. Can either one of you all give us what your plans for the future
are? Because I dont know if that money has been spent or if we
are going to need some more money for a new headquarters, but
give us your idea of where we are headed.
Mr. HALE. Well, let me comment on it. I think there is no question that they would like to move their command to the theater of
operation. I mean, there are political issues there that need to be
resolved, and I dont think they have been, so Imaybe, Wayne,
you can discuss the funding at Stuttgart.
Mr. ARNY. I can get you a specific funding number, but that
number was used to convert buildings so they could move into the
space. And now the building is goingand we will look at it in the
QDRon where is the ultimate location to have AFRICOM?
I agree with Mr. Hale. Everybody would love to have it in Africa,
but since this isyou are taking your dependents and stuff, there
are very few places that you could do that kind of command. And
if you have CENTCOM in southern Florida managing the war halfway around the world, there are a number of places you could put
the command and still be effective. So that money is pretty well
if there is a change, there will be additional
Mr. HALE. And it wont be next year. It will be a longer timeframe. Because I am told there is $100 million we have spent in
Stuttgart, including $25 million in fiscal 2009 provides temporary
facilities that will take care of them until some more permanent arrangement is made.
MAYPORT NAVAL AIR STATION
Mr. CRENSHAW. Right. Well, I was hoping I wouldnt ask any

more questions about Mayport because, I think as you all know,
the Navy conducted a 2.5-year study, looked at the environmental
impact, strategic impact, concluded that, in pretty strong language,
115-page, that we ought to have another nuclear carrier homeport
on the East Coast that can handle a nuclear carrier, Mayport
should be the place.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01342
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1343
The CNO submitted his report. The Secretary of Navy signed a
Record of DecisionSecretary Gates wrote a letter saying we have
three homeports on the West Coast for nuclear carriers. It certainly
makes sense to do it on the East Coast.
And then, about a month ago, I got a call from the new Deputy
Secretary of Defense, who said we are going to put that decision
under the QDR. And I said, Well, you are not reversing the decision? He says, no, we are just going to put it under the QDR. I
said, Well, wasnt there already a record of decision? He said, yes,
but we view that as a recommendation.
So I thought it was over and I was never going to have to ask
you a question about it, but so it is still a question. And I was disappointed to learn that, but that is the way it is.
Is the QDR going to be the firm and final decision to that question of whether we need a second nuclear homeport?
Mr. HALE. I think we will make a decision. I mean, we need to
decide one way or another and move ahead.
The secretary has said that he stands by his letter, but the fact
that the price seems to be increasing substantially led us to believe
that we should look at this again.
There is $46.3 million, if I recall correctly, of dredging money in
the fiscal 2010 budget, so carriers will be able to get in and out.
The question is, do we build a repair facility that will allow it to
be a true homeport? That could be quite expensive. Hence, part of
the reason that we would like to look at it again. But, yes, I expect
we will make a decision.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Where does it fit? I know the QDRs are generally prettythey are a general report. And I am a little concerned that it maybethat it is not going to fit
Mr. HALE. Well
Mr. CRENSHAW. Here is the big question: If that decision doesnt
come out, when you are ready for the FY 2011 budget, and lets assume that they reaffirmed what they decided all along, then you
have lost a year-and-a-half, because there is some planning and design money that is on hold right now.
So, A, where does it fit? And, B, will we know somethingbecause as I understand it, the key toyou have a preliminary answer in general sometime late summer, early fall, that if you said,
yes, that was the right decision, if you made that decision, you
would only lose about 6 months, in terms of the plan design. If you
wait until February and submit the 2011 budget, you would lose
a year-and-a-half.
So, A, where does it fit? And, B, do you think we will know something in time to keep on track?
Mr. HALE. I would anticipateI mean, the QDR, we hope it will
provide recommendations by July to feed into the fall program and
budget review. But I think the final decision, as most final decisions, are made in that fall program budget review.
So I think we probably wont have a final decision on Mayport
until the fiscal 2011 budget. And we may lose some time, I understand, but that would be my expectation. But I think, by 2011, we
need to make a decision one way or the other
Mr. CRENSHAW [continuing]. Wasis it $46 million orI think
that the estimate was $48 million for the dredging and someobvi-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01343
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1344
ously, there are some other costs. And there is, $46 million in this
years request
Mr. HALE. $46.3 million, you are right.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Is that a better estimate than $48 million? Any
particular reason why it is not what was in the EIS?
Mr. HALE. I need help.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Probably justmaybe a betterestimate.
Mr. HALE. We will get that one for the record. I am not sure. I
mean, I assume it is based on the corps estimate. I hope so. That
was the intent.
The original estimate of $48 million for dredging was modified due to a pricing
adjustment by the Department, and was subsequently requested at $46.3 million in
FY 2010.
Mr. CRENSHAW. There is also money in the request, as I understand it, to upgrade one of the wharfs, not the one that would be
the maintenance wharf, but the other wharf.
And in justagain, for the record, I think right now a nuclear
carrier could spend the night at Mayport.
Mr. HALE. I am told they can only get out at high tide. That
sounds like not a very good arrangement, so
Mr. CRENSHAW. It was justone was just there to pick up some
folks to go to Norfolk, but I dont think the question on the EIS was
whether or not you can park one overnight. I think it was a question of whether you ought not put all your eggs in one basket, that
you ought to have
Mr. HALE. I understand. I mean, this is a first step that would
at least give us some emergency berthing for them if something
bad happened at Norfolk. And that was the intent of the dredging
and allow you to get in and out with confidence.
But I think you can expect a decision with the 2011 budget.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Farr.
CENTER FOR STABILIZATION AND RECONSTRUCTION STUDIES
Mr. FARR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate getting back

to some of these issues that are on the cost of these programs and
how they can be better programs.
The fiscal year 2009 National Defense Authorization Act specifically named the Center for Stabilization and Reconstruction Studies (CSRS) at the Naval Postgraduate School as one of two existing
public institutions that will provide training for the newly established active response corps, the standby response corps, and the
civilian response corps, the whole government of field components
of the State Departments Office of Coordinator for Reconstruction
and Stabilization.
And since DoD policy recognizes the need for the stabilization,
reconstruction, education and training and CSRS is the only classroom that brings together all the actors who are in the field together, the military, the civilian agency partners, the foreign military, the NGOs, and the I.O.s, can you help me get this POMd?
Because it has had to survive on an earmark.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01344
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1345
Mr. HALE. Well, you know, help in the sense of get it introduced?
Yes. Help in the sense of, say, Absolutely you have to do this? I
think that is not the right solution for the comptroller. I mean, it
needs to compete with others. And I dont know enough about this
one specifically to know why it has not made it.
But I dont want to sit across the table from you and tell you I
am going to go and say, You absolutely have to fund this. I think
that wouldnt be appropriate to my job.
Mr. FARR. Well, can you tell me how that process works, to work
with it? You know, the combatant commanders come in here
Mr. HALE. Sure. I mean, there are a number of inputs intonormally we do a bottom-up process with the services making proposals. And I could speak in more detail from the Air Force, since
I was there for many years. That one comes up through their commands. There are a series of review processes.
Mr. FARR. Is this something Admiral Roughead has to do? Or it
is a
Mr. HALE. Well, he can certainly play a role.
Mr. FARR [continuing]. School within a school that has all
Mr. HALE. Again, he can certainly play a role. But I would hope
he would say, if he were sitting here, the same thing, that he
would want to hear what other priorities there are.
Mr. FARR. Well, as you have heard, everybody loves it and talks
about it, but then it comes back to having to get an earmark.
Well, we will have some further discussions about it.
Mr. HALE. Okay.
Mr. FARR. Also, I dont know if you are aware, but the House of
Representatives has createdI guess it is a relatively new committee. It is called the House Democracy Assistance Commission.
It is not a standing committee of the House, but its role is to work
with our counterparts in other countries, those countries congress
members, so to speak.
We also have learned that the Center for Civil-Military Relations
at the Naval Postgraduate School has a highly relevant expertise
and connections with all the countries that HDAC is assisting.
What I want to know is how we can bridge the gap between your
shop and specifically the Center for Civil Military Relations and
HDAC, because you have developed a lot of education and research.
Members of Congress are working with the legislatures in Mongolia, East Timor, Indonesia, which is a big IMET program now,
and Colombia, Haiti, Liberia, and others.
So with each of these countries, the Civil-Mil Center already has
relationships. So I am trying to see how we might get a better bang
for the buck.
Mr. HALE. If I understand you right, you are looking to use an
existing program and have this committee have access to it or
Mr. FARR. Yes, I think CCMR can be very helpful to the work
of HDAC but CCMR needs to get reimbursed.
Mr. HALE. Okay. Well, have them get a hold of my legislative
folks, Blaine Aaron and Pam Bain, and we will figure out how we
can get you in touch with the right people. I mean, there is no reason we shouldnt try to be helpful.
Mr. FARR. I am not chairman of the committee, but
Mr. EDWARDS. You are pretty close.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01345
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1346
Mr. FARR [continuing]. But David Price is. And he is, I know,
keen on that.
Mr. HALE. Glad to try to be helpful.
DEFENSE LANGUAGE INSTITUTE
Mr. FARR. Another question the Army is funding this private

company called the Rosetta Stone, which is a Web-based foreign
language program.
Several years ago, the Army briefed that DLI, the Defense Language Institute, which is your training center for foreign languages, and develops the teaching material and the evaluation materialswould provide oversight for the Rosetta Stone to make
sure Rosetta Stone meets the military needs.
And we were just told by the Commandant running the school
that the DLI does not have oversight over the Rosetta Stone. There
is a lot of money being spent for this contract for Rosetta Stone.
And I dont know how beneficial it is.
Because DLI is really good at developing the quality and the effectiveness of language training, I am just interested in ensuring
that Rosetta Stone is supporting the mission requirements and
maybe requiring DLI at least to have some role in it.
Mr. HALE. I am going to need to take that one for the record. I
am not familiar with it, but I understand your point. Lets see if
we can find out who has oversight on this issue.
Two organizations within the Army provide oversight of the Rosetta Stone program. The Program Executive Office Enterprise Information Systems (PEO-EIS) is
responsible for the delivery of commercially-developed online training programs for
our Soldiers. The Armys Director of Training, also the Armys Senior Language Authority (Brigadier General Richard C. Longo), is responsible to ensure online language training provides the necessary content to meet the needs of the Army. The
Senior Language Authority (SLA) is advised by his staff (including seasoned foreign
language professionals) and the Army Language and Culture Enterprise (ALCE).
The purpose of the ALCE is to provide advice to the Army SLA on all matters pertaining to foreign language and cultural training. The Defense Language Institute,
Foreign Language Center is a principal member of the ALCE.
Rosetta Stone is a commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) training program available
to all Active, Reserve and National Guard Soldiers, and Army Civilians and has the
potential for well over one million users. Employing the COTS software required
neither R&D resource expenditure nor delay in the immediate execution/deployment
of foreign language training online. The intent of this online language program in
e-Learning is to provide foreign language familiarization instruction to the non-linguist. The latest cumulative statistics (April 2009) show 219,904 unique registered
users, 208 average daily new registrations, and a total of 1,095,419 hours logged
training online. During the month of March 2009, over 3,500 users studied the war
zone languages of Arabic, Pashto, and Farsi. Additionally, hard discs with multiple
user site licenses are shipped to requesting units for use in theater where no Internet access is available. Rosetta Stone developed a military Arabic module for inclusion in the Army program that is not available to commercial customers.
By offering Rosetta Stone on Army e-Learning, Soldiers have a tool at their disposal for enhancing their operational skills as well as a tool for self-development.
Courses offered through e-Learning are tracked by the Army Training Requirements
and Resources System (ATRRS). Upon successful completion of Rosetta Stone modules Soldiers earn points toward promotion to the ranks of Sergeant and Staff Sergeant. A total of 31 language courses are available including English. The English
module has experienced over 36,000 users and 65,281 hours. This is a valuable tool
for Soldiers who speak English as a second language to improve their skills.
As an aside, the contract for online foreign language training is currently out for
proposals. Throughout the contract process we will continue to provide online language instruction to the non-linguist. The future vendor will be selected based upon
a fair and open competition process.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01346
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1347
OVERSEAS HEALTH CARE
Mr. FARR. And do we have any reportswould your office have

any reports on the health care for civilian contractors in Iraq and
Afghanistan? The Washington Post came out saying that the cost
is more than $1 million a month for private contractors providing
health care to our military.
Mr. HALE. I am going to need to check that one, too. I am sorry.
You are asking me questions I just dont know. And that is probably our personnel and readiness folks.
The military provides emergency healthcare for all US personnelsoldier, sailors,
airmen, marines, civilian employees and government contractor employeesat theater medical treatment facilities. While some legacy contracts still permit free
healthcare to contractor employees, all contracts are being standardized to comply
with the policy that allows for the provision of, and seeking reimbursement for,
emergency healthcare. The provision of healthcare in theater is a military Service
specific responsibility, funded with Overseas Contingency Operations funding, and
as such requires the Services to develop billing process, protocols, data systems, info
systems, etc. that do not currently exist. The Comptroller and Assistant Secretary
of Defense (Health Affairs), the stateside medical billing experts, are assisting the
Services in developing the process to ensure that prospective and retrospective billing can occur. The implementation of this new process and the enforcement of contracting terms that comply with the policy will ensure that the Department is fully
reimbursed for the provision of these medical services. Since DoD policy does not
permit provision of primary care services, several large contractors have established
primary care clinics in theater, and may have tried to pass on the costs to the DoD.
To date, any costs to establish these clinics would be imbedded in the overall contracts and not easily identifiable. The contracting officers are aware of this practice
and continue to look for any indication that these costs are being passed thru to
the DoD.
Mr. FARR. Well, part of it was that the DoD had failed to collect
payment for over the last 2 years from military contractors for the
emergency and primary health care. I guess we are providing
they have their own
Mr. HALE. Right, we provide it there.
Mr. FARR [continuing]. They have it in their own contracts, in
their own health care programs, but we are providing for them
Mr. HALE. That part I should be able to check out. I mean, that
is an accounts receivable. And I know we have had problems collecting, not necessarily just from those contractors
Mr. FARR. But you are trying to collect from them?
Mr. HALE. Yes, I mean, we track our accounts receivable regularly. You may not think of that, but we do. We have a number of
people who owe us money.
Mr. FARR [continuing]. Didnt know whether you had anyindicate whether any effort had been made to collect that.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Sam.
INCREMENTAL FUNDING
Secretary Hale, let me ask you about incremental funding versus

phased funding. Tell me what the administrations new policy is
and how that differs from the past and why you are putting
Mr. HALE. Well, I dont think it is a new policy. I mean, first off,
I support full funding in almost all cases. I think it is the right way
for both the Department of Defense and Congress, in that it insists
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01347
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1348
on transparency and accountability. It forces us to face the full
costs.
You know, there are probably rare circumstances, but I think
they should be rare, where we have pursued incremental funding
and, maybe even rarer, phased funding, although I think, particularly in the phased funding, we have to worry about whether we
are affecting the efficiency of the operation and we are building
four air conditioners rather than one because we are doing it in a
phase is something we want to avoid.
But, in general, I believe we should fully fund military construction projects, in the Department of Defense budget. I would like to
see the Congress do it, too.
Mr. EDWARDS. We might need some more discussions on that, becausewell, for various reasons. But in terms of the phased funding, you said you would like to avoid phased funding whenever possible, but I think for the new health care facility down at Lackland,
you know, you have four distinct phases. And I asked some of the
people involved, does that literally affect the architecture of the
building itself?
And yes. I mean, you literally have tofouras they are proposing, four separate buildings now. And in San Antonio, where
land is relatively cheap, maybe in abundance, maybe that is not all
the problem, although I dont know. In a theoretical case, someone
is going from primary case over to inpatient, I am not sure I want
to walk out in 103-degree heat in San Antonio if I am a wounded
warrior, military service man or woman, or their families.
Have you had a chance to look at the phased funding and maybe
use that as an example of, does this really make sense? And I am
not a building contractor. I was in commercial real estate for a little bit back in the 1980s, but not enough to learn the economics
of contracting.
But I had to think that, you know, if I were to use an analogy,
contracting out to get somebody to fill the foundation for my new
home, and then, when that is finished, getting somebody to build
the walls, and then somebody else to build the roof would be far
more expensive than being able to make that commitment up front
and taking advantage of economies of scale.
And it seems to be just the opposite of thewhat the administration has proposed and Congress is looking at on V.A. funding. We
want, you know, the economic advantages of knowing what is going
to be funded and not.
Any thoughts? I know it is not perfect no matter which alternative you pursue, but do you have some
Mr. HALE. Well, let me answer in general, and then I am going
to ask if you talk about Lackland, because I dont know the details.
I said, I believe we should fully fund these projects up front. There
may be rare circumstances where something is so large that it
would cause such spikes in the budget as to be a problem, but I
would like to avoid incremental funding and I think, in general,
phase-funding.
So let me ask you, Wayne, if you would comment on Lackland.
Mr. ARNY. Well, Lackland was a case where it was originally
again, I agree with Mr. Hale. If we could fund the whole thing
right up front, it would be the best way to do it.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01348
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1349
But we were told not to do an incremental funding, so in order
to make it fit in thewithin the budget constraints we had, and
given that we could do complete phasesand you wont have to
walk outside; there will be walkways between themit was designed as four phases.
Mr. EDWARDS. OMB, I guess, has adopted this policy of no incremental funding, perhaps in rare cases. Instead of having incremental funding, where you could have some economies of scale,
going to phase-funding? I dont understand that rationale there.
Mr. ARNY. We are stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Mr. EDWARDS. Sure. I understand.
Mr. ARNY. Again, we would not have phased funded thisfunded
Lackland. Part of it is to avoid our phases, keep the phases small
enough that, when it comes to the Hill, they dont get chopped and
used for something else.
Ideally, the total of this would get $72 millioncall it $450 million$467 million. We would rather justfund that in one year,
and let it spend out.
And, frankly, as I have mentioned to you before, prior to coming
into the MILCON world, I just assumed no one did incremental
funding. In the 1980s, we tried to incrementally fund the carrier,
and we were kicked out of the Senate.
And so when I found that we were doing incremental funding, I
was a little surprised, but I will sayand I have tried to convince
OMBthat it does work in the MILCON world. They want to stick
with no incremental funding.
So in this particular case, with a building in which you can
thank youwe pay like a 5-percent premium, but we can phase
this building, because we have the land available to stretch out.
They will be connected. No one will be walking outside.
I think where you are really going to see it hurt us is when we
send over, probably in 2011we have a big nuclear pier up in Congressman Dicks district that is probably going to be $600 million,
$700 million, $800 million.
And I have talked to the Navy. And something like thatI said,
Why cant you phase it? Give me 100 feet every year or whatever.
They said, No, I cant. That is not the way we build piers. We set
all the pilings in. And at the end of a phase, it is not complete and
usable.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
Mr. ARNY. Whereas, with the hospital at Lackland, each phase
will be complete and usable.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. We might need to talk to OMB. You know,
I will give you an example of where the philosophy of no incremental has hurt. We are so badly undercapitalized, in terms of hospital modernization, in DoD. And the reason was, Secretary England said, nobody ever presented to me in any of these
supplementals since the Iraq war began a need to do a hospital at
their base, so I concluded we just didnt need any new DoD hospitals.
The reason is that commander would have been laughed out of
the room or kicked out of the room for offering a $500 million, $1
billion project in one year in a supplemental. Consequently, we
have service men and women being taken care of in hospitals that
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01349
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1350
are so damn old that they cant even put MRI machines at Fort
Knox. They have to go out in 95-degree heat in the summer and
over to a trailer, their wounded soldier out there.
So I dont know. I guess we need to sit down with OMB. And is
this an OMB policy basically?
Mr. ARNY. Yes, sir.
Mr. HALE. Yes.
Mr. ARNY. Again, we could adapt to no incremental funding, because we said no incremental funding, and we know, because as
you well know, we put an $800 million project into the budget,
when it comes over to Congress, Congress has saidall four committees have saidsubcommittees have said, It is our prerogative
to incrementally fund.
And so the danger we face is we know that, you know, out of an
$800 million project, $650 million is going to go someplace else, and
then next year we are going to have to cough up that money again.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
Mr. ARNY. We will go either way.
INADEQUATE HOUSING
Mr. EDWARDS. Well, we will follow up on that.

And one last thing if I could ask your shop to do, I want to support the new administration. I also want to hold them accountable.
Could your folks put together as accurate as you possibly can the
number of actual troops living, their families or singles, living in
housing that doesnt meet the respective services standards?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01350
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01351
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1351
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01352
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1352
1353
We kind of get numbers all over the place. If you could get me
a hard number. I am not interested in whether the process is in
place to build them a new home 15 years from now or 5 years from
now. It seems to me that should be the metric we ought to look at
each year. Are they living in housing?
For example, in your testimony, when you said, 95 percent with
this years budget will be housingand I assume you were talking
about family housing
Mr. ARNY. Yes.
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Will be funded for modernization. I
dont know how that applies to, say, Chaffee Village at Fort Hood,
which I visited recently. And, I mean, I went into these houses and
they were not anything I would want my family living in, much
less a family sacrificing as much as our soldiers.
And if it werent for the base commander taking that issue up
and pushing it and renegotiating withthe plan was to modernizeto build those new homes in the year 2032.
So I come to this committee and I hear, you know, we are 98 percent funded for modernization, I go out in the real world, and I
see
Mr. ARNY. Let me checkI asked on the Chaffee housing, because I asked about that. And, in fact, we may notit may not be
required after a certain period of time.
And I know in San Diego, the Navy faced a problem where we
we cant do this all inwe cant do all the modernization in a week.
And the Marine Corps especially was in bad shape, but the Navy
out in San Diego had some bad housing, real housing that actually
got some bad press.
And I had been out there right before. And it wasnt the best
housing, but the private-sector partner had gone through and had
cleaned it up, put new appliances, done carpeting, done painting,
and what was missed in the article was the families that chose to
go into Cabreo knew ahead of time that, if you choose to go into
Cabreowhich doesnt meet our standards, but we are trying to do
the best we canyou have first choice as we build the new buildings.
So we are trying to make sure everybody is accommodated as we
make the shift. I mean, Congressman Farr is seeing what we have
done with the housing out in Monterey. So it is not all there yet,
but we are getting there.
Mr. EDWARDS. I think we have made tremendous progress in
family housing, and, clearly, barracks is an area we are farther behind. It seems like every service has a different number, every witness has a different number. Some of the numbers assume, well,
based on the present process, there is funding available
Mr. ARNY. That is exactly why I changed. The money is in place.
I know how you feel about that. I dont want to say that everybody
is living in a perfect house. They are not, and we are moving there.
But we have the money to privatize 98 percent of our housing in
the United States. So some of it is not going to get privatized because it is in really oddball locations, but there is not much left
that is not going to be privatized.
Mr. EDWARDS. Chaffee Village has been scheduled for 2032. And
thatthey had some money for fixing it up a little bit, but you talk
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01353
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1354
about, you know, a waste of money. Fixing up those houses, in my
opinion, was truly a waste.
Part of the reason I want the metric is we ought to be able to
tell the taxpayers all the improvements we have made and how
many fewer. But it seems like we need to have one clear definition.
To the service man or woman and their family, the only thing
that matters is, am I living in a decent house or not? The process
doesnt matter. The plans might matter in the future, but today it
is, am I living in decent housing or not?
Do we have the ability to provide those numbers? Are you today
living in decent housing or not?
Mr. ARNY. We can tell if it is inadequate or adequate by the services standards.
Mr. EDWARDS. Even though I disagree with the services standards, at least so we have a metric, and each year we can clearly
compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges.
Mr. ARNY. Yes, sir
Mr. Crenshaw.
Let me ask you all about this joint cargo aircraft program I think
between the Army and the Air Force. They were going to buy 16
of those new aircraft, and then the request this year, I think, in
the budget is for 8. And I was told that they are going to transfer,
I guess, the control from the Army to the Air Force. I dont know
if that has been done or not. And then there was going to be an
assessment of the overall program.
And I guess the question is, what is the assessment going to involve? Are they going to concludeis that going to be part of the
QDR? Will they conclude we ought to buy the original 16 or we are
not going to buywe are only going to buy 8?
I mean, what is going to be involved in that assessment? What
is the reason for the assessment? And when will that kind of be
finalized?
Mr. HALE. Well, first, we wont change the fiscal 2010 budget.
The issue is the overall objective.
First, I think this is a good news story. We had the chief of staff
of the Army actually go to the chief of staff of the Air Force and
say, This is an issue, and I think you can do better, or at least
I would like you to take over, because, frankly, we have underutilized C130s in the United States Air Force today.
And if I remember the figure right, the C130s can land at about
99 percent of the runways that can be used by the C27, the JCA
aircraft. So the Air Force is going to be able to achieve some commonalities that will benefit the taxpayers.
With that in mind, we lowered the overall inventory objective for
the JCA from 78 to 38. That decision may get revisited in the QDR,
that is the overall inventory objective. And I realize there are some
important basing decisions here. I am mindful of that issue.
But from the taxpayer standpoint, I think what we are doing is
getting better utilization of the overall assets that the Air Force or
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01354
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1355
the DoD has available. And that, in my mind, and I think in Secretary Gates mind, is a good news story.
Mr. CRENSHAW. One of theI know we had General Casey before
us. And we were kind of ramping up in Afghanistan. I cant remember the exact figure, but I think he said we are spending about
$8 million a month leasing kind of airplanes that are like the joint
cargo. And that is a lot of money.
And so I guess you have the National Guard. If C130s can do
all that, I dont know why they are not doing it right now. But
maybe I think I would just be interested in hearing what the rationaleit is kind of like the aircraft carrier, when you say, Well,
we may have changed our mind.
Nobody said you changed your mind. You just said, We are just
going to further review it. And then people say, Well, maybe the
cost has gone up. I dont know of anybody that said the cost has
gone up. I have heard it from you, but the Navy did a study. They
went through the costI mean, have they changed their minds,
said, No, it is going to cost more thanwhen I hear you say
I hadnt heardI think I heard
Mr. HALE. That is in Mayport now, right?
Mr. CRENSHAW. In terms of change inthe Joint Cargo Aircraft
(JCA). You say, Well, we are going to build 16. No, we only need
8, because C130s do it. But we are leasing planes that do what
the (JCA) is going to do.
It just confuses me a little bit to hear you saymaybe explain
to mewhere did the change in costs come from, whether it is
we will say the (JCA), and also the nuclear carrier in Mayport.
Where did the change occur in terms of the cost?
Mr. HALE. I mean, my understanding on Mayport is that our latest cost estimates are significantly higher. And
I would like to retract my statement, I mean, my understanding on Mayport is

that our latest cost estimates are significantly higher. I misspoke. Our cost estimates for Mayport are not significantly higher.
The FY 2010 Presidents Budget request for the Joint Cargo Aircraft program reduced the total number of JCA from 78 to 38 and transferred the direct support airlift mission supporting Armys Time-Sensitive/Mission-Critical (TS/MC) air delivery
to the Air Force. These changes maximize the robust capabilities of our existing C
130 fleet and ensure that the Department meets all intra-theater airlift requirements. Adjusting roles and missions and assigning the Air Force greater responsibility for delivering Army time-sensitive, mission-critical cargo will free up Army assets such as CH47 helicopters and crews that are critically needed for tasks that
only rotary aircraft can perform. The FY 2010 Presidents Budget acknowledges that
changes in the way the Air Force and Army operate will yield efficiencies that reduce the requirement for combined Army-Air Force intra-theater airlift compared to
how we execute today. The budget reflects improved effectiveness, increased joint
synergy and minimized duplication of effort between the Services to maximize the
utilization of the Departments intra-theater airlift assets.
Mr. CRENSHAW. But did youtell me about those costs. Did you
do a new study?
Mr. HALE. I am not sure. I will need toanybodydo you know
the Mayport situation in terms of the
Mr. CRENSHAW. I would loveif you could supply those new cost
estimates to the committee
Mr. HALE. Sure.
Mr. CRENSHAW [continuing]. Show the new costs?
Mr. HALE. We will be glad to.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01355
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1356
Mr. CRENSHAW. Because I think they considered the costs, and
they said, Look, you know, it is expensive, but we are talking
about national security.
Mr. HALE. Right.
Mr. CRENSHAW. And to make sure that we keep our carrier fleet
safe, we think it is a good idea
Mr. HALE. Let me also run down the leasing in Afghanistan. You
may be thinking of thewe are leasing some commercial aircraft
to provide communications capability. And I am not sure that is
something the Sherpas could do, but I need to check
Mr. CRENSHAW. Yes, I just remember him talking about that we
are doing more in Afghanistan.
But I think we are all trying to save taxpayers dollars. And if
there is a demandfor any kind of cargo craft, whether it is a National GuardI know in Florida they do a great job. They bring in
supplies, hurricanes, things like that. And they feel like there is a
need for that. But I dont know if that is built into the requirements document for that kind of aircraft.
But that would be great, if you could, just to help us get a better
idea of what all these costs are.
Mr. ARNY. Also, sir, in answer to your earlier question, we did
for 2010, we do a repair to wharf Charlie at $29.7 million.
Mr. CRENSHAW. And thatI think that is the Charlie wharf
where, a carrier just was there to come inso that thingI know
that is in the budget for that repair. And I think the maintenance
wharf isand the controlled industrial stillthose are the big
items that, I dont think their costsI am not aware of any new
study that said the costs had gone up, but if there is one, we would
love to see it.
Thank you.
Mr. Farr.
Mr. FARR. Yes, just a couple questions. Thank you very much.
Mr. Arny, in our discussion on how much money could be used
for cleaning up closed BRAC bases, I think you indicated that the
department was maxed out and the capacity out there was being
fully utilized.
We received a letterChairman Edwards received a letter on
May 12th laying out what the capacity was by the National Association of Ordnance and Explosive Waste contracts. I think what
you indicated is that the amount is aboutapproximately $500
million that is allocated, but the capacity for clean-up within the
industry is currently about $1.5 billion, about three times as much
as we are putting out.
It is just that if we are looking at the future and thinking that
we are meeting capacity, we are not. And, you know, a lot of it is
fromwhere the little bases are interested in getting them cleaned
up.
The other thing I wanted to revisit with you is the Treasure Island, because you said something that struck me last time that I
thought was very interesting, that they couldnt qualify for an EDC
because there werent enough permanent jobs being created. How
many permanent jobs does one need to create to get an EDC?
Mr. ARNY. I believeI dont know the numbers of that.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01356
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1357
Mr. FARR. Is there a threshold?
Mr. ARNY. Under the rulewe will work with you on this. But
under the rules, they had to have permanent jobs and a lastbecause they initially were looking at a no-cost EDC.
Mr. FARR. Yes.
Mr. ARNY. So let me get back to the record.
In determining whether to grant an Economic Development Conveyance (EDC),
the Secretary concerned is to determine whether the EDC is needed for purposes
of job generation, including the extent of short- and long-term job generation. There
is not a threshold or a minimum job creation requirement for an EDC due to the
considerable variability of our surplus properties and local markets impacting redevelopment activity. Rather, the Secretary concerned has discretion and flexibility to
structure an EDC that can be tailored to local needs to assist local job creation/recovery activities and base redevelopment. This is done in close collaboration with
the Local Redevelopment Authority (LRA). Specifically, as set forth in the governing
regulation (32 CFR 174), the Secretary concerned will consider the following factors,
as appropriate, in evaluating the application and the terms and conditions of the
proposed transfer:
(1) Adverse economic impact of closure or realignment on the region and potential
for economic recovery through an EDC.
(2) Extent of short- and long-term job generation.
(3) Consistency with the entire redevelopment plan.
(4) Financial feasibility of the development, including market analysis and need
and extent of proposed infrastructure and other investments.
(5) Extent of state and local investment, level of risk incurred, and the LRAs ability to implement the plan.
(6) Current local and regional real estate market conditions.
(7) Incorporation of other Federal agency interests and concerns, and applicability
of, and conflicts with, other Federal surplus property disposal authorities.
(8) Relationship to the overall Military Department disposal plan for the installation.
(9) Economic benefit to the Federal Government, including protection and maintenance cost savings and anticipated consideration from the transfer.
(10) Compliance with applicable Federal, state, interstate, and local laws and regulations.
Mr. FARR. I have anthey say that they can getthey are going
to have 2,629 permanent jobs. Those are notin addition to whatever the construction jobs, which are huge.
And I think you indicated maybe it was when we were walking
back to the office that there wasnt any firm appraisal on Treasure
Island.
Mr. ARNY. There is a firm Navy appraisal, yes, sir.
Mr. FARR. There is a GSA-confirmed appraisal.
Mr. ARNY. Right.
Mr. FARR. We are$250 million?
Mr. ARNY. Yes, sir.
Mr. FARR. Which I think the city has offered to pay. This is what
I understand. It is not in my district, but it is up the street a little
bit. But they
Mr. ARNY. I dont believe so, but let me get back to you on the
details of that.
The City of San Francisco has not offered to pay the appraised Fair Market Value
of $250M for Naval Station Treasure Island. The Navy has offered payment terms
at below market interest rates for the appraised Fair Market Value to be paid starting in the later years of development and paid over a period of two to three years.
The Citys compensation offers have been centered on profit participation models
where the Navy is compensated after the developer realizes an 1825% profit. The
City has offered to take over the remaining limited environmental work, estimated
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01357
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1358
at $19.3M, as part of the compensation under profit participation models. Nevertheless, the Navy believes that the models of profit participation offered by the City
would likely result in little or no return for the Federal Taxpayer.
Mr. FARR. We want to try to get this thing moving.

Mr. ARNY. Yes, sir.
Mr. FARR. That is it. Thank you.
BRAC SAVINGS
Mr. EDWARDS. My last question will just be for the record. Secretary Arny, you mentioned that there are $4 billion in annual
BRAC savings. I havent looked at those numbers in quite a while.
My general recollection is that we know the costs of BRAC are very
hard, building buildings, moving people. The savings sometime are
a little bit soft, in terms of efficiencies.
But someone came up with that $4 billion number. Could you
please ask your office to send over to our subcommittee the list of
how that $4 billion figure is derived? If we are saving that much
in the real world, we need to brag about it. If we are not, we need
to know that.
And, Mr. Crenshaw, do you have any additional questions?
GUARD AND RESERVE FUNDING
Mr. CRENSHAW. Just real quick. The Guard and Reserve I noticed last year was like $1.5 billion. This year it is down to $1 billion. That is $500 million less, 30 percent reduction. And they are
still pretty active.
A, what is the reason for that? B, is there anything this subcommittee can do, you know, to kind of help in that regard? Is
it
Mr. HALE. I think if you go back and look at the trimble, we actually submitted for the Guard last yearwe have increased that
amount. The Congress typically does add money for the Guard,
which is your prerogative. And so we submitted, I think, a little
less than a billion in 2009. You made it $1.5 billion.
We have increased our submission, because we feel it is the right
amount for the Guard. I understand that we propose, you dispose.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Got you. I think we ought toI didnt realize
that we had bumped it pretty good, but I think that is something
we ought to think about, becauseI think they are still very, very
involved. Unless there is some kind of reduction in their operation,
they are going to need that kind of support.
Mr. EDWARDS. You bet. You know, and I think traditionally over
the years administrations, Republican and Democrats alike, tended
to underfund Guard and Reserve MILCON knowing Congress
would add to it. The problem is, with the budget situation being
what it is, it is more and more difficult for us to, you know, routinely add $1 billion, $1.5 billion
Mr. HALE. I doat least say for the record, we dont think we
underfunded. I understand.
Mr. EDWARDS. I understand.
Mr. FARR. Are any of thoseinteroperable, Guard, Reserve and
active duty? So can you go train on a National Guard base? Does
it meet your standards?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01358
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1359
Mr. ARNY. I think it depends. I mean, I had to leave my own
plane in Savannah International. And there were a hugeit is a
C130 Guard operation, and there were a huge number of F15s
and F16s that were doing exercises out of there. And right down
the road, there is the Hunter Army Airfield. So they are training.
Mr. FARR. Well, I am sure the Air Guard is, because they are
constantly flying, but it seems to me that those bases in my districtI have a Reserve base, I have a Guard base, I have an active
duty base. And I dont know that they are even
Mr. ARNY. I know, when I was on active duty, we would go from
base to base and get training. And sometimes you would have to
pre-position equipment, like our F4s couldnt use Air Force F4
starters, but we would train at other peoples bases. It depends on
the facilities and what you are looking for. You dont necessarily go
to your own base.
Mr. FARR. No, but I think it is a MILCON responsibilitymaybe
there is some report language we can look at to see whether these
bases are interoperable rather than just expanding them, getting
them to be used more efficiently.
Mr. ARNY. We did an entire air wing operation
Mr. EDWARDS. Makes sense.
Mr. ARNY [continuing]. Out of Naval Station Mayport. I mean,
we have the entire airway, because the ship sank at the pier, but
that is another story. [Laughter.]
Mr. EDWARDS. Any other additional questions? If not, let me finish as we began.
Thank you both for being here and for what you are doing for
our country. Secretary Arny, we wish you Godspeed and all the
best to you. And let your sons know we appreciate their service to
the country, as well. Thank you for the legacy you leave through
your many years of public service.
And, Secretary Hale, we look forward to working dollars and
cents with you in the years ahead.
Mr. HALE. Thank you.
We stand adjourned.
INFLATION
Question. For the record, what is the construction price inflation factor built into
your FY 2010 budget request, and how does this compare to the rates used by the
private sector and other Federal agencies?
Answer. The construction price inflation factor built into the FY 2010 budget request is 1.5 percent for FY 2010. The annual inflation rates used by other federal
agencies (as reported to DoD) range from 2.6 percent to 9.0 percent. Engineering
News-Record (a common industry source for cost indices) predicted an increase of
1.8 percent for its Building Cost Index for calendar year 2008 (published in December 2007), and a decrease of 0.5 percent for calendar year 2009 (published in December 2008).
MISSILE DEFENSE
Question. Congress approved $151 million in FY 2009 to begin construction of the
bases that constitute the Ballistic Missile Defense third site in Europe. By last
years estimates, about $690 million was required to complete construction. I understand that you are not requesting additional funds for this initiative in FY 2010,
as the 2009 funds have not spent due to a lack of parliamentary approval from the
host nations. What is your intention going forward on this project?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01359
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1360
Answer. The Department is currently conducting the Ballistic Missile Defense Review (BMDR) which will, among other things, review the rationale and requirements for the third site and explore alternatives that may exist. No final decisions
have been made. The FY 2010 budget preserves the Administrations flexibility to
arrive at a future decision on missile defense in Europe. Remaining FY 2009 funding will be sufficient for the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) to begin work on the
sites in the Czech Republic and Poland, should the Administration make the decision to do so.
Initial review results will be available later this year and a final report will be
submitted to Congress in January 2010.
OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS REQUEST
Question. The FY10 request includes $1.4 billion in additional MILCON projects
for what is now called Overseas Contingency Operations, or OCO. Nearly all of this
money is specifically for Afghanistan. However, there is also $192 million for 11
MILCON projects in Afghanistan included in the regular part of the budget. How
do you determine which Afghanistan projects are included in the main base budget,
and which are included to the OCO?
Answer. The construction projects in the FY 2010 base budget support peace time
mission requirements at locations where we expect to have a presence after the contingency operations, such as Bagram in Afghanistan and Camp Arifjan in Kuwait.
The Afghanistan construction projects in the FY 2010 OCO request are synchronized to the troop announcements made by the President and reflect requirements driven by wartime urgency. Although some of these requirements are at enduring locations (Bagram and Kandahar), these projects are in direct support of
troop announcements/movements or require acceleration in support of troop increases/movements. For example, the housing at Bagram in support of the enduring
requirements for the base population is funded in the base budget. However, the
troop housing to support the force increase is funded in the OCO request.
BRAC
Question. During the hearing, you suggested that the overseas-to-U.S. realignments encompassed in the Global Defense Posture Review should not be included
in a comparison between the original COBRA estimates for BRAC and the current
estimates. Yet the Department incorporated these realignments and their costs into
the BRAC program primarily through Recommendation #10, Operational Army
(IGPBS) and Recommendation #4 for Fort Bragg. Could you please clarify what you
meant by this statement?
Answer. Yes, to the extent the costs associated with these recommendations result
from stateside relocation activities, they have been incorporated into the BRAC program. The costs associated with closing overseas units and transportation of forces
to U.S. soil have not been charged to the BRAC account, but rather have been more
appropriately absorbed by the operational accounts.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01360
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2

FISCAL YEAR 2010 AIR FORCE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, FAMILY HOUSING AND BASE REALIGNMENT
AND CLOSURE PROGRAMS
WITNESSES
GENERAL NORTON A. SCHWARTZ, CHIEF OF STAFF, USAF
MAJOR GENERAL DEL EULBERG, THE AIR FORCE CIVIL ENGINEER,
USAF
STATEMENT
OF THE
CHAIRMAN
Mr. EDWARDS [presiding]. I would like to call the subcommittee

to order.
General Schwartz, General Eulberg, thank you both for being
here.
And, General Eulberg, I see in my notes that you are retiring
this summer after 36 years?
General EULBERG. Sir, 35 in uniform.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thirty-five, 35 years of military service. And I
want to thank, on behalf of all of us in Congress, you and your
family for your service to our country over those years. You made
a real difference, and we salute you for that service. And thank you
for being here today.
General EULBERG. Thank you, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. I would like to just make a few very brief opening
comments, and then I am going to turn to Zach Wamp, our ranking
member, for any opening comments he would care to make. And
then we will proceed with the testimony.
We are here today to receive testimony in the Air Forces fiscal
year 2010 budget request for military construction, family housing,
and BRAC.
Over 1 year ago, the prior chief of staff of the Air Force told this
subcommittee that the Air Force had chosen to accept what he
called manageable risk in facilities and infrastructure funding.
Although the active Air Force military construction request of
$1.145 billion represents an increase over both the fiscal year 2009
request and the fiscal year 2009 enacted level, it is still more than
$200 million short of what last years FYDP projected for 2010. It,
therefore, would appear to me that the Air Force is still accepting
some degree of risk in facilities to meet other priorities.
I also am concerned that the Guard and Reserve MILCON budgets are not keeping pace with the possible needs out there.
The Air Force certainly has many challenges and budget issues
to balance, so my goal today is to hope to better understand the
Air Forces views in relation to MILCON and family housing in the
context of all the other pressing needs that you have.
(1361)
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01361
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1362
Before I introduce our witnesses, I would like to turn to Mr.
Wamp, our ranking member, for any comments.
STATEMENT
OF THE
Mr. WAMP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me thank you for your
extraordinary leadership.
I welcome the chief today and certainly commend General
Eulberg for his outstanding career.
I want to thank Mr. Crenshaw, in his absence, for subbing for
me yesterday and for your understanding, Mr. Chairman. I happened to have my 24th wedding anniversary Monday night, and as
many of those as I have missed over the last 15 years, I got one
in.
Mr. EDWARDS. You should not miss any of those for any committee hearing.
Mr. WAMP. It was very worthwhile, and I am grateful for the opportunity. I just want to say brieflyI dont want to repeat anything the Chairman just said, looking at the reduced funding levels
I too am concerned about the level of risk the Air Force is taking
on.
I want to thank the Air Force for all that they do and continue
to do for our national capability. And I want to especially thank
you for allowing one of your finest, Major Juan Alvarez, over my
right shoulder, to actually help staff me this year.
He has served the Air Force and his country extremely well and
certainly gives me a full and new, even better appreciation of the
United States Air Force and the quality of the men and women
that serve our country through the United States Air Force.
So thanks for your presence today. I look forward to a good hearing.
General Schwartz, since this is your first time before our subcommittee in your position, let me just read into the record a very
brief introduction.
General Schwartz, Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force,
became Chief of Staff in August of 2008. He has served for 36
yearsthat is where I got the 36 years, Major General Eulberg
36 years of service since graduating from the Air Force Academy
in 1973.
And thank you, General Schwartz, for those years of service and
leadership.
He previously has served as commander, U.S. Transportation
Command, director of the Joint Staff, commander of the 11th Air
Force, Deputy Commander-in-Chief of Special Operations Command, Commander of the 16th Special Operations Wing.
And he is a command pilot with more than 4,400 hours in C
130s, MH53s, and MH60s. It is a little bit different from the
1,100 hours I have in a single-engine Cessna 210. General
Schwartz also served in Operations Desert Shield and Desert
Storm.
I want to, again, welcome both of you to the committee. We will
accept for the record your complete statements, but I would like to
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01362
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1363
recognize you now, General Schwartz, for any opening comments
you care to make.
STATEMENT
OF
GENERAL NORTON A. SCHWARTZ
General SCHWARTZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Congressman

Wamp.
Thank you very much for allowing me to appear before you
today. The Air Force is dedicated to its role as a trusted member
of the armed forces.
And our infrastructure investment strategy supports our core
functions and ensures that the investments reflect stewardship of
the taxpayers dollar and achieves strategic balance in our current
fiscal circumstances through five priorities, the first of which is reinvigorating our nuclear enterprise; the second is partnering with
the joint coalition team to win todays fight; third, to develop and
care for our Airmen, their families, and importantly, our wounded;
fourth, to modernize our air and space inventories and training capabilities; and, finally, to recapture acquisition excellence.
With this in mind, I would like to update you on military construction, family housing, and BRAC as a part of our comprehensive strategy to support the national defense with global vigilance,
reach, and power.
As you indicated earlier, I am accompanied by Del Eulberg, our
Air Force Civil Engineer, and I will have a few more comments, if
I may, at the conclusion of my remarks on that, as well, who will
sort of round out the details of the strategy.
And as we continue to focus today on todays fight and to modernize our air and space inventories for tomorrows challenges, we
recognize that we cannot lose focus on critical Air Force infrastructure programs.
Air Force installations are key to delivering game-changing air,
space and cyber capabilities to our combatant commanders. And
our fiscal year 2010 investments directly contribute to maintaining
the infrastructure necessary to accomplish these many missions.
At the same time, we are committed to quality of service for our
people. And that is consistent with the contributions and sacrifices
they make on behalf of our nation.
While the fiscal year 2010 budget for MILCON, BRAC, and family housing and facility maintenance requests is in the neighborhood of, as you indicated, $1.5 billion or thereabouts for MILCON
and $4.9 billion for the entire program, which is somewhat less
than last years projection, we intend to mitigate the difference in
MILCON and facility maintenance by intensifying our efforts in
restoration and modernization of existing plans, and managing our
resources from an enterprise portfolio perspective, optimizing facility utilization.
In addition to targeted demolition and aggressive energy saving
initiatives, we will continue to privatize family housing and modernize dormitories, as well, to assure Airmens quality of service.
Air Force MILCON, family housing, and BRAC initiatives will
continue to directly support these overall priorities that I outlined
for you, sir. And we appreciate and we thank you for your continuing support of our Air Force, and particularly our Airmen and
their families, who are devoted, I think, to defending the nation.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01363
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1364
I do look forward to your questions. With your permission, sir,

I would like to make off-script comments.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01364
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01365
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1365
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01366
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1366
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01367
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1367
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01368
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1368
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01369
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1369
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01370
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1370
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01371
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1371
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01372
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1372
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01373
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1373
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01374
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1374
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01375
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1375
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01376
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1376
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01377
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1377
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01378
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1378
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01379
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1379
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01380
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1380
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01381
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1381
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01382
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1382
1383
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
General SCHWARTZ. One relates to an observation for your consideration, as I have traveled since moving into this position last
August, that on two trips to the U.S. Central Command Area of Responsibility, on both occasions, the limitationthe threshold of
$750,000 for construction in the contingency areas is too low. I
would ask you to considerand Del can reinforce thisthat in the
neighborhood of $2 million to $3 million is probably the right
threshold forgiven the cost of construction, the availability of the
material, and so on, not asking for broader application of that elevated threshold, but simply to the warfighting AOR.
The second point, sir, is, as you indicated, Del moves on here
shortly. He has brought a fact-based, analytical approach to our
civil engineering discipline, leadership to our engineers and explosive ordnance disposal personnel.
His service has been truly notable, and Suzie and I honor your
service, as well. In fact, Dels wife is packing out today, as he is
here testifying before the committee, so another indication of how
this is a team sport.
So, Mr. Chairman, again, thank you for your compliment. And I
double your compliment to Major General Eulberg, sir.
Thank you.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, General Schwartz for your leadership
and service, for your comments today, and for honoring General
Eulberg.
General Eulberg, most of us in Congress realize that, the day
after we retire, announce our retirement, the question then about
us is, who is going to replace us? And we are forgotten pretty
quickly. You will have left a legacy, in terms of housing, quality of
life, as well as training facilities that will be serving our servicemen and women for decades to come.
So thank you to you and your family for the difference that you
have made.
INADEQUATE HOUSING
As we begin questioning, I might ask a question I like to routinely ask all of our service chiefs and civil engineers, and that is,
do you have a number, in terms of how many Air Force personnel
are living in housing, whether it is barracks or family homes, that
are determined as inadequate, using the Air Forces own standards? Not how many are planned to be brought up to adequate, or
the funding is in the pipeline, or the process is ongoing, but, as of
tonight, how many Air Force families and single personnel would
be going to bed in a home or a barracks that doesnt meet your
standards?
General EULBERG. Sir, if I might address that question. As you
are well aware, each time we testify before this committee, who has
great support for our quality of service of our Airmen and their
family, both of the dormitory plan, as well the housing, the Air
Force has a dormitory master plan that we update every 3 to 4
years, as well as a family housing master plan that formed the
basis for assessments of existing homes, as well as the investment
needed to ensure that they are up to the standards that our Airmen and their families deserve.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01383
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1384
So with that as a preamble, we have just updated our dorm master plan for 2008 and our family housing master plan, which allows
us to answer that question specifically.
In the 2008 family housing master plan, we have 9,000 homes
that are currently inadequate, of which
Mr. DICKS. That people are living in?
General EULBERG. Yes, sir. And we have a plan most of which
the majority of those homes have already been funded. In fact, they
all have been funded either with the overseas investment that we
are making in this upcoming fiscal year, as well as what we have
funded with housing privatization.
We have a significant effort in the coming year with funds that
we already have to privatize roughly 16,000 homes. And with that,
we will have taken care of all inadequate family housing that are
currently a part of the family housing master plan.
Mr. EDWARDS. Can I ask you about that point
General EULBERG. Yes, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Barracks? For example, we had testimony regarding the Army, and they said, Oh, you know, we are
taking care of these needs with the funding that we have.
But I visited Fort Hood recently, and they always call it Chaffee
Village. And under the public-private family housing partnership
program, it wasnt scheduledthose homes werent scheduled for
demolition until the year 2032.
So you could say we have a plan in place to take care of all the
soldiers of Fort Hood to see they are living in adequate housing,
but if you look at the details of it, that is not very comforting to
somebody that hears Chaffee Village wont be improved until 2032.
And those homes, in my opinion, probably should have been torn
down already.
When you say they have been funded or plans to fund, did you
mean that the dollars are in the pipeline to see that, within, what,
the next 2, 3 years, or next couple of years, or next year, that they
would all be living in housing that meets Air Force standards?
General EULBERG. Yes, sir. Great question. Let me just go back
and correct my last statement.
I had 9,000 right, but there are 9,000 scheduled for privatization
and about 2,000 overseas. So the total is 11,000. I apologize.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. No, that is okay.
General EULBERG. I had 9,000 in my head
Mr. EDWARDS. All right.
General EULBERG. But your question is a good one, in terms of,
how long does it take once funding is in the pipeline? What we
have found is it takes, on privatization, the developer typically is
given seven years for a development plan to take place.
What we have seen over the last decade is the privatization developer accelerates construction and renovation and our average is
about four years. Right now, our plan is that we will have all
inadequates construction complete by 2015.
Mr. EDWARDS. 2015?
Mr. EDWARDS. Is that for families and barracks?
General EULBERG. No, sir, just families.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01384
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1385
Mr. EDWARDS. Just families, okay. And then since I interrupted
you on the family housing issue, in terms of barracks, what are the
numbers?
General EULBERG. Yes, sir. Let me just back up. The dormitory
master plan was just completed. We have 966 dormitories in the
United States Air Force. Of those, 106 are categorized as tier one
dormitories.
We do a tiering system. Tier one is our worst condition dormitories, which we would classify as inadequate, 106.
Now, as I testified last yearand as you have been and the committee has been a great supporter in dormitoriesin our 2004
dorm master plan, we were on a glide path to do away with all
inadequates by this year, which we accomplished based on that
plan. So the commitment to our single Airmen remains as strong
as ever.
So what we did in the proceeding years is expanded the criteria
in our dorm master plan. We have added a permanent party officer
living in unaccompanied housing, as well as contractors, because
contractorsall you have to do is visit Thule Air Base, Greenland,
which is supported by contractors. They have been there, part of
the mission, for a very long time. And so we have to address those
living conditions, as well, especially in remote and isolated places
like Thule Air Base, Greenland.
So by adding those additional categories to our dorm master
plan, we have 106 dormitories that are currently inadequate. Out
of the
Mr. EDWARDS. That is not 106 individual units; that is 106
dorms.
General EULBERG. Dormitories. Yes, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. So that could behow many rooms would that actually be, just approximately?
General EULBERG. Sir, it varies. We build them on different
sizes. Usually it isour standard is 96 rooms per dormitory. Now,
sometimes they are larger. For example, as you know, our request
includes pipeline dormitories, as well as normal dormitories.
Mr. EDWARDS. But using that number, approximately ballpark
we dont need the exact number10,000?
Mr. EDWARDS. Personnel living in inadequate?
General EULBERG. Yes, sir, that is inadequate, ballpark figure.
We will submit for the record the exact number. But that is roughly the figure.
AIRMEN LIVING
IN INADEQUATE
QUARTERS
3,140 Airmen are living in Tier 1 inadequate dormitories. 400 contractors are
living in Tier 1 inadequate dormitories. The Air Force has 8,000 bed spaces in
eight Basic Military Training dormitories at Lackland Air Force Base, Texas that
are designated Tier 1 inadequate.
The Tier 1 designation means that the facility has reached the end of its useful
life and is scheduled to be replaced or renovated. The Tier 1 designation is not an
indication of habitability. Tier 1 dormitories are maintained to be safe and comfortable.
Mr. EDWARDS. Well, thanks to you, the numbers are a lot less
than they were several years ago. I know we salute the progress
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01385
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1386
for that. But we want to keep track of those that are still living
in inadequate dorms or houses today, the fact that we made
progress doesnt mean much to you, other than maybe the guy
down the street has a better home than you do. But thank you.
You were going to say something else?
General EULBERG. Yes, sir, if you dont mind. The Air Force has
invested about $1.4 billion in dormitories in the last nine years. We
have another $1.3 billion programmed in the Future Years Defense
Plan (FYDP). But it doesnt stop there, in military construction,
now.
We have also developed what we would call a bridging strategy,
is where we have targeted restoration and modernization funding
against those dormitories to ensure we dont take risk in that area.
As you saw in the preceding four years, we had some deterioration
in the condition of facilities, so we want to make sure we stop that.
So what has happened, since the end of last fiscal year, the Air
Force has invested $188 million in the last year alone in O&M dollars, maintenance and repair funds. We have also set aside $100
million a year for the next two years in O&M restoration and modernization funds with a $50 million from then on out in the FYDP.
These will be targeted towards the tier one dorms that I discussed earlier, so what we are doing is a balanced approach between O&M, maintenance and repair funds, and MILCON funds to
make sure that we stay on top of this critical quality of service
area.
General SCHWARTZ. The strategy, I guess, could be explained in
a few words, is that the good ones stay good.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right. That is important, obviously.
My last question would be, you said 2015 is a scheduled date to
have everybody in standard family housing or better, adequate
housing. What would be the date for the dorms at your present
glide path?
General EULBERG. Sir, we have the same goal. By 2015, we will
have all inadequate dorms addressed either through military construction or O&M funding, with one exception.
Right now, the funding that we have in will address all of them
except for Thule Air Base, and that is the unknown. Of the 106 inadequate dorms in our inventory today, 41 are at Thule Air Base.
And we have asked for some help from the Army Corps of Engineers to come up with a new design standard, because our standard dorms for Airmen, the quad concept, does not work at Thule
Air Base, Greenland.
And so we have asked for some help. That was built in 1951, as
you may know, sir, and that is a unique environment. So we have
asked for some support from the corps on coming up with a standard just for Thule Air Base.
So with that as a caveat, not knowing when we are going to be
able to do that and how much the cost is, by 2015, we will have
Mr. EDWARDS. We will see if we can get Mr. Dicks up there in
February to take a look at that.
Mr. DICKS. I will be glad toI have been there.
Mr. EDWARDS. In February?
Mr. DICKS. We went to the North Pole.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thanks.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01386
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1387
Thank you very much, General.
Mr. Wamp.
For the second straight year, Chief, the request has been explained lower in somewhat the same verbiage. When you say mitigate potential shortfalls in MILCON facilities and maintenance
funding by bolstering our restoration and modernization programs
as much as possible, it almost sounds like one of our press releases when something back home doesnt go right, the way we explain it.
And I just wondered if this is a Pentagon, or OMB decision.
What filter is this coming through? I know that is a tough question
for you to ask.
General SCHWARTZ. No, it is our approach. And this didnt have
anybody elses English on it.
You know, the budgetour facility effort here is part of a larger
tapestry of trying to deal with both people issuesthat is clearly
the first prioritymodernization demands and so on.
And so we think we have achieved a reasonable balance. And it
is true. If we had more funds, we might well invest additional resources in infrastructure. But as you are well aware, we have to
make choices. And I think that the way we have postured infrastructure certainly is solid relative to some of the other choices we
have made, lets say, on the innovation side.
So I think this is a responsible proposal for your consideration,
sir.
GUARD AND RESERVE COMPONENTS
Mr. WAMP. Well, you give a good report on housing. And I applaud your leadership there, given the resources that you are working with.
Let me ask you about reserve components, particularly. You have
30,000 Airmen total deployed as part of Operation Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. The Air National Guard provides almost
half of the Air Forces tactical airlift support, combat communication functions, aeromedical evacuations, and aerial refueling, and
has total responsibility for air defense of the United States.
The Reserves, 33 flying wings, 7 groups, across 63 locations, 100
percent of the Air Force aerial spray and weather reconnaissance
capabilities, 60 percent of aeromedical evac, 46 percent strategic
airlift capability.
And according to the Commission on National Guard and Reserve, the shares of the total U.S. Air Force budget, though, for the
Guard and Reserve are 6 percent and 3 percent.
So, based on your operationalized reserve components and their
contributions to this persistent conflict, what guarantees are in
place to ensure that both the Guard and Reserve MILCON requirements are carved out and represent a fair and equitable share of
the entire construction request?
General SCHWARTZ. There are three approaches on this that I
think are worthy of note. The first and most important is, if there
is new mission, if it is Air National Guardand, for example, there
are several new unmanned aircraft systemsnew mission requirements for which the Air National Guard in California and in Ari-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01387
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1388
zona, if I recall correctly, are getting MILCON. New mission gets
MILCON regardless, without consideration to component.
The second aspect of this has to do with the amount of physical
plant. Now, when you are maintaining plant, you know, we have
an approach to try to maintain investment as a percentage of the
plant replacement value. And we do, I think, a credible job in ensuring that the Air National Guard, as well as the Air Force Reserve, obtain their fair share, if you will, of that plant replacement
value, relative to what the active duty receives, too.
The third part, I think, is that there are new efforts underway
that really will make this problem less of an issue as we go forward. It is called the Total Force Initiative. And, for example,
where the active duty and the Air National Guard or the activeduty Reserves share the same facilities, whether it be security
forces or whether it be flying operations or what have you, that the
days of independent facilities on the same installation are behind
us.
And so where the components increasingly share facilities, they
will have exactly the sameyou know, enjoy the same quality of
service as does their other component. Those are the three major
pieces of our effort, sir.
Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I have other questions, but I will wait
for the next round. We have three other members on the other end
of the table.
JOINT BASING

And, General, good to see you again. I appreciated your coming
by to have a conversation.
Let me ask one general question. In our state of Washington,
McChord Air Force Base and Fort Lewis are going to be combined
into a joint base. And I know the Air Force had some concerns
about this; Secretary Anderson came in to see me several times.
Can you kind of give us a status on this and how the Air Force
feels about these joint bases? And the concerns that were expressed, about whether this would adversely affect your ability to
do your mission? And I would just like to know kind of how you
feel since you have taken over about this issue.
General SCHWARTZ. We start big and get small
Mr. DICKS. Right.
General SCHWARTZ [continuing]. Sir. I favor those bases. It never
made sense to me on why we would have at Fort Dix, and McGuire
Air Force Base, or at McChord Air Force Base and Fort Lewis, or
otherFort Bragg and Pope Air Force Base, essentially adjacent
installations, why we would have two separate refuse contracts or
two separate this or two separate that, when there was the opportunity to have one contract that served the adjacent military installation, presumably at some savings to the taxpayer.
Mr. DICKS. Right.
General SCHWARTZ. And there are many opportunities in this regard, which I think are certainly a positive outcome from joint basing.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01388
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1389
Additionally, the reality is that each of the services is looking for
ways to maximize their installation dollar. And partnering is a
good strategy for achieving that outcome.
Now, the bottom line is, is that the platformthat, for the Air
Force, for sureand this is probably what former Assistant Secretary Anderson shared with you earlieris that our Air Force
bases typically are the platforms from which we operate, you know,
the Army to a somewhat lesser extent, the Navy to a somewhat
lesser extent, so we worry about our airfields and the places from
which we project the nations power.
And early on, before this thing matured, there were some issues
with regard to, how prominent would mission be on a joint base?
Would it be accorded the same prominence that we felt was necessary?
I think we havethe process has matured. We now have common output standards forthat all the Services must meet, regardless of who is in charge. And as you are aware, sir, there are six
joint base initiatives, six of which the Air Force is in charge and
six of which others have.
And in the case of Fort Lewis specifically, there was a recent
meeting in April where the two teams had reached agreement.
They will forward the memorandum of agreement, which codifies
this understanding between the two installations, on who does
what, who is in charge of what, who invests, who supports, and so
on, will come to the building at the end of this month for final approval.
And my sense is that we are on the right glide path. I will be
candid: There was some anxiety that a three-star over a colonel in
the chemistry wasmight be a problem. I think we have sort of
settled that.
You know, there iswe have enough attention onthe Army has
made an extra effort to ensure that the colonel commander of the
62nd Wing at McChord Air Force Base has full access over at Fort
Lewis and can have his needs in the base and the Air Force requirements presented and dealt with in a responsible way.
So long answer to your short question is, my sense is, we are on
a good glide path there. And I favor the joint basing initiatives.
Mr. DICKS. Good.
General SCHWARTZ. Yes, sir.
MODULAR CONSTRUCTION
Mr. DICKS. Let me ask one quick question concerning modular

construction, The Army is using it. We are using it at Fort Lewis.
It looks fantastic. Now, there has been some issue raised about how
long it will last. What is your take on that, General?
General EULBERG. Sir, as you well know, modular construction
has improved drastically in the last 10 years. And so it just depends on a lot of factors on whether or not you use it. The Army
is pushing it for a number of reasons.
Mr. DICKS. They are doing it at Fort Lewis, and they are probably going to do it at McChord, I would think.
Mr. EDWARDS. What kind
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01389
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1390
Mr. DICKS. It looks fantastic. I went in these units. General
Soriano and the wives of the sergeants, they have said it is the best
housing they have ever had over 25 or 30 years in the Army.
General EULBERG. Sir, if you are specifically talking about the
housing at McChord-Lewis, as you know, through your leadership,
we now have a joint venture, if you will, with McChord Air Force
Base part of Fort Lewis.
The construction there, they had some early on issues with modular construction at Fort Lewis. The developer has corrected those
problems. We are getting a quality product, and the Air Force is
very happy with it.
Mr. DICKS. So you think this will be okay for McChord, too?
General EULBERG. Yes, sir, we do. As a matter of fact, we have
150 Army families living in Air Force houses now. And as you
know
Mr. DICKS. See, I wouldnt let them tear them down, General. I
just thought that the numbers of houses to be demolished were too
extreme. It was like 900 units. They were going to go to 250, and
I said, no, wait. You have too many people who want this housing.
And now the Army is in that housing, and some of them, we had
to take down, but we worked it out.
General SCHWARTZ. And this is what
Mr. DICKS. It wasnt easy, by the way.
General SCHWARTZ. No, sir, I understand.
Mr. DICKS. It was like the Air Force was fighting the last battle.
[Laughter.]
General SCHWARTZ. As is oftenchange is difficult. I mean,
change is hard. And, you know, you have to get the right people
with the right mindset and the right oversight.
Mr. DICKS. I told the colonel out there, I said, Have you ever
been to Fort Lewis? Have you ever seen this housing? And he said,
No. And this ishe told me later, he said, I drove down there,
and I was prepared just to hate this housing, and it was terrific.
General SCHWARTZ. One quick input, sir, just quickly. Modular
also has a potential place in administrative spaces. And, again, it
depends on how long you want the thing to last, what its purpose
is, and so on. So, again
Mr. DICKS. What about that, on the life cycle? Is there a difference between modular and other forms of construction, in terms
of how long they last?
General EULBERG. Sir, as a general rule, modular has
sustainment issues over the life cycle. Yes, sir. And so there is
Mr. DICKS. But this new stuffit looked pretty good to me.
General EULBERG. Yes, sir. It is. And as I mentioned, a lot of the
quality issues, which you join certain parts of the building together,
is a critical aspect. And they have worked all those issues out. So
I dont anticipate any long-term problems.
Mr. DICKS. Good.
Mr. EDWARDS. How much cheaper is it to build a modular home,
the ones we are talking about, compared to the conventional construction?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01390
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1391
General EULBERG. Sir, it depends on location. However, as a general rule, it is cheaper, anywhere from 8 percent to 10 percent
cheaper.
Mr. EDWARDS. Eight percent to 10 percent cheaper?
Mr. DICKS. It was cheaper in this case, but people thought it was
better than anything they had ever had before.
Mr. EDWARDS. That is good to hear. Thank you, Mr. Dicks.
Mr. Crenshaw.

And thank you all for being here today. I just have a question
about Joint Cargo Aircraft that originally was the Army and the
Air Force program together. And the 2010 budget made some major
changes, transferred, as I understand it, from the Army to you all
to head it up, and that they reduced the number of planes they
were going to buy by half.
And I think they wanted to buy 16 this year, and now the request is for 8, and then, again, transferring the program to you all.
But they said that there was going to be an assessment done.
And I wondered, well, what is the assessment going to do? Is it
going to tell you how many you should buy? Or is that going to
come in the QDR? But why all those changes and what do you
think is going to be the outcome?
General SCHWARTZ. Congressman, thanks for the questionwhat
is going to transpire is a couple of things. First of all, the Army
and the Air Force have to get together on fundamentals, which is
transferring program responsibility. That is not an instantaneous
effort. That probably wont occur until the fall of 2010.
So the Army is going to continue in the lead on the procurement
actions for this program, and we will be on their wing. And then
later, in 2010, there will be a transfer of responsibility.
The other aspect of this is how the Air Force will support the
Army. In the end, that is what this is about. It is time-sensitive,
mission-critical re-supply of elements, and we typically as an Air
Force have operated on the notion of something called general support.
General support is a very efficient way to run a railroad, if you
will. You look for full airplanes or the fullest possible airplanes.
You run an airline in a way to be as effective and as efficient as
you can.
On the other hand, direct support is dedicated support to a particular maneuver unit, typically. And that maybe is not as efficient,
but it satisfies the need of that maneuver commander.
We need to be flexible as an Air Force enough to do both. And
my commitment to General George Casey from the Army was that,
if this thing unfolds as it has, as the Secretary of Defense decided,
we will do the direct support mission in the fashion you need it
done, not the way we are comfortable doing it necessarily, but the
way you need it done. That is the second piece.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01391
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1392
The third pieceand I know there is a lot of angst about this
there are 18 locations that had some stake in the Joint Cargo Aircraft (JCA), 12 Army National Guard and 6 Air National Guard.
And, obviously, when we went from 78 aircraft to 38, there was
some concern about what the footprint is going to be. And we dont
know the answer to that yet; that is still under discussion both between ourselves, the Army, and the National Guard Bureau, General Craig McKinley.
But I can tell you that the number 38, it is not less than that.
There will be ample opportunity through the QDR and in followon efforts here that we have to do to decide what the right number
is.
The Secretary of Defenses view was that we could use existing
C130s to do some of this work. He is probably right. But we need
to confirm how much that is. I am not sure it is just 38 JCAs. So
there is still more
Mr. CRENSHAW. So there is stillbecause again, we heard yesterdayfrom Mr. Hale, the new DoD Comptroller, he saidI asked
him a similar question. He said, Well, 99 percent of the work can
be done by C130s. And I am thinking
General SCHWARTZ. If that were the case, you know, the helicopters wouldnt be working as hard as they are and we wouldnt
have quite as much contract lift
Mr. CRENSHAW. That is the other thing General Casey said when
he was here. I think they are spending $8 million a month leasing
this kind of aircraftand, of course, I think General Casey would
say, look, it is not my job to figure it out. I just know what I need.
General SCHWARTZ. That is right.
Mr. CRENSHAW. And somebody else has to decide whether to
build them or lease them. But if we are spending that much
money, then I think your point is that we are probably going to
need them.
General SCHWARTZ. The number 38 basically came from replacing the existing C23 Sherpas. So there are 42 Sherpas in the inventory; 38 was considered a fair sort of replacement. Whether it
is more than 38, though, I think it is still to be
Mr. CRENSHAW. But is thatdo you knowI dont know what
assessment means, we are going to assess it. Do you think they
will come up with this assessment before the QDR?
General SCHWARTZ. It will certainly be a result that will affect
the fiscal year 2011 budget process.
General SCHWARTZ. Without a doubt.
Mr. Bishop.
MOODY AIR FORCE BASE

Welcome, Generals. I am particularly interested in Moody Air
Force Base. We have had a number of difficulties down there with
the construction of the privatized housing at Moody, a real, real
problem, especially for some of the subcontractors who were not
paid. And, of course, the completion has been delayed.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01392
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1393
It is my understanding that it is back on track now and that
some local contractors are being utilized to fulfill many of the work
opportunities resulting from the contract.
Can you give us an update on the status of how the claims under
the previous contract were resolved, and what the current status
is of the performance and the completion of the project? Are small
or disadvantaged contractors being utilized? Overall in the Air
Force, to what extent are small and disadvantaged contractors utilized?
General SCHWARTZ. Go ahead, Del. Why dont you
General EULBERG. Sir, thank you for that question. And as you
know, there is a long history with this project, and we have now
awarded a new one. There wasor rather a sale of the project. It
is called the Air Force Falcon Group. And they took over theor
the sale took place in November of last year.
It is part of a four-base group. Moody is one of them. All the
claims associated with all four bases that have been justified
through the contracting process and legal process, all claims have
been paid.
And the good news, also, is, is the contractor is making great
progress at all four bases, both Hanscom, Little Rock, and Moody,
and Patrick Air Force Bases. And specifically at Moody Air Force
Base, they are completing the site work on units that were stopped
in progress by American Eagle, so those are underway.
General SCHWARTZ. Same is true at Little Rock Air Force Base.
General EULBERG. Same thing at Little Rock, Hanscom, and Patrick Air Force Bases. So great progress, and the contractor is doing
a good job with all of that.
Sir, does that address your question?
Mr. BISHOP. Yes. I understand from the local folks that there are
local contractors participating as subs.
General EULBERG. Yes, sir, there are.
Mr. BISHOP. Regarding utilization of small and disadvantaged
businesses, I would be interested in hearing what is happening at
Moody and what is happening overall in the Air Force there.
General EULBERG. Sir, we will have to take that for the record.
General SCHWARTZ. We will get that back to you, the exact performance, both respectwith respect to this particular project, but
more broadly.
SMALL
AND
DISADVANTAGED CONTRACTOR UTILIZATION
Housing privatization is authorized by the 1996 National Defense Authorization

Act (Public Law 104106). Projects under housing privatization are real estate
transactions, and not federal contracts; therefore, they are not subject to Federal Acquisition Regulations. Although the project owners, which are private businesses,
may subcontract with small and disadvantaged businesses, there is no obligation to
do so, nor are they required to provide the Federal Government with information
regarding the extent to which their subcontractors are small and disadvantaged
businesses. In these circumstances, the Air Force has no authority to mandate
quotas or goals, or direct project owners to utilize small and disadvantaged businesses on housing privatization projects.
The data below represents the Air Force utilization, in contracted dollars, for
small businesses (SB) and small disadvantaged businesses (SDB) at Moody Air
Force Base, Georgia and Air Force wide for fiscal year 2008 and fiscal year 2009
year to date (YTD):
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01393
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1394
Eligible dollars
Fiscal Year 2008:

Moody AFB ....................................
Air Force Wide ..............................
*Fiscal Year 2009 YTD:
Moody AFB ....................................
Air Force Wide ..............................
Awarded to SB
Awarded
SDB
$48,743,916
57,181,926,908
$39,638,936
9,345,356,505
81.3
16.3
$19,621,069
3,556,482,418
40.3
6.2
27,446,624
40,909,206,246
19,968,129
5,197,461,346
72.7
12.7
6,957,782
1,843,956,787
25.4
4.5
* The Small Business and Small Disadvantaged Business utilization percentages for the first nine months of fiscal year 2009 closely match
the utilization percentages for the first nine months of fiscal year 2008.
Mr. BISHOP. Thank you. I appreciate that.

Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Bishop.
Mr. Berry.
First of all, thank you for your service. General Schwartz, I noticed you did two tours at Little Rock.
General SCHWARTZ. I did.
Mr. BERRY. It is good to hear that
General SCHWARTZ. I marriedmy wife comes from Little Rock.
Mr. BERRY. Is that right?
General SCHWARTZ. That is right.
Mr. BERRY. Well, I trust she turned out to be a good Arkansas
girl.
General SCHWARTZ. She is still a Razorback fan and, in factRazorback football
[Laughter.]
Mr. BERRY. But we do appreciate your concern and commitment
to the quality of life of our men and women in uniform. We appreciate that very much. It is good to hear that we have pretty much
resolved the issues with that American Eagle crowd.
General SCHWARTZ. Yes, sir.
Mr. BERRY. It is good to know that it is back on track and moving in a good direction. We appreciate what you do for Little Rock
Air Force Base. And I know that the men and women that serve
there appreciate it very much, and we thank you.
NUCLEAR-RELATED FACILITIES

General Schwartz, in your written testimony, you talked about
one of your priorities is to reinvigorate the Air Force nuclear enterprise. And you say, A critical aspect to this effort includes the infrastructure and facilities providing that necessary life cycle installation support to this vital mission.
I think you go on to say you are conducting facility condition assessments of all nuclear-related facilities. Could youobviously,
this is a terribly important responsibility of the Air Force. We are
all aware of some of the issues that cropped up over the past year.
So where are you in that assessment? And is any of that incorporated into your 2010 military construction budget? Or will additional facilities or improvements in facilities be pushed out to the
2011 or later budgets?
General SCHWARTZ. I think the short answer on the mission facilities specifically, launch facilities and so on, that assessment is
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01394
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1395
complete but we are still working assessments for weapons storage
areas and other nuclear related facilities. We know the status of
each of our missile launch facilities that control facilities that are
associated with it and so on, and likewise at the bomber bases.
And we are okay on those mission facilities. In other words, there
is no major requirement other than maintenance and standard
maintenance required for those at the moment.
There are a couple of areas that are not in the MILCON. Now,
there is $45 million in the 2010 proposal, recommendation to you,
for this particular mission area. About four items are included in
that.
And, for example, at Minot Air Force Base, there is a training
facility MILCON, and also at Minot Air Force Base, there is a munitions item involved. But there is also a substantial commitment
of $73 million, if I recall correctly, that is related to and involves
both security, armored vehicles, weapons related expenses, and
minor facilities renovation related to the weapons storage area at
Barksdale Air Force Base.
We are reopening the weapons storage area at Barksdale Air
Force Base. And that is not MILCON dollars. That will be essentially O&M or aircraft procurement, sort of special equipment dollars.
But that is the angle that we are on. We have assessed the mission facilities. We know what the status is. We have a plan for
maintaining those facilities and in the longer term, perhaps, to replace them. It is not required right now. Right now, the focus is
on getting Barksdale Air Force Base re-established with its weapons storage area, for example, and taking care of some of the needs
at Minot Air Force Base.
F.E. Warren Air Force Base and Malmstrom Air Force Base are
okay for the moment, sir.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. So there are no important, immediate needs
out there? I would ask if those needs arise, given the pre-eminence
of that responsibility to be good stewards of our nuclear weapons,
if there are any needs that pop up after the 2010 budget has been
put to rest, please
General SCHWARTZ. Understood.
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Please let us know, because we know
that does happen when you have to start putting these requests together months, if not a year, a year-and-a-half before, and things
change. And particularly in that area, we dont want to cut any corners.
General SCHWARTZ. And we wont cut corners.
Mr. EDWARDS. We dont have time to get into all the details of
storage of nuclear bombs. We are in an unclassified setting, so
there are probably some things you cant say.
But normally would you have tactical weapons in the same storage area as nuclear weapons? Normally those would be
General SCHWARTZ. Segregated.
Mr. EDWARDS. We segregate them.
General SCHWARTZ. Absolutely.
Mr. EDWARDS. So you have all the
General SCHWARTZ [continuing]. And you have training devices
also separated from the real ones, which was a problem we had in
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01395
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1396
one of the episodes last year. So, you know, that was not so much
a facility issue as it was a compliance issue
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay. Okay. So subject to any additional concerns
that are raised by an ongoing review of facilities and operations,
you have what you need, in terms off facilities
General SCHWARTZ. We do.
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. To protect our nuclear stockpile?
General SCHWARTZ. And, in fact, in the broader sense, we made
sure that 100 percent of the requirements, whether it be for facilities or operations, or whatever it was, training, you name it, 100
percent funded.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
General SCHWARTZ. So, I mean, we were not going to take any
risks there for obvious reasons.
I reserve my other questions for additional rounds.
Mr. Wamp.
ENGINEERING
Mr. WAMP. General Eulberg, while we have you, I want to hear

from you about engineers. Obviously, this budgetand the chief is
right having you here to present this budget. This is principally an
engineering budget. And I think you have 60,000 people within the
Air Force Civil Engineering career field, and you have 3,000 civil
engineers deployed between Iraq and Afghanistan.
I represent the Y12 National Security Complex, speaking of the
nuclear piece of the deterrent. But we have a guy there named
Kevin Smith, who has done an extraordinary job of bringing young
people into the military with a commitment that, if you go and
serve and get your training at the highest level, you have a job
here when you come back.
And we had the STEM initiative on science, math and engineering, where we are just grossly deficient as a nation. And I would
think the United States Air Force may be better than any other organization that is prepared to help us meet those needs through
the training, the experience that you actually provide.
Give us the state of engineering right now, as you go off into the
sunset, I hope to enjoy the rest of your service to others, but that
has got to be a big thing, especially in your heart, given your background.
General EULBERG. Sir, thank you very much for that question.
We do have 60,000 personnel assigned in Air Force Civil Engineering. They are part of an Air Force team and also part of a joint
team. And as you mentioned, we do have 3,000 engineers deployed
currently in the area of responsibility doing various missions, 43
percent of which are doing joint expeditionary tasking alongside
their other Service brethren.
So it is truly a joint undertaking. There has been a number of
initiatives on the joint side thatwith the other engineering services chiefs, we have been able to make great headway in the last
couple years.
But the civil engineering corps, as you know, is about half civilians, and as well as enlisted and officer corps, and as well as our
contracting partners. And we are able to do what we can, is be-
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01396
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1397
cause it is a team of civilians, military, as well as contracting support.
So as we go forward, I will tell you, I am very, very proud of the
Air Force engineering community and their contributions to the
missions that our nation has asked us to perform. The dedication
of the young men and women are just phenomenal. We have a
number of wounded warriors coming back, as well as those killed
in action
General SCHWARTZ. In fact, I met one on Sunday evening who
came back who was in explosive ordnance disposal, a young man
who stepped on a landmine dealing with unexploded ordnance in
Afghanistan, an engineer. And he is thankful that his wife was
with him. It was good to get him back.
But it is an example of what these kids are doing. They are on
almost a one-to-one dwell. In other words, for the period of time
they are deployed, that is with their home, and they are back into
it again. That is a high-stress career field.
They are highly valued, particularly now as we build in Afghanistan. There is not enough concrete in that country to put the air
down, and it is not just Air Force air. It is Army air. It is Marine
Corps air.
And so, in particular, the engineers are, again, with their brothers, the Seabees and the Army folks, again, they are doing horizontal construction. And I think it is a tribute, again, that, you
know, the people like me tend to get the credit for what happens,
you know, flying airplanes or whatever it is. And the truth of the
matter is, it is theyou know, it is the folks that lay concrete that
make is possible.
Mr. WAMP. But, General Eulberg, are more young airmen interested in the engineering side than in the past? Do we see a trend
there?
General EULBERG. Sir, we have been very fortunate in the Air
Force, is that we have been able to meet all of our recruitment targets and accessions across all enlisted Air Force Specialty Codes
(AFSCs), as well as in the officer corps. And so we have been able
to maintain that.
And so I dont see any problem in that. We went through a retention issue a couple of years ago, where we had less than 50 percent
of our captains staying in. It has improved since then. But I dont
see any major problems now or in the future, sir.
General SCHWARTZ. Just one example, Congressman. The new
Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, Chief Roy, who will take
over the responsibilities at the end of June, is a civil engineering
guy, just a case in point. That is where he started out.
DONATIONS
Mr. WAMP. General Schwartz, I have asked all of our services

about this problem that I learned of from General Casey, and that
is some of the kind of regulatory hurdles of justof benefits being
provided to wounded warriors and our military from the private
sector. And you have probably heard about this.
But the joint ethics regulation enables injured and ill-served
members and their families and their members to receive unsolicited gifts from non-federal entities.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01397
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1398
Do you know of anything else that Congress can do to remove
barriers to enable support for our wounded warriors from non-federal entities? And are you able to provide minimal logistical supporttransportation, donated items, warehousing, or donated
giftsto assist these entities when they provide resources to our
wounded warriors?
General SCHWARTZ. Congressman, I think there is a balance in
this. There are some things we dont do. We dont solicit. We cant
do that. And, likewise, we dont take cash donations. I mean, there
are some things we wont do.
But absent those sort of black-and-white sort of distinctions,
what we do now is simply run the proposal by our ethics people.
And unless there is some, you know, cause for concern, we are
okay, we are good to go.
So the way we practice this is the obvious things weyou know,
that are black and white, we wont do. And then we do engage our
ethics counselors to make sure that it is okay.
Now, with respect to transportation, I do have some experience
in this area. You know, we cant package things and so on. We can
deliver stuff to the theaterthere are certain exceptions to that,
for examplemovements, and if we move some stuff to Afghanistan for Afghan refugees, and we will probably do the same thing
for Pakistan here coming up.
But in terms of donations for things that go forward, we do provide minimal logistics support. And I think, you know, there is no
lack of willingness to do so.
Again, it is just trying to make sure that we dont favor one category of donation or one agency more than another. I think that
is the basic sensitivity.
Mr. WAMP. Let me just say, as I close, I am in my final term,
eighth term here in the House, and I have not done too much traveling, but I have done a significant amount. And I think it is important that members of Congress fight through the public disdain
for that, because it is important that we have 535 ambassadors for
our country around the world, instead of just the executive branch,
making friends and building relationships and understanding
needs.
And so I have probably done a moderate amount of travel, but
I just want to thank all the men and women of the United States
Air Force for the way that they deal with members of Congress, as
we go and see the world.
You know, we are criticized for it, but it is unfortunate that we
are, because it is really, really important. And the United States
Air Force just does an extraordinary job taking us places that we
need to be.
And I have been to tough places like Islamabad, and it is sometimes not easy to get in and out. But I have never had a bad experience, and I have always been amazed. So I am grateful.
General SCHWARTZ. Well, sir, it is our Service. It is what we do.
I would mention, though, that I agree with you.
And I travel some, as well, because you do notsomeone once
said that Washington, DC is the only city in the country that is
surrounded on all sides by reality. And so the effort to get out of
town and get ground truths is vital for me and, of course, vital
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01398
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1399
Mr. WAMP. Thank you, Chief. Well said.
Mr. Berry.
And let the record show that Mr. Berry, in his previous comments, said that, in good years and bad years, he is always with
the Razorbacks. Right? All right. I just want to be sure the transcriptaccurate statement that the gentleman
[Laughter.]
LACKLAND AIR FORCE BASE
General Schwartz, let me ask you about Lackland, where you do

your training for your Airmen. As I understand, earlier this week,
the Air Force announced that the preferred site for the 24th Air
Force would be Lackland. Could you further explain where we are
on that process? And then add to that, at what point we would
know whether there are any additional military construction needs
tied into that decision?
General SCHWARTZ. Sir, the key thing is that we announced last
week that, as you indicated, that Lackland Air Force Base is our
preferred alternativeColorado Springs, Peterson Air Force Base,
is a viable alternative for environmental assessment purposes.
That environmental assessment is underway, and we should have
that back in the July timeframe.
And as you are aware, I know that there is a 30-day comment
period which follows the finalization of the environmental assessment. And then, at that point, if there are no major hiccups, in the
August timeframe, we will finalize the decision.
The process we have in the Air Forceand, frankly, it is a maturing processwhat we do, we have a set of criteria that we use
to sort of examine options for bedding down either a new mission
or relocated mission.
And it includes things like mission synergy that is one place
more conducive to performing the mission than another. What are
the facilities on an installation that could accommodate it at least
cost? Is there transportation access? Is there human capital on the
installation or in the adjacent community that would, again, support that particular mission?
Those are the kinds of considerations. And what we do is, we go
to the major command that is responsible for that activity, in this
case, the Air Force Space Command. And they got the criteria.
They gave the Secretary of the Air Force and myself a short list
of installations that they felt were in the ballpark with those criteria.
And there were six. And we went out and subsequently, after the
secretary brought into those six, to do actual site surveys to assess
physically the capacity of the installation to absorb the mission,
and so on and so forth.
That comes back up through the major command as a recommendation, and, based on a criteria and a way to sort of objectively score the assets and the liabilities of each of the installations, comes back up to the headquarters for an executive review,
and then ultimately the Secretary of the Air Force and I get together to make a call on what we think is the best place.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01399
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1400
And as you indicated, Lackland Air Force Base, San Antonio,
was identified as thewhat we think is the best place for this new
mission, subject to environmental analysis and so on.
What I would also like to mention, thoughand this came out
of the preceding announcement on Global Strike Command, that
in an effort to be transparent and open, one of the unintended consequences of that was we beganwhen we had this shortlist, we
have created an incentive, unintentionally, for communities to compete against each other. And that is not a good thing.
And so what we are trying to do is to figure out a way to be open
and transparent, but to manage expectations in a way that it
doesnt force communities to mobilize and spend funds, and do lots
of different things to try to persuade us where to go. That is not
a good thing.
And so what we are going to try to do is thread the needle on
this, be objective, be as transparent as we can, and also keep folks
sort of breathing through their noses on not being too aggressive
in trying to market or sell their communities, I mean, because
what we want to avoid having a situation where people feel like
they desperately lost. And so we want to manage this in a way that
minimizes that likelihood.
So it is objective, sir. It doesthe senior leadership does apply
some judgment. We did that in the global strike case. And it was
the 24th Air Force case was much more clear-cut. The scoring was
not close. And, therefore we made that announcement.
And, again, we think that we will havethe environmental assessment for Global Strike Command was complete on the 12th of
May. We put that out for a 30-day comment period. So mid-June,
we should have a final on global strike. And I would say probably
mid-August, toward the end of August, we will have a final on the
24th Air Force.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay, mid-July. Thank you.
So you dont foresee, then, any MILCON requests
General SCHWARTZ. No.
Mr. EDWARDS [continuing]. Tied into that need for fiscal year
2010?
General SCHWARTZ. If there is anythingyes, sir, if there is anything that we didnt get in that initial site survey, it will be in
2011.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
General SCHWARTZ. Part of the decision process was minimizing
MILCON requirements.
Mr. EDWARDS. Okay.
My final question deals with BRAC. I am constantly learning

new aspects of BRAC. Let me just hypothetically say you are at one
installation, and BRAC 2005 moves you to another installation.
The BRAC process itself didnt necessarily require the Department of Defense, did it, to replace hangar for hangar, facility for
facility? I mean, for example, you could have X number of aircraft
with hangars at your present site in some location in the world or
in the countrysay it is CONUSand then you are asked to move
to another location.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01400
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1401
Does the BRAC process, by requirement, have to replace that
same number of hangars? Or could you end up beingwhether it
is hangars or whether it is other facilities, if we were fully funding
BRAC, you could still end up short facilities that you need. Is that
my understanding?
General SCHWARTZ. Well, I can onlyand Del probably can give
you the expert advice on thisbut in my personal experience, when
we were at Scott Air Force Base at U.S. Transportation Command
and one of the BRAC moves was the Army component to U.S.
Transportation Commandit is called the Surface Deployment and
Distribution Commandand relocated from three spots in Virginia
to Scott Air Force Base, Illinois.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
General SCHWARTZ. That was a fully-funded initiative, but the
definition of that initiative took some negotiation. You know, there
is some push-and-pull involved in that.
And all I can tell you is that we ended up with an $84 million
facility at Scott Air Force Base for the new Army command and
some growth that we had within U.S. Transportation Command
that was quite satisfactory.
And, Del, would you like to expand on that?
General EULBERG. Yes, sir, if I might. Sir, relative to the BRAC
process, as you know, when we worked with the commission and
developed the recommendations for BRAC, it is done with a very
small planning staff, and they make assumptions to the best of
their ability.
But one of the fundamental assumptions is, it is not a one-forone build here, move there or move here and replicate. It is
based on capacity.
And so the services spend a lot of time analyzing and providing
input to say, What is the capacity of this particular base to accept
a new mission? So that analysis is quite rigorous. However, it is
based on assumptions.
And, as General Schwartz mentioned, whenever the final list is
released, we go out and actually then begin the detailed site surveys. And that is where you begin to actually leverage some great
ideas.
And I was personally involved with U.S. TRANSCOM and the
consolidation efforts there. And a lot of great ideas came forward
as a result of that to make it even more effective.
And so bottom line is that is why we haveand I appreciate the
Congresss support on thisBRAC is not line-item managed, per
se, like the MILCON budget. And that gives the Services some
flexibility to leverage great ideas and to put the funding where it
is most needed.
But as a general rule, the business plans as developed are fully
funded. And there is some give-and-take, but
Mr. EDWARDS. And to be clear, the definition of fully funded
might mean that you have some unfunded needs when you move
to a new installation? For example, you are doing maintenance on
aircraft outside. That is not a good idea in most parts of the country, so that, in effect, BRACwe are tryingthe point I am trying
to get to, we are trying to take lessons learned from BRAC so we
can apply those to the future.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01401
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1402
So am I correct in understanding that maybe one of the things
Congress should do is look at the projected BRAC costs and maybe
question whether you are really building all the hangars you need
at the new station? You can call it fully funded, that is semantics.
It is not truly fully funded in the real world outside of Washington, DC, if you have needs, basic needs, hangar space, administrative space, other things?
General EULBERG. Sir, you are fully funded relative to the business plans and the assumptions made at the time, fully funded.
And as you rightfully point out, oneas I mentioned, there are
some great ideas underGeneral Schwartz, when he was
USTRANSCOM commander, came up with good ideas on how to
consolidate a number of functions. Those were different assumptions than just moving people, so it required additional funds. And
so we did an internal process.
But you highlight a great point, if the process was a little more
openbecause this is a multiyear effort. And as you move major
units around, you discover things that werent part of the business
plan up front.
And I will give you just a real simple example. You move an
Army unit to a base that requires a whole motor pool complex. So
your road structure, your gates have to be realigned.
Mr. EDWARDS. Right.
General EULBERG. Well, if you didnt catch that up front, then
you are going to have to give up mission facilities in order to provide the infrastructure. So if there was a way we could provide updates to Congress that would allow that process to be adjusted,
without opening the entire BRAC legislation, it would be most
helpful.
Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you for that, that insight. Thank you.
Mr. Dicks.
NUCLEAR WEAPONS
Mr. DICKS. One of the issues that I know has been very important to you, General, is improving the way the Air Force handles
nuclear weapons. I dont know if you have talked about this or not
yet.
Mr. EDWARDS. We talked some about it. I asked him, but proceed
Mr. DICKS. McChord Air Force Base took an exam up there and
did very well on this nuclear issue. And I know that Secretary
Gates has made this an ultimately high priority.
So could you tell us a little bit about how you are approaching
this, you and the secretary, to get this thing under control?
General SCHWARTZ. Sir, there are three major components to it,
but, again, to start at the strategic level. Over time, we lost focus
on this mission, and there are lots of reasons for it, I mean, some
of which are understandable.
We had two wars going on in the U.S. Central Command Area
of Responsibility. We had, within our Air Force being deployed, had
greater acceptance and a sense of value than being deployed in
place, like the folks who do the missile work in Montana, Wyoming,
and North Dakota. And, franklyand this was department-wide
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01402
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1403
the whole notion of deterrence sort of had less traction than it has
had in the past.
And for those reasons and a number of others, we, frankly, got
a little too casual. We lost the discipline and the focus needed to
do this right. I mean, perfection is the standard, and good intentions are not good enough in this mission area. You have to perform.
So one of the things we did, Congressman Dicks, was to re-emphasize the cultural piece of this, compliance. You know, you dont
want to stifle imagination or stifle innovation, but there are some
things in the Air Force where you do it the Air Force way. And that
is certainly true in the nuclear realm. So that was one part.
The other part was establishing this command we spoke of earlier of the Global Strike Command. Global Strike Command will
consolidate all the nuclear parts, operational pieces of the Air
Force, into one organization, both the missile piece and the bomber
piece. It will have a single three-star commander who will be responsible and accountable for nuclear readiness.
Mr. DICKS. So you are going to bring all the weapons there, all
the missilesnot the missiles. They are in the silos.
General SCHWARTZ. Right, right. And
Mr. DICKS. But there are some
General SCHWARTZ. And the wings, and the operations, the folks
that do the nuclear operations, both in the missile wings and the
bomber wings, will be subordinate to this major command.
The second piece of this was recognizing that there was a
sustainment part to this nuclear business, as well as the operations. We had sustainment distributed in four commands in the
Air Force. Bad idea.
So we consolidated that, as well, in an organization called the
Nuclear Weapons Center at Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico. And the end result now is that you have one accountable party
on the operations side, one accountable party on the sustainment
side, and their two belly buttons are very close together. They are
the folks that will keep us pristine in the nuclear mission.
Mr. DICKS. There werent any issues, really, with the missiles
General SCHWARTZ. No.
Mr. DICKS [continuing]. The silo-based missiles?
General SCHWARTZ. No, sir. There was not. This was a process,
procedures and compliance issue with respect toone of the occasions, you will recall, we moved weapons from Minot Air Force
Base to Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana
Mr. DICKS. Right.
General SCHWARTZ [continuing]. And lost track of them. Not a
good thing. And then the second incident had to do with what we
callit isI forget the exact name. In other words, these are nuclear-related materials, but they are not nuclear themselves, that
this was the thing about the fuses that went to Taiwan, you may
recall.
Mr. DICKS. Right.
General SCHWARTZ. They werent nuclear themselves, but they
were related to a weapon. And so, you know, they get the same attention, except this time. Well, no more of that.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01403
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6602
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1404
And in another example of what we have done, over time, we allowed the Defense Logistics Agency to take over some of the responsibility for logistics oversight of that material. No more. We
are bringing it back into the Air Force at two dedicated facilities
at Ogden Air Logistics Center, at Hill Air Force Base, and at Tinker Air Logistics Center in Oklahoma City.
And we are managing all that ourselves now, not contracting out
to anybody else. We are accountable. We are going to do it.
Those are the major features, sir, of how we are going about to
rectify the problems and to sustain the culture that we need.
Mr. DICKS. Did the Air Force do this by itself? Or did it have
oversight from the Department of Defense?
General SCHWARTZ. These were largely internal initiatives which
certainly were vetted all the way up to the Secretary of the Air
Force and brought into by the Secretary of Defense. And, incidentally, there were a couple of outside panels, including the Schlesinger panel, that I am sure you are aware of
Mr. DICKS. Right.
General SCHWARTZ. They vetted this, as well, and indicated that
they thought this was a sound strategy.
Mr. Wamp, do you have any additional questions?
I have no further questions, so, General Schwartz, thank you
again for being here today and your leadership.
General Eulberg, we hope we got you out early enough to go back
and help your wife pack up boxes. I dont know what is worse,
packing boxes at home or testifying before Congress. But thanks to
your 36 years of service. And we wish you all the best, and Godspeed in the years ahead.
And we will stand adjourned.
INFRASTRUCTURE FOOTPRINT
Your 20/20 plan to reduce both footprint and installation funding requirements
20 percent by 2020 indicates that the Air Force has an excess of infrastructure.
Question. Do you believe that the Air Force has an excess infrastructure footprint?
Answer. Yes, the results of initial space utilization surveys in several major commands indicate the Air Force has excess infrastructure footprint. The Air Force is
proceeding with standardized service-wide space utilization surveys to more completely describe our infrastructure utilization. The estimated completion date of
these surveys is the end of fiscal year 2010.
Question. If so, why did BRAC fail to reduce this excess?
Answer. The Air Force fully intended to reduce excess infrastructure when it recommended the closure of ten installations (including three active duty installations:
Cannon Air Force Base, New Mexico; Ellsworth Air Force Base, South Dakota; and
Onizuka Air Force Station, California) and the realignment of sixty-two other installations to the 2005 Base Closure and Realignment Commission. However, during
their deliberations and in its report to the President, the BRAC Commission altered
the Air Force recommendation and kept two of the three active duty and many of
the Reserve component installations open and fully manned.
Question. When you say that you plan to reduce resources required for installations, what specific Air Force accounts and activities are you looking at?
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01404
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1405
Answer. When the Air Force plans to reduce resources required for installations,
the Air Force is specifically referring to reduced costs associated with facilities operations, facilities sustainment and facilities restoration and modernization.
Question. Does your budget assume the savings leading to this 20 percent reduction by 2020?
Answer. The Air Force budget request does not reflect savings based on the 20/
20 by 2020 plan. The 20/20 by 2020 plan is an acknowledgement of excess inventory and the lack of operations and maintenance funding to properly care for all of
it. Over the past few years, the Air Forces budget has assumed greater risk in infrastructure funding as it moved operations and maintenance to fund the recapitalization of our weapons systems. As a result of these funding reductions, the Air
Force established the 20/20 by 2020 goal as part of the 2008 Air Force Civil Engineer Strategic Plan. The goal is to offset the reduction in funds available for installation support activities by achieving efficiencies and reducing by 20 percent the Air
Force physical plant that requires funds by 2020.
AIR SOVEREIGNTY ALERT
The GAO released a report this year raising concerns about the Air Forces management of the Air Sovereignty Alert (ASA) mission. The GAO found that the Air
Force had failed to treat ASA as a steady state mission for the purposes of planning and budgeting in accordance with DoD guidance. The GAO further found that
45 percent of ASA unit commanders identified facilities as a significant factor affecting their ability to perform this mission.
Question. Has the Air Force identified all of the facility requirements needed to
support this mission?
Answer. There are 18 Air Sovereignty Alert locations. Two of those locations will
transition to the F22 aircraft and four of those locations will transition to the F
15 Golden Eagles (F15s with electronically scanned radar, infrared search and
track, etc.). The decision on the other 12 locations is not final, but it looks like they
should be F35 locations, provided there is a high enough production rate in the
program. At this point in time, we are addressing our facility issues through our
standard military construction processes. Projects proposed in support of these sites
compete against other existing military construction requirements on an annual
basis for funding.
Question. Has the Air Force identified all of the facility requirements needed to
support this mission?
Answer. No. The Air Force developed an Air Sovereignty Alert site activation
guide identifying recommended facilities standards, but a comprehensive study to
assess the facility requirements has not yet been undertaken at existing sites
against these recommended standards.
Question. How much MILCON is requested in the FY10 budget for ASA facilities?
Answer. There are two projects supporting the Air Sovereignty Alert mission in
the fiscal year 2010 Air Force military construction program. The munitions storage
area at Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland has one active Air Force project and one
Air National Guard project which both support the ASA mission at a total cost of
$23.3 million.
AIR FORCE ROAD MAP

VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01405
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1406
Question. Has the Air Force updated this document, and if not, does it intend to
update this document to reflect changes in aircraft procurement since that date?
Answer. The Air Force generated Road Maps for 2009, but the data has not been
updated to reflect fiscal year 2010 changes. Currently, the Air Force is finalizing
the data for the force structure announcement which will reflect changes in manpower and aircraft, State by State. The announcement is scheduled to be released
later this summer.
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01406
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6621
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01407
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
Insert graphic folio 3042 here 50526E.064
(1407)
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01408
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1408
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01409
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1409
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01410
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
1410
VerDate Nov 24 2008
06:47 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 01411
Fmt 6601
Sfmt 6601
E:\HR\OC\A526P2.XXX
A526P2
Insert graphic folio 3046/3200 here 50526E.068
1411
WITNESSES
Page
Appel, Stanley .......................................................................................................... 784

Arny, Wayne............................................................................................... 237, 558, 1284
Baker, Kerry ............................................................................................................ 899
Barnes, Joe ............................................................................................................... 728
Billings, Kevin .......................................................................................................... 269
Blake, Carl ............................................................................................................... 854
Bottene, Cinzia ......................................................................................................... 791
Campbell, Patrick .................................................................................................... 778
Casey, General George W., Jr ................................................................................. 1061
Casscells, S. Ward ................................................................................................... 503
Cohoon, Barbara ...................................................................................................... 674
Conway, General James T ...................................................................................... 1114
Cox, Timothy C ........................................................................................................ 962
Craddock, General Bantz J ..................................................................................... 374
Daigh, John Jr ......................................................................................................... 129
Eastin, Kenneth D ............................................................................................... 248, 577
Ferguson, Kathleen ................................................................................................. 600
Finn, Belinda ........................................................................................................... 149
Greene, Chief Judge William P., Jr ....................................................................... 918
Hale, Robert F .......................................................................................................... 1276
Houlemard, Michael ................................................................................................ 801
Jones, Rick ............................................................................................................... 742
Keating, Admiral Timothy J ................................................................................... 317
Kelley, Raymond ...................................................................................................... 867
Kelly, Heather .......................................................................................................... 713
Kent, Sergeant Major Carlton W ...........................................................................
29
Kussman, Michael J ................................................................................................ 488
Maupin, John E., Jr ................................................................................................. 757
McKinley, Chief Master Sergeant Rodney J .........................................................
62
Melvin, Valerie ......................................................................................................... 152
Needham, Christopher ............................................................................................ 881
Nicholson, Brigadier General John W ................................................................... 930
Nolan, Stephan J ..................................................................................................... 693
Penn, B.J............................................................................................................... 259, 589
Petraeus, General David H ..................................................................................... 987
Preston, Sergeant Major Kenneth O ......................................................................
7
Redmond, Ben .......................................................................................................... 814
Regan, Maureen ....................................................................................................... 150
Robertson, Steve ...................................................................................................... 829
Roman-Rodriguez, Jesse .......................................................................................... 722
Roughead, Admiral Gary ........................................................................................ 1104
Salt, Terrence C ....................................................................................................... 941
Schwartz, General Norton A ................................................................................... 1363
(i)
VerDate Nov 24 2008
05:21 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 5905
Sfmt 0483
50526P3
ii
Page
Sharp, General Walter L ......................................................................................... 329

Shinseki, the Honorable Eric .................................................................................. 1188
Streim, Joel E .......................................................................................................... 661
Toews, Galen B ........................................................................................................ 654
West, Chief Master Petty Officer Rick D ...............................................................
48
Williamson, Randall B ............................................................................................ 130
VerDate Nov 24 2008
05:21 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 5905
Sfmt 0483
50526P3
INDEX
QUALITY OF LIFE
Page
Accessibility and Availability of Healthcare ..........................................................

Army Family Action Plan .......................................................................................
Army Medical Action Plan ......................................................................................
Basic Allowance for Housing ..................................................................................
Chairman, Statement of ..........................................................................................
Cross-Cultural ExchangeHorn of Africa .............................................................
Cross-Cultural Training ..........................................................................................
Demobilization Process ............................................................................................
Education Benefits ...................................................................................................
Family Housing, Aging ............................................................................................
Family Programs .....................................................................................................
Financial Assistance Programs ..............................................................................
Guard and Reserve Morale and Cohesion .............................................................
Guard and Reserve Quality of Life Issues .............................................................
Guard and Reserve, Employer Support for ...........................................................
Healthcare ................................................................................................................
Homeowners Assistance Program ..........................................................................
Homeport Ashore .....................................................................................................
Housing Entitlements, Single Soldier ....................................................................
Housing for Redeploying Soldiers ...........................................................................
Housing Privatization ..............................................................................................
Iraq, Rebuilding .......................................................................................................
Kent, Prepared Statement of Sergeant Major Carlton W ....................................
Kent, Statement of Sergeant Major Carlton W .....................................................
McKinley, Prepared Statement of Chief Master Sergeant Rodney J ..................
McKinley, Statement of Chief Master Sergeant Rodney J ...................................
Mental Health Counseling ......................................................................................
MilCon ......................................................................................................................
Post Traumatic Stress Disorder .............................................................................
Preston, Prepared Statement of Sergeant Major Kenneth O ...............................
Preston, Statement of Sergeant Major Kenneth O ...............................................
Quality of Life Issues, Top ......................................................................................
Ranking Minority Member, Statement of ..............................................................
RCI Housing .............................................................................................................
Recruiting .................................................................................................................
Soldier Fitness, Comprehensive .............................................................................
Suicide Prevention ................................................................................................. 92,
Suicide Rates ............................................................................................................
TRICARE Provider ..................................................................................................
TRICARE ..................................................................................................................
Web-Based Psychological Counseling .....................................................................
(iii)
VerDate Nov 24 2008
05:21 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 5905
Sfmt 0483
50526P3
85
104
119
107
1
112
100
96
93
109
120
98
84
96
97
103
89
99
126
124
111
103
30
29
65
62
86
97
85
10
7
106
2
123
82
119
118
81
115
104
91
iv
Page
West, Prepared Statement of Chief Master Petty Officer Rick D .......................

West, Statement of Chief Master Petty Officer Rick D ........................................
50
48
REVIEW OF VA CHALLENGES
Accountability Goals ................................................................................................
Audits .......................................................................................................................
Backlog of Benefits Claims .....................................................................................
Benefits Claims Processing .....................................................................................
Budget Estimates ....................................................................................................
Chairman, Statement of the ...................................................................................
Claims Processors, Hiring of ...................................................................................
Community-Based Outpatient Clinics, Vet Centers, and Contracted Care ........
Community-Based Outreach Clinics .......................................... 135, 139, 143, 147,
Daigh, Statement of John D ...................................................................................
Data Security ...........................................................................................................
DoD/VA Computable Data ......................................................................................
DoD/VA Transition to Care .....................................................................................
Electronic Medical Records .....................................................................................
Enrollment ...............................................................................................................
Federal Information Security Management ..........................................................
Fee-for-Service Care ................................................................................................
Finn, Statement of Belinda J .................................................................................
G.I. Bill, New........................................................................................................ 160,
Health Care Center Facilities .................................................................................
Homeless Veterans ..................................................................................................
Identity Theft ...........................................................................................................
Interoperability ........................................................................................................
Joint Incentive Fund ...............................................................................................
Melvin, Prepared Statement of Valerie C ..............................................................
Melvin, Statement of Valerie C ..............................................................................
Mental Health Resources, Access to ......................................................................
Multiple Award Schedule Advisory Panels ........................................................ 158,
Post Traumatic Stress Disorder .............................................................................
Prepared Statement of Office of Inspector General ..............................................
Prescription Drugs ...................................................................................................
Regan, Statement of Maureen T ............................................................................
Telemedicine ......................................................................................................... 138,
Transition Assistance for OEF/OIF Veterans .......................................................
VA Information Technology Risks ..........................................................................
VA Medical Procedure Problems ............................................................................
VBA Claims Processing Operations .......................................................................
Williamson, Prepared Statement of Randall B .....................................................
Williamson, Statement of Randall B ......................................................................
162
137
222
209
136
127
161
211
223
129
162
213
212
144
159
215
164
149
209
224
140
137
155
225
193
152
225
164
133
166
153
128
150
147
210
214
134
213
177
130
FAMILY AND TROOP HOUSING

Air Force Housing ....................................................................................................
Arny, Prepared Statement of Wayne .....................................................................
Arny, Statement of Wayne ......................................................................................
Barracks........................................................................................................ 290, 296,
Billings, Prepared Statement of Kevin W .............................................................
Billings, Statement of Kevin W ..............................................................................
Committee Support ..................................................................................................
VerDate Nov 24 2008
05:21 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 5905
Sfmt 0483
50526P3
295
239
237
308
271
269
235
293
v
Page
Eastin, Prepared Statement of Kenneth D ............................................................

Eastin, Statement of Kenneth D ............................................................................
Eglin AFB Housing Privatization ...........................................................................
Family Housing ........................................................................................................
Financial Challenges ...............................................................................................
Fort Huachuca/Yuma Proving Ground RCI ...........................................................
FSRM Funding for Barracks ..................................................................................
Government-Owned Family Housing .....................................................................
Grow the Force .........................................................................................................
Guaranteed Loss ......................................................................................................
Guard and Reserve ..................................................................................................
Housing Privatization Standardization .................................................................
Housing Services ......................................................................................................
Housing, Inadequate ...............................................................................................
Housing, Privatized .................................................................................................
Investments ..............................................................................................................
Korea Housing .........................................................................................................
Marine Corps Barracks Modernization/Growing the Force .................................
Market Liquidity ......................................................................................................
Navy Unaccompanied Housing ...............................................................................
Non-Military on Base Housing ...............................................................................
Penn, Prepared Statement of B.J ...........................................................................
Penn, Statement of B.J ...........................................................................................
Pinon Canyon ...........................................................................................................
Privatization of Army Lodging ...............................................................................
Ranking Minority Member ......................................................................................
Standard Housing, Dollar Amount Needed ...........................................................
Stimulus Funding ....................................................................................................
Warrior Transition ...................................................................................................
Wounded Warrior Barracks ....................................................................................
250
248
284
307
289
308
312
312
286
303
310
300
283
308
287
282
286
302
305
302
304
283
261
259
284
312
235
297
287
311
306
PACIFIC COMMAND
Accompanied Tours to Korea............................................................................... 361,
Command-Sponsored Families ...............................................................................
Guam Buildup ..........................................................................................................
Guam ........................................................................................................................
Humphreys Housing Opportunity Program ..........................................................
Keating, Prepared Statement of Admiral Timothy J ............................................
Keating, Statement of Admiral Timothy J ............................................................
Korea .........................................................................................................................
Korea, Force Levels in .............................................................................................
Naval Postgraduate School and Cooperation with Other Countries on Search
and Rescue ............................................................................................................
Naval Postgraduate School Diversity .....................................................................
North Korea and Oceanic Cooperation ..................................................................
Nuclear Powered Aircraft in Japan ........................................................................
Okinawa to Guam, Moving Troops from ................................................................
Realignment, Status of ............................................................................................
Schools ......................................................................................................................
Sharp, Prepared Statement of General Walter L .................................................
Sharp, Statement of General Walter L ..................................................................
VerDate Nov 24 2008
05:21 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 5905
Sfmt 0483
50526P3
364
315
371
365
357
370
320
317
356
371
354
353
351
355
348
315
370
362
332
329
vi
Page
South Pacific, Resources to the ...............................................................................

U.S. Forces Korea Tour Normalization ..................................................................
U.S. Dollar, Impact on the Value of .......................................................................
361
348
359
EUROPEAN COMMAND
Afghanistan .................................................................................................. 467, 471,
Ballistic Missile DefenseEuropean Site ..................................................................
Chairman, Statement of ..............................................................................................
Command Structure at EUCOM.................................................................................
Craddock, Prepared Statement of General Bantz J ..................................................
Craddock, Statement of General Bantz J...................................................................
DoD Education Needs in Europe ................................................................................
DoDEA Schools in Europe ...........................................................................................
Economic Downturn .....................................................................................................
Force Levels/Demands in Europe................................................................................
Germany, Military Construction Implications in ......................................................
Infrastructure, Deployment and En Route.................................................................
International Military Education in Training ...........................................................
Missile Defense.............................................................................................................
NATO Contributions ....................................................................................................
NATO Security Investment Program .........................................................................
NATO ............................................................................................................................
Privatized Housing/Quality of Life .............................................................................
Quality of Life ...................................................................................................... 455,
Stabilization Corps ..................................................................................................
Tajikistan .................................................................................................................
474
459
373
473
376
374
475
482
461
480
453
483
458
485
463
486
470
477
477
373
464
476
DOD/VA MEDICAL TRANSITION

AHLTAUpcoming Changes .................................................................................
Casscells, Prepared Statement of S. Ward ............................................................
Casscells, Statement of S. Ward .............................................................................
Congressioal Support ...............................................................................................
Continuum of Care ..................................................................................................
Disability Evaluation System Pilot Program ..................................................... 530,
DoD/VA Data SharingInteroperability ...............................................................
DoD/VA Data Sharing .............................................................................................
DoD/VA Health Care Collaboration in Monterey ..................................................
DoD/VA Medical Facilities ......................................................................................
Electronic Health Records .......................................................................................
Joint DoD/VA Facilities ...........................................................................................
Kussman, Prepared Statement of Michael J .........................................................
Kussman, Statement of Michael J .........................................................................
Medical BRAC in the National Capital Region .....................................................
Mental Health Professionals ...................................................................................
Mental Health ..........................................................................................................
Network of Care Website ........................................................................................
Telemedicine ............................................................................................................
Warrior Transition Units ........................................................................................
Wounded Warriors/Military Families, Public Assistance to ................................
VerDate Nov 24 2008
05:21 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 5905
Sfmt 0483
50526P3
545
505
503
487
549
540
536
545
531
547
528
537
543
534
491
488
532
546
529
553
488
543
538
552
vii
Page

Bethesda and Fort Belvoir, Congestion at .............................................................
Billings, Prepared Statement of Kevin W .............................................................
BRAC Acres Pending Disposal ...............................................................................
BRAC Implementation ............................................................................................
BRAC Money ............................................................................................................
Brigade Combat Teams ...........................................................................................
Cleanup .....................................................................................................................
COBRA.................................................................................................................. 626,
Communities, BRAC ............................................................................................ 619,
Community Support and Quality of Life Projects .................................................
Cost Estimates for BRAC ........................................................................................
Defense Access Roads ..............................................................................................
Discrete BRAC Actions ............................................................................................
Eastin, Prepared Statement of Kenneth D ............................................................
Eastin, Statement of Kenneth D ............................................................................
EDC ...........................................................................................................................
Eglin AFBInitial Joint Training Site for the Joint Strike Fighter ..................
Eglin AFBRelocation of the 7th Special Forces Group .....................................
Ferguson, Statement of Kathleen ...........................................................................
Fiscal Year 2009 Army BRAC 2005 Construction Projects ..................................
Fixed Deadline .........................................................................................................
Fort Detrick ..............................................................................................................
Fort Ord ....................................................................................................................
FUDS ........................................................................................................................
Impact Aid ................................................................................................................
Infrastructure ...........................................................................................................
Joint Basing .............................................................................................................
Lessons Learned................................................................................................... 614,
Milan Army Ammunition Plant ..............................................................................
Milan Arsenal ..........................................................................................................
Navy Business Plans ...............................................................................................
Penn, Prepared Statement of B.J ...........................................................................
Penn, Statement of B.J ...........................................................................................
San Antonio Military Medical Center ....................................................................
Savings and Reduction in Excess Infrastructure ..................................................
Statutory BRAC Deadline .......................................................................................
Surveys and Investigations Report ........................................................................
Treasure Island ............................................................................................ 618, 632,
Vision Center of Excellence ....................................................................................
561
558
636
602
632
644
628
621
555
629
641
622
644
613
643
645
579
577
633
641
642
600
646
616
643
617
638
624
618
641
625
644
635
646
591
589
556
641
643
640
614
638
634
OUTSIDE WITNESSES
Appel, Statement of Stanley ...................................................................................
Baker, Statement of Kerry ......................................................................................
Barnes, Statement of Joe ........................................................................................
Blake, Statement of Carl .........................................................................................
Bottene, Statement of Cinzia ..................................................................................
Campbell, Statement of Patrick .............................................................................
Cohoon, Statement of Barbara ...............................................................................
VerDate Nov 24 2008
05:21 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 5905
Sfmt 0483
50526P3
784
899
728
854
791
778
653
674
viii
Page
Houlemard, Statement of Michael .........................................................................

Jones, Statement of Rick .........................................................................................
Kelley, Statement of Raymond ...............................................................................
Kelly, Statement of Heather ...................................................................................
Maupin, Statement of John E., Jr ..........................................................................
Needham, Statement of Christopher .....................................................................
Nolan, Statement of Stephen J ...............................................................................
Redmond, Statement of Ben ...................................................................................
Robertson, Statement of Steve ...............................................................................
Roman-Rodriguez, Statement of Jesse ...................................................................
Streim, Statement of Joel E ....................................................................................
Toews, Statement of Galen B .................................................................................
801
742
867
713
757
881
693
653
814
829
722
661
654
COURT OF APPEALS
Case Filings, Decrease in ........................................................................................
CAVC Courthouse, New ..........................................................................................
CAVC ........................................................................................................................
Electronic Management/Electronic Case Filing System .......................................
Greene, Prepared Statement of Chief Judge William P., Jr ................................
Greene, Statement of Chief Judge William P., Jr .................................................
Judges, Increase in ..................................................................................................
Renovating Existing Building .................................................................................
930
979
979
917
980
919
918
930
917
929
AMERICAN BATTLE MONUMENTS COMMISSION

American Battle Monuments Commission FY 2010 Budget Request .................
DoD Cemeterial Expenses/Arlington National Cemetery/FY 2010 Overcrowding ................................................................................................................
Foreign Currency Fluctuation Account ..................................................................
Interpretive Techniques ..........................................................................................
Nicholson, Prepared Statement of John W ............................................................
Nicholson, Statement of John W ............................................................................
Normandy Visitor Center ........................................................................................
Pointe du Hoc ...........................................................................................................
Tomb of the Unknowns ...........................................................................................
Total Cemetery Management System/Digitizing Records ....................................
981
981
940
938
933
930
937
937
982
982
CEMETERIAL EXPENSES, ARMY

Burial Expenses .......................................................................................................
Millenium Project ....................................................................................................
Salt, Prepared Statement of Terrence C ................................................................
Salt, Statement of Terrence C ................................................................................
Tomb of the Unknown Soldier ................................................................................
961
953
943
941
960
ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME

Admission Criteria ...................................................................................................
Cox, Prepared Statement of Timothy C .................................................................
Cox, Statement of Timothy C .................................................................................
Financial Stability ...................................................................................................
Fraud and Abuse .....................................................................................................
Gulfport Facility ......................................................................................................
Homeless Veterans............................................................................................... 976,
VerDate Nov 24 2008
05:21 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 5905
Sfmt 0483
50526P3
983
964
962
983
983
978
977
ix
Page
Scott Dormitory Renovation (D.C. Campus) ..........................................................

Waiting Lists ............................................................................................................
Washington, D.C. Campus ......................................................................................
Washington, D.C. Site, Revenues from ..................................................................
982
976
982
976
CENTRAL COMMAND
Afghanistan ...................................................................................................... 1034,
Afghanistan, Agriculture Potential ........................................................................
Afghanistan, Illegal Drugs in .................................................................................
India ..........................................................................................................................
Interagency Involvement .........................................................................................
Iraq ...........................................................................................................................
Iraq, Drawdown of Troops .......................................................................................
Kashmir ....................................................................................................................
Kyrgystan .................................................................................................................
Pakistan ....................................................................................................................
Petraeus, Prepared Statement of General David H ..............................................
Petraeus, Statement of General David H ..............................................................
Piracy ........................................................................................................................
Taliban ......................................................................................................................
1044
1040
1041
986
1053
1043
1051
1053
1056
1052
1051
992
987
1041
986
1038
ARMY BUDGET
Afghanistan and Pakistan ......................................................................................
Afghanistan ...................................................................................................... 1084,
AFRICOM .................................................................................................................
Army Funding Priorities .........................................................................................
Army National Guard ..............................................................................................
Army Policy of Proselytizing ...................................................................................
Base Realignment and Closure ....................................................................... 1081,
Brigade Combat Teams ...........................................................................................
Casey, Prepared Statement of General George W., Jr .........................................
Casey, Statement of General George W., Jr ..........................................................
Declining Construction Costs on Military Construction Projects, Impact of ......
Hospitals ........................................................................................................... 1080,
IMET .........................................................................................................................
Impact Aid ................................................................................................................
Iraq, Casualties in ...................................................................................................
Iraq, Drawdown of Troops in ..................................................................................
Joint Cargo Aircraft .................................................................................................
Joint DoD/VA Clinic in Monterey, California ........................................................
Language Training ..................................................................................................
Military Home Sales and Benefits .........................................................................
Sustainable Performance Ratio ..............................................................................
Unfunded Requirements .........................................................................................
Unsolicited Assistance .............................................................................................
Wounded Warriors in Afghanistan vs. Iraq, Evacuation Time ............................
1097
1086
1100
1083
1086
1083
1087
1079
1065
1061
1060
1082
1087
1098
1090
1098
1090
1085
1082
1092
1095
1060
1081
1080
1091
1094
NAVY AND MARINE CORPS BUDGET

Barracks............................................................................................................ 1181, 1182
Blount Island ........................................................................................................... 1184
VerDate Nov 24 2008
05:21 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 5905
Sfmt 0483
50526P3
x
Page

Conway, Prepared Statement of General James T ...............................................
Conway, Statement of General James T ...............................................................
DDG1000 ................................................................................................................
DoD Health Care System Modernization ..............................................................
East Coast CVN Homeporting ................................................................................
Education ..................................................................................................................
End Strength ............................................................................................................
Guam....................................................................................................... 1166, 1175,
International Military Education Training Program ............................................
Maintenance .............................................................................................................
Morale, High Rate of Deployment Impact on ........................................................
Naval Station Mayport, Homeporting Nuclear Carrier at ...................................
Navy Educational Institutions ................................................................................
Outlying Landing Field for East Coast Carrier Landing Practice ......................
Roughead, Prepared Statement of Admiral Gary .................................................
Roughead, Statement of Admiral Gary ..................................................................
S&R and FAO Education and Training .................................................................
Stabilization and Reconstruction MOS ..................................................................
USS Hartford ...........................................................................................................
1103
1116
1114
1170
1174
1182
1179
1182
1183
1130
1175
1178
1172
1131
1171
1182
1103
1106
1104
1169
1168
1178
VETERANS AFFAIRS
Advance Appropriation .................................................................................... 1228,
Advance Appropriations for VA Medical Care ......................................................
Backlog .....................................................................................................................
Cemeteries, Closing of .............................................................................................
Cemeteries, VA ........................................................................................................
Chattanooga CBOC Report .....................................................................................
Claims Adjudication ................................................................................................
Claims Processing System, Hiring of Veterans in ................................................
Construction Competition Pricing ..........................................................................
Departmental Administration ................................................................................
Federal Recovery Coordinators ...............................................................................
Fitzsimmons Army Medical Center ........................................................................
G.I. Bill .....................................................................................................................
Health Care Innovation ...........................................................................................
Health Care Standards ...........................................................................................
HealtheVet Integrated Master Plan .......................................................................
Homeless Veterans ..................................................................................................
Homelessness ...........................................................................................................
Information Security ...............................................................................................
Information Technology Procurement ....................................................................
Jointness ...................................................................................................................
Medical Care for Veterans in Rural Locations ......................................................
Medical Research .....................................................................................................
Mental Health ..........................................................................................................
National Guard and Reserve Benefits ...................................................................
NCAs Outreach Plan ..............................................................................................
Office of Information and Technology Hiring Freeze ............................................
Post-9/11 GI Bill Implementation ..........................................................................
VerDate Nov 24 2008
05:21 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 5905
Sfmt 0483
50526P3
1232
1269
1224
1242
1244
1185
1271
1235
1240
1256
1257
1258
1220
1239
1253
1252
1265
1216
1227
1220
1260
1214
1233
1222
1259
1236
1246
1243
1264
1271
xi
Page

Rural Health Outreach and Delivery .....................................................................
Service Dogs .............................................................................................................
Shinseki, Prepared Statement of the Honorable Eric ..........................................
Shinseki, Statement of the Honorable Eric ...........................................................
Specialty Mental Health Care and Rural Health Outreach and Delivery ..........
Suicide Hotline .........................................................................................................
Sustainability and Energy ......................................................................................
Technology Acquisition Center ...............................................................................
Transformation Review ...........................................................................................
Transformation ............................................................................ 1212, 1219, 1230,
VA Benefits Claims Backlog ...................................................................................
VA Information Technology Risks ..........................................................................
VA IT Staffing ..........................................................................................................
VA/DoD Interoperability Plan ................................................................................
Vouchers ...................................................................................................................
1186
1270
1255
1191
1188
1270
1241
1257
1263
1257
1268
1270
1269
1270
1272
1248
BUDGET OVERVIEW
AFRICOM .................................................................................................................
Allies, Support to .....................................................................................................
Base Realignment and Closure Savings ................................................................
Base Realignment and Closure ....................................................................... 1327,
Base Realignment and Closure, Lesson Learned ..................................................
Center for Stabilization and Reconstruction Studies ............................................
Defense Language Institute ....................................................................................
FYDP................................................................................................................. 1326,
Guard and Reserve Funding ...................................................................................
Hale, Prepared Statement of Robert F ..................................................................
Hale, Statement of Robert F ...................................................................................
Incremental Funding ...............................................................................................
Inflation ....................................................................................................................
Mayport Naval Air Station .....................................................................................
Missile Defense ........................................................................................................
Overseas Contingency Operations Request ...........................................................
Overseas Health Care .............................................................................................
School Construction Funding ..................................................................................
Workforce .................................................................................................................
1342
1330
1287
1284
1358
1360
1339
1344
1275
1346
1328
1358
1280
1276
1332
1350
1347
1359
1354
1342
1359
1360
1347
1275
1336
1329
AIR FORCE BUDGET

Base Realignment and Closure ..............................................................................
Contractor Utilization, Small and Disadvantaged ................................................
Donations ..................................................................................................................
Engineering ..............................................................................................................
Guard and Reserve Components ............................................................................
Infrastructure Footprint ..........................................................................................
VerDate Nov 24 2008
05:21 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 5905
Sfmt 0483
50526P3
1400
1361
1393
1397
1396
1387
1383
1404
xii
Page
Joint Basing .............................................................................................................

Lackland Air Force Base .........................................................................................
Modular Construction ..............................................................................................
Moody Air Force Base, Georgia ..............................................................................
Nuclear Weapons .....................................................................................................
Nuclear-Related Facilities .......................................................................................
Schwartz, Prepared Statement of General Norton A ...........................................
Schwartz, Statement of General Norton A ............................................................
VerDate Nov 24 2008
05:21 Jul 08, 2009
Jkt 050526
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 5905
Sfmt 6611
50526P3
1388
1391
1399
1389
1392
1402
1394
1362
1365
1363

House Hearing, 111TH Congress - Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations For 2010

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

House Hearing, 111TH Congress - Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations For 2010

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, VETERANS AFFAIRS,

AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS

ZACH WAMP, Tennessee

hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with HEARING

Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations

VerDate Nov 24 2008

22:45 Jul 07, 2009

hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with HEARING

VerDate Nov 24 2008

22:45 Jul 07, 2009

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, VETERANS AFFAIRS,

ZACH WAMP, Tennessee

hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with HEARING

VerDate Nov 24 2008

22:45 Jul 07, 2009

JERRY LEWIS, California

BEVERLY PHETO, Clerk and Staff Director

hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with HEARING

VerDate Nov 24 2008

22:45 Jul 07, 2009

Quality of Life ..........................................................................................................

Review of VA Challenges ........................................................................................

Family and Troop Housing .....................................................................................

Pacific Command .....................................................................................................

European Command ................................................................................................

DoD/VA Medical Transition ....................................................................................

Base Realignment and Closure ..............................................................................

Outside Witnesses ...................................................................................................

Court of Appeals ......................................................................................................

American Battle Monuments Commission ............................................................

Cemeterial Expenses, Army ....................................................................................

Armed Forces Retirement Home ............................................................................

Central Command ....................................................................................................

Army Budget ............................................................................................................ 1059

hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with HEARING

VerDate Nov 24 2008

22:45 Jul 07, 2009

jbell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with HEARING

Mr. EDWARDS [presiding]. I would like to call the committee to

VerDate Nov 24 2008

06:47 Jul 08, 2009

jbell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with HEARING

RANKING MINORITY MEMBER

Mr. WAMP. Well, Mr. Chairman, thank you. Good morning.

VerDate Nov 24 2008

06:47 Jul 08, 2009

jbell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with HEARING

VerDate Nov 24 2008

06:47 Jul 08, 2009

jbell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with HEARING

VerDate Nov 24 2008

06:47 Jul 08, 2009

jbell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with HEARING

VerDate Nov 24 2008

06:47 Jul 08, 2009

jbell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with HEARING

VerDate Nov 24 2008

06:47 Jul 08, 2009

jbell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with HEARING

SERGEANT MAJOR KENNETH O. PRESTON

Sergeant Major PRESTON. Mr. Chairman, thanks very much.

VerDate Nov 24 2008

06:47 Jul 08, 2009