Order Code RL34590
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act:
Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
July 21, 2008
Lawrence Kapp, Coordinator
Specialist in Military Manpower Policy
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
David F. Burrelli and Charles A. Henning
Specialists in Military Manpower Policy
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
Richard A. Best, Jr.
Specialist in National Defense
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected
Military Personnel Policy Issues
Summary
Military personnel issues typically generate significant interest from many
Members of Congress and their staffs. Ongoing military operations in Iraq and
Afghanistan in support of what the Bush Administration terms the Global War on
Terror, along with the emerging operational role of the Reserve Components, further
heighten interest and support for a wide range of military personnel policies and
issues.
CRS selected a number of issues considered by Congress as it considers a
National Defense Authorization Act for FY2009. In each case, a brief synopsis is
provided that includes background information, a comparison of the House passed
provisions (H.R. 5658) and the provisions reported by the Senate Armed Services
Committee (S. 3001), if any, and a brief discussion of the issue. Where appropriate,
other CRS products are identified to provide more detailed background information
and analysis of the issue. For each issue, a CRS analyst is identified and contact
information is provided. Note: some issues were addressed in the FY2008 National
Defense Authorization Act and discussed in CRS Report RL34169 concerning that
legislation. Those issues that were previously considered in CRS Report RL34169
are designated with a “*” in the relevant section titles of this report.
This report focuses exclusively on the annual defense authorization process. It
does not include appropriations, veterans’ affairs, tax implications of policy choices
or any discussion of separately introduced legislation.
It is anticipated that this report will be updated.
Contents
Tricare Fee Increases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Tricare Reserve Select Fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Active Duty End Strengths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
*Military Pay Raise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Use of Reserve Component Personnel to Respond to Certain Domestic
Disorders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Use of Reserve Component Personnel to Respond to Certain Disasters
or Emergencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
*Continuation of Authority to Assist Local Education Agencies that
Benefit Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and
Department of Defense Civilian Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authority for Educating and Training for Military Spouses Pursuing Portable
Careers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Career Intermission Pilot Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Incentives for Foreign Language Proficiency and Foreign Cultural Studies . . . . 12
Travel Allowances for Family of Service Members with Serious Psychiatric
Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Limitation on Simultaneous Deployments to Combat Zones of Dual-Military
Couples who have Minor Dependents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Sole Surviving Sons and Daughters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Revised Disability Pay Computation Formula for Reserve Component
Personnel Wounded in Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Searchable Military Decorations Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Award of the Vietnam Service Medal To Veterans Who Participated in the
Mayaguez Rescue Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Protective Orders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
*Implementation of Information Database on Sexual Assault Incidents in the
Armed Forces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Paternity Leave for Members of the Armed Forces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Presentation of Burial Flag to the Surviving Spouse and Children of Members
of the Armed Forces who Die in Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Secretary of Defense Review of the Deferment from Deployment Policy
following the Birth of a Child . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Effect of Termination of Subsequent Marriage on Payment of Survivor Benefit
Plan Annuity to Surviving Spouse or Former Spouse who Previously
Transferred Annuity to Dependent Children . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
*Extension to Survivors of Certain Members who Die on Active Duty of
Special Survivor Indemnity Allowance for Persons Affected by
Required Survivor Benefit Plan Annuity Offset for Dependency and
Indemnity Compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Enhanced Enforcement of Prohibition on Sale or Rental of Sexually Explicit
Material on Military Installations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (JROTC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act:
Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Each year, the Senate and House Armed Services Committees report their
respective versions of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). These bills
contain numerous provisions that affect military personnel, retirees and their family
members. Provisions in one version are often not included in another; are treated
differently; or, in certain cases, are identical. Following passage of each by the
respective legislative body, a Conference Committee is typically convened to resolve
the various differences between the House and Senate versions. If a Conference
Committee reports its final version of the Authorization Act, the bill is returned to
the House and Senate for their consideration. Upon final passage the act is sent to the
President for his consideration.
In the course of a typical authorization cycle, congressional staffs receive many
constituent requests for information on provisions contained in the annual NDAA.
This report highlights those personnel-related issues that seem to generate the most
intense congressional and constituent interest, and tracks their status in the FY2009
House and Senate versions of the NDAA. The Duncan Hunter National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009, H.R. 5658, was introduced on March 31,
2008, reported by the House Committee on Armed Services on May 16, 2008
(H.Rept. 110-652), and passed by the House on May 22, 2008. The National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009, S. 3001, was introduced on May 12, 2008
and reported by the Senate Committee on Armed Services on that same day (S.Rept.
110-335). The entries under H.R. 5658 and S. 3001 in the following pages are based
on language in the House passed and Senate Armed Services Committee passed bills,
respectively, unless otherwise indicated.
Each presentation in this report offers the background on a given issue, tracks
its legislative status, discusses the proposed language, identifies other relevant CRS
products, and designates a CRS issue expert. Note: some issues were addressed in
the FY2008 National Defense Authorization Act and discussed in CRS Report
RL34169 concerning that legislation. Those issues that were previously considered
in CRS Report RL34169 are designated with a “*” in the relevant section titles of this
report.
CRS-2
Tricare Fee Increases
Background: For several years the Administration has proposed increases in co-
payments and enrollment fees for retirees and their dependents who are not
Medicare-eligible. The Administration argues that the growing costs of Defense
health care, both in absolute terms and as a percentage of the defense budget, require
efforts to seek greater contributions by users. It argues that inasmuch as Tricare
Prime enrollment fees were set in 1995 and have not been raised since, it is
reasonable that they should be increased. Congress has thus far refused to give DOD
the requested authority to raise the fees.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
Section 701 & 702
Provides an additional
preclude DOD from
$1.2 billion over the
altering co-payment levels
Administration request to
and enrollment fees
cover rejection of the
through the end of
Administration’s plans to
FY2009.
raise Tricare fees
(according to SASC Press
Release 5/1/2008).
Discussion: The health care portion of the Defense budget has grown from $19
billion in FY2001 to over $42 billion in FY2008. Since 2006 DOD has been
attempting to raise co-payment and enrollment fees for retired military personnel and
their dependents who are not eligible for Medicare. (Medicare-eligible retirees can
use the Tricare for Life program which would not be affected by the proposed fee
increases.) DOD asserts that retirees using Tricare Prime paid approximately 27
percent of their health care costs in 1995 but now pay only 12 percent. Consistent
with recommendations of the Department of Defense Task Force on the Future of
Military Health Care, for FY2009 would gradually raise enrollment fees for those
using Tricare Prime, the HMO-like option, from the current $460 (self+dependents)
to 2011 rates as high as $1,750 for retirees making over $40,000 annually. DOD also
proposed creating an enrollment fee for retirees who use Tricare Standard, the fee-
for-service option, of $120 per year. In addition, DOD maintains that retail
prescription usage and costs have contributed significantly to the growth in health
care spending and recommended increases in pharmacy co-payments (along with
eliminating co-payments for pharmaceuticals provided by the DOD Mail Order
Pharmacy). According to DOD, these fee increases would save some $1.2 billion in
FY2009. Opposition from beneficiary organizations has been strong and the
Government Accountability Office concluded in May 2007 that DOD’s estimates of
cost savings were over-estimated. Congress has twice denied DOD authority to
increase Tricare fees in FY2007 and FY2008 and has encouraged DOD to find other
approaches to restraining the growth of the health care budget.
Reference(s): CRS Report RS22402, Increases in Tricare Costs: Background and
Options for Congress. Task Force on the Future of Military Health Care, Final
Report, December 2007 [http://www.dodfuturehealthcare.net/images/103-06-2-
Home-Task_Force_FINAL_REPORT_122007.pdf]. Government Accountability
Office, Military Health Care: TRICARE Cost-Sharing Proposals Would Help Offset
CRS-3
Increasing Health Care Spending, but Projected Savings are Likely Overestimated,
May 2007 [http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07647.pdf].
CRS Point of Contact (POC): Dick Best, x7-7607.
Tricare Reserve Select Fees
Background: The FY2005 Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act
(P.L. 108-375) established the Tricare Reserve Select program which permitted some
drilling reserve personnel to utilize Tricare but required that they pay enrollment fees
interpreted to be equivalent to the 28 percent charged to Federal civil servants under
the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). The FY2007 John
Warner National Defense Authorization Act (P.L. 109-364) extended the benefit to
all drilling reservists. In December 2007 the Government Accountability Office
(GAO) found that the premiums DOD established had actually exceeded the costs of
providing the Tricare benefit.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
Section 705 requires DOD
Section 701 requires DOD
to recalculate premiums
to base fees on reported
for Tricare Reserve Select.
costs in the previous year
rather than using Blue
Cross/Blue Shield
benchmarks.
Discussion: Tricare Reserve Select (TRS) provides a health care benefit to reservists
who are in drilling status and not on active duty. (Reservists called to active duty
have regular Tricare benefits that have no enrollment fees.) Current monthly
premiums are $81/self or $253/self+family. Enrollment in TRS has been lower than
estimated, suggesting that premium rates discourage selection or that reservists have
access to more affordable civilian health care options. A GAO report published in
December 2007 concluded that the premiums DOD established exceeded the reported
average cost of providing care through TRS. This situation resulted, according to
GAO, from DOD having used FEHBP Blue Cross/Blue Shield rates as benchmarks
that in practice proved to be higher than necessary to cover DOD’s costs. GAO
recommended that DOD base premiums on actual costs and DOD has indicated its
support for that approach consistent with available cost data.
Reference(s): GAO Report Military Health Care: Cost Data Indicate that TRICARE
Reserve Select Premiums Exceeded the Costs of Providing Program Benefits, GAO-
08-104, December 2007 [http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08104.pdf].
CRS Point of Contact (POC): Dick Best, x7-7607.
CRS-4
Active Duty End Strengths
Background: Continuing combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have stressed
the nation’s armed forces, especially the Army and Marine Corps. The FY2008
NDAA supported increasing the Army end strength by 65,000 to 547,400 by FY2012
and increasing the Marine Corps end strength by 27,000 to 202,000, also by FY2012.
While the Army and Marine Corps grow, the Navy remains stable and the Air Force
continues manpower reductions that began in 2005 to support the recapitalization of
modernized aircraft. The Air Force is projected to reduce from 359,700 in FY2005
to approximately 300,000 in FY2009.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
Section 401 authorizes a
Section 401 authorizes a
FY2009 end strength of
FY2009 end strength of
532,400 for the Army,
532,400 for the Army,
326,323 for the Navy,
325,300 for the Navy,
194,000 for the Marine
194,000 for the Marine
Corps and 317,050 for the
Corps and 316,771 for the
Air Force.
Air Force.
Section 402 establishes
No similar provision.
new minimum end
strengths of 532,400 for
the Army, 326,323 for the
Navy, 194,000 for the
Marine Corps and 317,050
for the Air Force.
Discussion: The Army and Marine Corps have been successful, so far, in growing
to meet the congressional goals. The Army plans to meet its ultimate goal of 547,400
by 2010, two years earlier than the congressional benchmark. The Secretary of
Defense recently recommended that the Air Force end strength not fall below
330,000, a strength that has not yet been integrated into the FY2009 NDAA. The
House version authorized 1,023 more Navy personnel and 450 more Air Force
personnel above the budget request to restore military positions in the military
medical community. The Senate committee version authorized 171 more Air Force
personnel above the budget request to support the operation and maintenance on 76
B-52 aircraft.
Reference(s): CRS Report RL31334, Operations Noble Eagle, Enduring Freedom,
and Iraqi Freedom: Questions and Answers About U.S. Military Personnel,
Compensation, and Force Structure, by Lawrence Kapp and Charles Henning.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): Charles Henning, x7-8866.
CRS-5
*Military Pay Raise
Background: Ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, combined with
end strength increases and recruiting challenges, continue to highlight the military
pay issue. Title 37 U.S.C. 1009 provides a permanent formula for annual military pay
raises that indexes the raise to the annual increase in the Employment Cost Index
(ECI). The FY2009 President’s Budget request for a 3.0 percent military pay raise
was consistent with this formula. Congress, in FY2004, FY2005, FY2006, and
FY2008 approved the raise as the ECI increase plus 0.5 percent. The FY2007 pay
raise was equal to the ECI.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
Section 601 supports a 3.9
In Section 601, the Senate
percent (0.5 percent above
also supports a 3.9 percent
the President’s Budget)
pay raise to be effective on
across-the-board pay raise
January 1, 2009.
that would be effective
January 1, 2009.
Section 608 requires a
No similar provision.
guaranteed pay raise of
0.5 percent above the ECI
for FY2010 through
FY2013.
Discussion: A military pay raise larger than the permanent formula is not
uncommon. Mid-year, targeted pay raises (targeted at specific grades and longevity)
have also been authorized over the past several years. This year’s proposed
legislation includes no mention of targeted pay raises.
Reference(s): CRS Report RL33446, Military Pay and Benefits: Key Questions and
Answers, by Charles Henning.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): Charles Henning at x7-8866.
CRS-6
Use of Reserve Component Personnel to Respond
to Certain Domestic Disorders
Background: Chapter 15 of Title 10, sometimes referred to as the Insurrection Act,
provides the President with the authority to call the militia into federal service and
to use “the armed forces” to respond to certain domestic disorders, including aiding
state governments in suppressing insurrection (10 USC 331), enforcing the laws of
the United States and suppressing rebellion (10 USC 332), and preventing domestic
violence which interferes with the execution of federal and state laws (10 USC 333).
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
Section 591 would amend
No similar provision.
10 USC 331-333 to
specify that the
President’s use of the
“armed forces” under
these provisions includes
“units and members of the
Army Reserve, Navy
Reserve, Air Force
Reserve, Marine Corps
Reserve and Coast Guard
Reserve ordered to active
duty for this purpose.”
Discussion: The amendments contained in Section 591 would specify that the
President’s authority to use the armed forces to respond to these domestic disorders
includes the ability to activate members of the federal reserve components (Army
Reserve, Navy Reserve, Air Force Reserve, Marine Corps Reserve, and Coast Guard
Reserve) and use them as part of the response effort. Activation of the Army
National Guard and Air National Guard is already provided for under the original
language authorizing the President to order the militia into federal service (the militia
includes, but is not limited to, the National Guard).1
Reference(s): CRS Report RL30802, Reserve Component Personnel Issues:
Questions and Answers, by Lawrence Kapp.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): Lawrence Kapp, x7-7609.
1 10 USC 311(a) defines the militia as follows: “The militia of the United States consists of
all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title
32, under 45 years of age, who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become,
citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members
of the National Guard.” 10 USC 311(b) divides the militia into the organized militia
(members of the National Guard and Naval Militia) and the unorganized militia (those
members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia)
CRS-7
Use of Reserve Component Personnel to Respond
to Certain Disasters or Emergencies
Background: Section 12304 of Title 10 allows the President to activate certain
reservists for a period of up to 365 days for specified purposes. This authority is
commonly referred to as Presidential Reserve Call-up (PRC) authority. A
subparagraph of section 12304 prohibits the President from using this authority for
“providing assistance to either the Federal Government or a State in time of a serious
natural or manmade disaster, accident, or catastrophe,” unless responding to an
certain emergencies involving weapons of mass destruction or terrorist attacks.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
Section 594 would amend
No similar provision.
10 USC 12304 to allow
the President to order
Selected Reserve units
from the Army Reserve,
Navy Reserve, Air Force
Reserve, Marine Corps
Reserve, or Coast Guard
Reserve to active duty to
assist in the response to
certain disasters or
emergencies.
Discussion: This provision would allow the President to use PRC authority to
activate Selected Reserve units from the purely federal reserve components (but not
the National Guard) to respond to disasters or emergencies which met the definitions
of the Stafford Act.2 A somewhat similar provision was passed as part of the John
Warner National Defense Authorization Act for FY2007 (P.L. 109-364, section
1076); however, among other differences, it applied to the National Guard as well as
the federal reserves and was opposed by many state governors. It was later repealed
by section 1068 of P.L. 110-181.
2 42 USC 5122 defines emergency as “...any occasion or instance for which, in the
determination of the President, Federal assistance is needed to supplement State and local
efforts and capabilities to save lives and to protect property and public health and safety, or
to lessen or avert the threat of a catastrophe in any part of the United States.” Major disaster
is defined as “...any natural catastrophe (including any hurricane, tornado, storm, high water,
winddriven water, tidal wave, tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide, mudslide,
snowstorm, or drought), or, regardless of cause, any fire, flood, or explosion, in any part of
the United States, which in the determination of the President causes damage of sufficient
severity and magnitude to warrant major disaster assistance under this Act to supplement
the efforts and available resources of States, local governments, and disaster relief
organizations in alleviating the damage, loss, hardship, or suffering caused thereby.”
CRS-8
Reference(s): CRS Report RL30802, Reserve Component Personnel Issues:
Questions and Answers, by Lawrence Kapp.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): Lawrence Kapp, x7-7609.
CRS-9
*Continuation of Authority to Assist Local
Education Agencies that Benefit Dependents of
Members of the Armed Forces and Department of
Defense Civilian Employees
Background: Last year Congress authorized $30 million for continuation of
assistance to eligible local agencies impacted by enrollment of DOD military and
civilian employee dependents, and $10 million for assistance to agencies with
significant changes due to base closures, force structure changes, or force relocations.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
Section 571 of the House
Section 561 of the Senate
bill asks for ‘impact aid’
bill calls for $30 million
of $50 million for local
for local agencies to be
educational agencies and
authorized in ‘impact aid’
$15 million to those with
and $10 million for those
significant changes due to
with significant changes
base closures, force
due to base closures, force
structure changes, or force
structure changes, or force
relocations.
relocations.
Section 562 stipulates of
the amount authorized, $5
million in ‘impact aid’ is
for agencies with children
with severe disabilities.
Discussion: The language in these bills is similar to last year’s efforts regarding
impact aid.
Reference(s): CRS Report RL34169, The FY2008 National Defense Authorization
Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues, p. 7-8.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): David F. Burrelli at x7-8033.
CRS-10
Authority for Educating and Training for Military
Spouses Pursuing Portable Careers
Background: Military families are relocated quite frequently during a military
career. Non-military spouses seeking employment at a new duty location are often
frustrated because many of the skills they have may not be portable to a new location.
Often, work skills must be learned anew. It has been reported that local employers
prefer a more stable workforce with less turnover and less training needed.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
No similar provision.
Section 571 amends 10
USC 1784 (“Employment
opportunities for military
spouses”) by adding
language allowing the
Secretary of Defense to
carry out programs to
provide or make available
to eligible spouses
education and training to
facilitate the pursuit of a
portable career.
Discussion: Although this language is permissive in nature, if implemented, spouses
may be more likely to continue a career following relocation to a new duty station.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): David F. Burrelli at x7-8033.
CRS-11
Career Intermission Pilot Program
Background: Each service supports educational programs that permit selected
members to temporarily attend civilian educational institutions and then return to the
parent service without interrupting their normal career pattern. However, there is
currently no program that allows an extended break in service for personal or
professional reasons.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
Section 532 would
Section 585 would
authorize a pilot program
authorize a similar
that allows a Service
program. Interim reports
Secretary to release
would be required in 2010
selected personnel from
and 2012 with a final
active duty for a maximum
report in 2015.
period of three years to
pursue personal and
professional goals. Up to
20 officer and 20 enlisted
members annually from
each armed force under
the Secretaries jurisdiction
could participate in this
program during the period
January 1, 2009 through
December 31, 2014.
Members would incur a
service obligation of two
months for every month of
program participation.
Participants and their
families would remain
eligible for medical and
dental care and access to
military facilities.
Discussion: These programs, called “Career Intermission” in the House report and
“Career Flexibility” in the Senate committee version, are aimed at enhancing
retention by allowing personnel an opportunity to pursue other personal or
professional goals. The House and Senate programs would be capped at 40 service
members per year for each armed force and require a service obligation of two
months for every month of program participation.
Reference(s): None
CRS Point of Contact (POC): Charles Henning, x7-8866.
CRS-12
Incentives for Foreign Language Proficiency and
Foreign Cultural Studies
Background:. In recent years, both Congress and the Department of Defense have
shown significant interest in increasing the ability of military personnel to operate
in foreign countries by enhancing their cultural knowledge and foreign language
proficiency. However, building these language and cultural skills has proven
challenging due to the intensive study required for mastery and the competing
demands of other training and operational requirements for currently serving
personnel There is currently statutory authority to provide bonuses to those who are
already proficient in designated foreign languages (37 USC 316), but not for those
who are seeking to become proficient.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
Section 619 would amend
Section 619 would add
37 USC 353 to allow the
section 316a to Title 37. It
Service Secretaries to pay
would authorize the
a proficiency bonus of up
Secretary of Defense to
to $12,000 per year to
provide up to $3,000 per
regular or reserve
year to participants in the
personnel, and to those
Senior Reserve Officers
enrolled in an officer
Training Corps and the
training program, who are
Marine Corps Platoon
“in training to acquire
Leaders Class who
proficiency in a critical
participate “in a language
foreign language or
immersion program
expertise in foreign
approved for purposes of
cultural studies or a
the Senior Reserve
related skill designated as
Officer’s Training Corps,
critical by the Secretary
or in study abroad, or is
concerned.” It also allows
enrolled in an academic
the Service Secretaries to
course that involves
provide those in officer
instruction in a foreign
training programs who
language of strategic
pursue such studies with
interest to the Department
up to $1,000 per month in
of Defense....” This
incentive pay. It mandates
section also contains a
that the Secretary of
provision to recoup such
Defense establish a pilot
payments if the individual
program through 2013 to
does not complete
offer bonuses to reservists
participation in the
who pursue such studies.
language program or the
pre-commissioning
program.
Discussion: Both provisions seek to improve the language skills of new officer
accessions by giving them a financial incentive to study foreign languages and
cultures before they begin active service. The House provision also would require
the Secretary of Defense to establish a pilot program for currently serving reserve
personnel who undertake such studies, and it permits the Service Secretaries to use
CRS-13
such financial incentives for currently serving active and reserve personnel who
pursue such studies. The House provision also has a higher maximum payment cap.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): Lawrence Kapp, x7-7609.
CRS-14
Travel Allowances for Family of Service Members
with Serious Psychiatric Conditions
Background: Section 411h of Title 37, U.S.C., authorizes the military departments
to pay travel and transportation allowances for family members of service members
who are seriously injured, seriously ill, or in a situation of imminent death when the
appropriate authority (physician, commander of the military medical facility
concerned, for example), determines that the family’s presence may contribute to the
service member’s health or welfare.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
No similar language.
The committee report (p.
346-7) notes: “The
committee strongly
believes that service
members who suffer from
serious psychiatric
conditions meet the
seriously injured or
seriously ill threshold
under section 411h of title
37, United States Code,
and that family members
should be afforded travel
and transportation
allowances in accordance
with that section. The
committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to
report to the congressional
defense committees by
June 1, 2008 on the
Department of Defense
policies regarding the
eligibility of family
members of such service
members to receive travel
and transportation
allowances under that
section.”
Discussion: This report language would make no change in law but suggests that the
Secretary of Defense broaden the current travel and transportation policy for family
members of those with serious psychiatric conditions.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): David F. Burrelli, x7-8033.
CRS-15
Limitation on Simultaneous Deployments to
Combat Zones of Dual-Military Couples who have
Minor Dependents
Background: Section 586 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2008 (P.L. 110-181) contains the following provision: “The Secretary of Defense
shall establish appropriate procedures to ensure that an adequate family care plan is
in place for a member of the Armed Forces with minor dependents who is a single
parent or whose spouse is also a member of the Armed Forces when the member may
be deployed in an area for which imminent danger pay is authorized under section
310 of title 37, United States Code. Such procedures should allow the member to
request a deferment of deployment due to unforeseen circumstances, and the request
for such a deferment should be considered and responded to promptly.”
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
Section 596 would remove
No similar provision.
the second sentence of the
above cited legislation,
and specify that “In the
case of a member of the
Armed Forces with minor
dependents who has a
spouse who is also a
member of the Armed
Forces, and the spouse is
deployed in an area for
which imminent danger
pay is authorized under
section 310 of title 37,
United States Code, the
member may request a
deferment of a deployment
to such an area until the
spouse returns from such
deployment.”
Discussion: By making this change, a military member with minor children who has
a spouse already serving in an imminent danger pay area and facing simultaneous
deployment may request a deferment to such an area until the spouse returns from
such a deployment, regardless of the existence, or lack thereof, of “unforeseen
circumstances.”
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): David F. Burrelli, x7-8033.
CRS-16
Sole Surviving Sons and Daughters
Background: The Department of Defense defines sole survivors as the only
remaining son or daughter in a family where the father or mother, or one or more
sons or daughters, while serving in the Armed Forces, was killed, died as a result of
wounds, is captured or missing, or is permanently 100% disabled. Sole survivors may
voluntarily enlist if they waive their right to separation as a sole surviving son or
daughter but may apply for a protective assignment which precludes their assignment
to an overseas area designated as a hostile-fire or imminent danger area. Enlisted
service members who become sole survivors after entering the service may apply for
separation.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
No similar provision.
Section 651authorizes
separation pay, transitional
health care, commissary,
and exchange privileges
for service members
voluntarily separated as
surviving sons and
daughters.
Discussion: The administrative discharge of a sole survivor is considered a
voluntary separation. Under current policy, if the separation occurs prior to the
completion of the initial enlistment, there are no benefits associated with the
discharge. Section 651 of the Senate bill would authorize certain benefits, typically
associated with involuntary separations, for sole surviving sons and daughters who
elect to separate.
Reference(s): CRS Report RL31334, Operations Noble Eagle, Enduring Freedom,
and Iraqi Freedom: Questions and Answere About U.S. Military Personnel,
Compensation, and Force Structure, by Lawrence Kapp and Charles Henning.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): Charles Henning, x7-8866.
CRS-17
Revised Disability Pay Computation Formula for
Reserve Component Personnel Wounded in Action
Background:. National Guard and Reserve personnel serving on active duty for
more than 30 days qualify for disability retirement under the same legal framework
as active duty personnel, and a similar legal framework if on duty for 30 days or less.
If qualified for disability retirement or placement on the temporary disability retired
list (TDRL), disability retired pay is calculated using a formula that factors in years
of service or disability rating, whichever is more favorable to the servicemember.
However, the method of calculating years of service for regular component personnel
differs from that of reserve component personnel. Regular component personnel,
who are on duty every day of the year, receive a year of service for each year of duty.
Reserve component personnel, who normally serve part-time, have their years of
service calculated using a more complex formula based on their level of
participation. To simplify somewhat, this method sums up a reservist’s participation
“points” and divides by 360 to produce the number of equivalent years of active-duty
service. Given the less-than-full-time nature of reserve service, this means that an
individual who has been serving in the reserves for 20 years may only have four or
five years of service for retired pay computation purposes.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
Section 641 would amend
No similar provision.
10 USC 1208 so that
reserve component
personnel who qualify for
disability retirement or
placement on the TDRL
due to an disability for
which a Purple Heart was
awarded, shall have their
years of service calculated
under 10 USC 12732
rather than 10 USC 12733.
Discussion: This provision would modify the method of calculating “years of
service” for reservists who become eligible for disability retirement or are placed on
the TDRL based on a combat-related injury. Rather than summing up the reservist’s
participation points and dividing by 360 to get active-duty equivalent years of
service, as is currently done, the formula would award a year of service for each year
in which a reservist met the minimum participation standard of 50 points.3 Hence,
under this provision, a reservists with 20 qualifying years of reserve service would
be awarded 20 years of service for his disability retired pay computation. This
change would increase the amount of disability retired pay received by some combat-
3 Earning 50 points in a given year is usually not difficult for members of the Selected
Reserve, as attending all weekend drills and two weeks of annual training will generate 77
points. For more information on reserve retirement points, see CRS Report RL30802, p. 14-
15.
CRS-18
injured reservists, particularly those with a modest disability rating (30-40%) but
many years of reserve service.
Reference(s): CRS Report RL30802, Reserve Component Personnel Issues:
Questions and Answers, by Lawrence Kapp.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): Lawrence Kapp, x7-7609.
CRS-19
Searchable Military Decorations Database
Background: The House Committee notes that there have been a number of recent
incidents in which individuals have fraudulently claimed to have been awarded the
Congressional Medal of Honor or other decorations of valor. The committee
believes that false claims reduce the prestige of these decorations and that the valor
of these decorations could be preserved if the general public had access to a
searchable database listing individuals and the decorations for valor they have been
awarded.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
This report language
No similar provision.
directs the Secretary of
Defense to study the
potential for establishing a
searchable database listing
individuals who have been
awarded medals for valor.
Topics considered should
include cost,
administrative challenges,
options of public access,
as well as issues
concerning the privacy of
those listed. The study
should consider the
feasibility of listing
recipients of multiple
valor decorations, but at a
minimum, report the
feasibility of a database
listing only Medal of
Honor recipients. The
Secretary of Defense is
directed to report the
findings and
recommendations to
HASC and SASC by
March 31, 2009.
Discussion: This report is exploratory in nature. It is expected that this would
discourage false claims as such a list would allow for easy verification of their
validity. Such a database may raise privacy issues.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): David F. Burrelli, x7-8033.
CRS-20
Award of the Vietnam Service Medal To Veterans
Who Participated in the Mayaguez Rescue
Operation
Background: On May 12, 1975, in the aftermath of the Vietnam War (approximately
two weeks after the fall of Saigon), a U.S. merchant ship, S.S. Mayaguez, was seized
by the Khmer Rouge Navy. Thirty-nine sailors were captured and taken to the island
of Koh Tang. A rescue operation was mounted and the battle began on May 15. By
most accounts, the result was a failure with four U.S. helicopters shot down or
disabled and 41 Marines killed. Ironically, the number killed outnumbered the
number of sailors captured by the Khmer Rouge. Shortly thereafter, all 39 sailors
were released.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
Section 565 states “The
No similar provision.
Secretary of the military
department concerned
shall, upon application of
an individual who is an
eligible veteran [as
defined], award that
individual the Vietnam
Service Medal,
notwithstanding any
otherwise application
requirements for the award
of that medal. Any such
award shall be made in
lieu of any Armed Forces
Expeditionary Medal
awarded the individual for
the individual’s
participation in the
Mayaguez rescue
operation.”
Discussion: This language would authorize the Vietnam Service Medal for
participants in the Mayaguez rescue. It is not clear what other benefits, if any, would
accrue from recognizing these individuals in this manner.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): David F. Burrelli, x7-8033.
CRS-21
Protective Orders
Background: Chapter 80 of Title 10 United States code is concerned with
“Miscellaneous Investigation Requirements and Other Duties.” It includes
provisions concerning complaints of sexual harassment, civilian orders of protection
and domestic violence data.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
The House bill contains
No similar provision.
language concerning
“Protection Orders”
affecting Chapter 80.
Section 552 holds that a
protective order issued by
a military commander
remains standing until the
incident has been resolved
by investigation, courts
martial or other command
determined adjudication,
or a new order is issued.
Section 553 states that if a
military protective order is
issued against a military
member and the individual
involved does not reside
on a military installation,
the commander must
notify appropriate civilian
authorities of the issuance
of the order, the duration
of the order, and the
individuals involved.
Discussion: The intent here is to maintain a protective order until it has been
officially resolved and to ensure that civilian authorities are aware of such orders
when the individual(s) involved do not reside on a military installation.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): David F. Burrelli, x7-8033.
CRS-22
*Implementation of Information Database on Sexual
Assault Incidents in the Armed Forces
Background: Over the years reports of sexual assault involving military personnel
have brought about a number of reforms, including changes in the Uniformed Code
of Military Justice, training, and creation of the Defense Incident Based Reporting
System which tracks criminal acts, especially sex crimes, and reports these data to
the Justice Department.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
Section 554 of the House
No similar provision.
bill contains language
requiring the Secretary of
Defense to implement a
centralized, case-level
database of information
regarding sexual assaults.
This database builds on
earlier congressionally
mandated reporting
requirements.
Discussion: This language would provide more centralized, more detailed and
arguably better reporting of sexual assault incidents in the Armed Forces.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): David F. Burrelli at x7-8033.
CRS-23
Paternity Leave for Members of the Armed Forces
Background: At present, when a member of the armed forces becomes the father of
a child and wishes to take time off for paternity purposes, he uses his regular leave.
Such leave accumulates at the rate of 2 ½ days per month of active service.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
No similar provision.
Section 583 of the Senate
bill modifies Chapter 40
(“Leave”) section 701
(“Entitlement and
accumulation”) of Title 10
to afford a member of the
armed forces who is the
husband of a woman who
gives birth to a child up to
21 days of leave to be used
in connection with the
birth of the child.
Discussion: This language would provide a new type of leave for paternity purposes,
which would be in addition to the servicemember’s regular leave.
Reference(s): None .
CRS Point of Contact (POC): David F. Burrelli, x7-8033
CRS-24
Presentation of Burial Flag to the Surviving Spouse
and Children of Members of the Armed Forces who
Die in Service
Background: Under 10 USC 1482(a), when a member of the armed forces dies in
service, a burial flag is presented to the person designated to direct disposition of the
remains and to the parents of the servicemember.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
Sec 581 of the House
Section 641 of the Senate
report would amend 10
bill would amend 10 USC
USC 1482 to allow the
1482 to allow the Service
Service Secretary to pay
Secretary to pay the
the expenses necessary to
expenses necessary to
provide a ceremonial
provide a ceremonial
burial flag to a surviving
burial flag to the
spouse (including a
surviving spouse
remarried surviving
(including a remarried
spouse), if the person
surviving spouse), if the
authorized to direct the
person authorized to direct
disposition of remains is
the disposition of remains
other than a spouse.
is other than the spouse,
and to each surviving
child.
Discussion: Under the House and Senate language, a surviving spouse may be
presented a burial flag if someone else is authorized to direct the disposition of
remains. The Senate language allows for a burial flag to be presented to each
surviving child (including foster child, adopted child, etc.) as well.
Reference(s): CRS Report RL32769, Military Death Benefits: Status and Proposals,
David F. Burrelli and Jennifer Corwell.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): David F. Burrelli, x7-8033.
CRS-25
Secretary of Defense Review of the Deferment from
Deployment Policy following the Birth of a Child
Background: Current DOD policy requires a minimum of four months following
the birth of a child before a military mother can be assigned to a dependent-restricted
or unaccompanied tour. The Secretary of the military department has the authority
to extend that time. The Army and the Air Force provide a minimum of 4 months,
while the Marine Corps defers for 6 months and the Navy for up to 1 year.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
No similar provision.
The committee report (p.
341) directs the Secretary
of Defense to review the
policies concerning such
deployments. The review
shall take into account
readiness, recruitment and
retention of female service
members, and consider
differing deployment and
manpower needs, family
care plans, psychological
readiness of the member
for deployment, and
personal hardship (such as
a newborn with special
medical needs). The
Secretary is directed to
contact outside experts.
The committee directs the
Secretary to report to
HASC and SASC by May
1, 2009
Discussion: The Secretary of Defense is directed to describe changes to DOD or
service policies as the result of this review.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): David F. Burrelli at x7-8033.
CRS-26
Effect of Termination of Subsequent Marriage on
Payment of Survivor Benefit Plan Annuity to
Surviving Spouse or Former Spouse who
Previously Transferred Annuity to Dependent
Children
Background: The Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) provides annuities to the surviving
spouse, children, former spouse, or spouse/former spouse and children. If a spouse
or former spouse remarries before age 55, SBP annuities cease. Children remain
eligible until age 18 or 22, if a full-time student. An eligible child who marries loses
SBP. If a spouse is eligible to receive benefits under the Veterans Affairs
Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC), the SBP is offset or reduced on a
dollar- for-dollar basis. A surviving spouse of a service member killed in the line of
duty is eligible to receive both SBP and DIC. To avoid the offset, Congress allowed
survivors in this example to designate their children as SBP beneficiaries, allowing
the surviving spouse to receive VA’s DIC.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
Section 642 would amend
No similar provision.
10 USC 1450(b)(3) by
adding this sentence at the
end: “The payment of an
annuity to a surviving
spouse or former spouse
under this paragraph shall
be resumed even though
the surviving spouse or
former spouse previously
transferred the annuity to a
child or children under
section 1448(d)(2)(B) of
this title if, when the
marriage is so terminated,
the child or children, due
to loss of dependent status,
death, or other cause, are
no longer eligible for the
annuity under such
section.’‘
Discussion: Essentially, this language would return eligibility for SBP to a surviving
spouse or former spouse, who allowed the dependent child or children to be
designated as SBP beneficiaries to avoid the SBP/DIC offset, following the
termination of the remarriage and the end of eligibility for the child or children.
Reference(s): CRS Report RL31664, The Military Survivor Benefit Plan: A
Description of Its Provisions, by David F. Burrelli.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): David F. Burrelli, x7-8033.
CRS-27
*Extension to Survivors of Certain Members who
Die on Active Duty of Special Survivor Indemnity
Allowance for Persons Affected by Required
Survivor Benefit Plan Annuity Offset for
Dependency and Indemnity Compensation
Background: An SBP-eligible spouse who is eligible for Dependency and Indemnity
Compensation will have his or her SBP reduced or offset on a dollar-for-dollar basis
by Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (see previous page). For certain
beneficiaries affected by the offset, section 644 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 created a new survivor indemnity allowance
to be paid to survivors of service members who are entitled to retired pay, or would
be entitled to reserve component retired pay but for the fact they were not yet 60
years of age. This monthly allowance, effective October 1, 2008, would be $50, and
would increase annually by $10 through FY2013.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
Section 643 would extend
No similar provision.
the special survivor
indemnity allowance for
offset-effected survivors
of active duty members.
Note: This special
survivor indemnity
allowance is an additional
benefit and does not
represent a repeal of the
SBP/DIC offset.
Discussion: This language provides additional benefits to offset-affected survivors
of active duty service members.
Reference(s): CRS Report RL31664, The Military Survivor Benefit Plan: A
Description of Its Provisions, by David F. Burrelli.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): David F. Burrelli, x7-8033.
CRS-28
Enhanced Enforcement of Prohibition on Sale or
Rental of Sexually Explicit Material on Military
Installations
Background: The National Defense Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (P.L. 104-201,
September 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2489) contained language that prohibited the sale of
sexually explicit material on military installations. An eight-member board (Resale
Activities Board of Review) was established to review materials for resale. Once the
board determined that an item was ‘sexually explicit,’ it was removed and not
available for resale or rental on military installations. The review board reviewed
473 titles in 1998 and determined 319 to be sexually explicit. In May, 2006, the
board reversed its decision with regard to Playgirl and Penthouse. A Christian group
(Alliance Defense Fund) wrote a letter to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates
protesting the sale of these and other items.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
Section 654 would amend
No similar provision.
10 USC 2495b to establish
a new nine-member
“Resale Activities Review
Board” not later than 120
days after the enactment of
this Act. The Board
would be required to meet
within one year after the
date of appointment and
may consider all materials
previously reviewed.
Discussion: This language re-establishes the existing review board and modifies its
composition. Its intent grew out of efforts to ban particular items for rental or resale.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): David F. Burrelli, x7-8033.
CRS-29
Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (JROTC)
Background: JROTC is a federal program sponsored by the Armed Forces in high
schools to instill the values of citizenship, service to the nation, personal
responsibility and a sense of accomplishment. Current law does not establish a
minimum or maximum number of JROTC programs for the Department of Defense
or the Services.4 However, there are approximately 3,300 JROTC units currently
operating in high schools and overseas in the Department of Defense School System.
House (H.R. 5658)
Senate (S. 3001)
Conference
Section 547 supports the
No similar provision.
expansion of JROTC to
4,000 units by 2020. It
also requires DOD to
submit a report to the
defense committees by
March 31, 2009 on how
the services will achieve
this goal.
Discussion: JROTC was created in 1916 and the program has been expanded several
times. While generally viewed as a positive influence on high school youth, some
have criticized the program as a military recruiting tool for the Services or a program
that tends to militarize schools.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): Charles Henning at x7-8866.
4 In 1992, Congress established the maximum number of JROTC units at 3,500. However,
this statutory limit was rescinded by Section 534 of the FY2001 National Defense
Authorization Act.