{
  "id": "R44496",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "R44496",
  "active": true,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 588635,
      "date": "2016-05-10",
      "retrieved": "2019-05-03T15:50:43.647953",
      "title": "Military Officer Personnel Management: Key Concepts and Statutory Provisions",
      "summary": "Congress and the executive branch are currently considering changes to the officer personnel management system. Some of these proposed changes would require changes to the laws, including provision enacted by the Defense Officer Personnel Management Act (DOPMA) and the Goldwater-Nichols Act (GNA). \nContemporary debates over officer personnel management policy often revolve around the fundamental questions of \u201cwhat type of officers do we need to win the next war?\u201d and \u201cwhat skills does the officer corps need to enable the military services to perform their missions?\u201d These questions are implicitly oriented towards future events. Their answers are therefore somewhat speculative. Still, contemporary trends and military history can provide valuable insight. Additionally, a set of broader questions can help focus the analysis:\nWhat will be the key security interests and priorities of the United States in the future?\nWhat conflicts will likely arise in the pursuit of these interests? \nWhat opponents will we face in these conflicts? How will they fight?\nWhat military strategy will the United States employ to secure its interests? How will we fight?\nWhat knowledge, skills, and abilities must the officer corps possess to effectively carry out these roles and missions? How do we attract and retain individuals with the necessary potential for service as officers?\nHow should the officer corps be prepared so it can effectively adapt to unforeseen crises and contingencies?\nGiven limited resources, what are the most critical areas for improvement?\nWhere should the nation accept risk? \nPolicymakers often have divergent answers to these questions and thus come to different conclusions about the most appropriate officer personnel management policies. Examples of diverging views can be found in debates on the criteria for accepting or rejecting people for military service; required training and education over the course of a career; assignments to be emphasized; distribution of officers by grade; retention of experienced and talented individuals; and the criteria for selecting individuals for promotion and for separation. \nIn the exercise of its constitutional authority over the armed forces, Congress has enacted an array of laws governing military officer personnel management and periodically changes these laws as it deems appropriate. This report provides an overview of selected concepts and statutory provisions that shape and define officer appointments, assignments, grade structure, promotions, and separations. It also provides a set of questions that policymakers may wish to consider when discussing proposed changes to current law.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": true,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44496",
          "sha1": "31f46be15ab4af33cf0752b0fc392e9885b70ccd",
          "filename": "files/20160510_R44496_31f46be15ab4af33cf0752b0fc392e9885b70ccd.html",
          "images": {}
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44496",
          "sha1": "8d2af23d6314480a45cdfb7e53dc8d9b6ae5a9e6",
          "filename": "files/20160510_R44496_8d2af23d6314480a45cdfb7e53dc8d9b6ae5a9e6.pdf",
          "images": {}
        }
      ],
      "topics": [
        {
          "source": "IBCList",
          "id": 4872,
          "name": "Military Personnel, Compensation, & Health Care"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Constitutional Questions",
    "National Defense"
  ]
}