FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Congressional research reportJan 16, 2013

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act:

Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

*name redacted*, Coordinator

Analyst in National Security Policy and Information Operations

*name redacted*

Specialist in Military Manpower Policy

*name redacted*

Specialist in Military Manpower Policy

*name redacted*

Analyst in Defense Health Care Policy

January 16, 2013

Congressional Research Service

7-....

www.crs.gov

R42651

CRS Report for Congress

Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress

FY2013 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. Recent military operations in Iraq and ongoing operations in Afghanistan, along

with the operational role of the Reserve Components, further heighten interest in a wide range of

military personnel policies and issues.

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) has selected a number of the military personnel

issues considered in deliberations on the House and Senate versions of the National Defense

Authorization Act for FY2013. This report provides a brief synopsis of sections that pertain to

personnel policy. These include end strengths, pay raises, health care, sexual assault, issues

related to the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, as well as less prominent issues that

nonetheless generate significant public interest.

This report focuses exclusively on the annual defense authorization process. It does not include

language concerning appropriations, veterans’ affairs, tax implications of policy choices, or any

discussion of separately introduced legislation. Some issues were addressed in the FY2012

National Defense Authorization Act and discussed in CRS Report R41874, FY2012 National

Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues, coordinated by (name red

acted). Those issues that were considered previously are designated with a “ *” in the relevant

section titles of this report.

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Contents

Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1

*Active Duty End Strengths ............................................................................................................ 2

*Selected Reserves End Strength..................................................................................................... 4

*Military Pay Raise ......................................................................................................................... 6

*Retirement, Adoption, Care, and Recognition of Military Working Dogs. ................................... 7

Diversity in Military Leadership and Related Reporting Requirements.......................................... 9

Authorized Leave Available for Members of the Armed Forces Upon Birth or Adoption

of a Child .................................................................................................................................... 10

Report on Feasibility of Developing Gender-Neutral Occupational Standards for Military

Occupational Specialties Currently Closed to Women ............................................................... 11

Independent Review and Assessment of Uniform Code of Military Justice and Judicial

Proceeding of Sexual Assault Cases ........................................................................................... 12

Briefing, Plan, and Recommendations Regarding Efforts to Prevent and Respond to

Hazing Incidents Involving Members of the Armed Forces ....................................................... 13

Protection of Rights of Conscience of Members of the Armed Forces and Chaplains of

Such Members ............................................................................................................................ 14

Use of Military Installations as Sites for Marriage Ceremonies and Participation of

Chaplains and Other Military and Civilian Personnel in Their Official Capacity ...................... 15

Transfer of Troops-to-Teachers Program from Department of Education to Department of

Defense and Enhancements of Program ..................................................................................... 16

Award of Purple Heart to Members of the Armed Forces who were Victims of the Attacks

at Recruiting Station in Little Rock, Arkansas, and at Fort Hood, Texas ................................... 18

Retroactive Award of Army Combat Action Badge ....................................................................... 19

*Protection of Child Custody Arrangements for Parents Who Are Members of the Armed

Forces.......................................................................................................................................... 20

*Sexual Assault Provisions ............................................................................................................ 21

Extension of Authority to Provide Two Years of Commissary and Exchange Benefits

After Separation .......................................................................................................................... 26

Repeal of Requirement for Payments of Survivor Benefit Plan Premiums when

Participant Waives Retired Pay to Provide a Survivor Annuity Under Federal

Employees Retirement System and Terminating Payment of the Survivor Benefit Plan

Annuity ....................................................................................................................................... 27

*TRICARE Beneficiary Cost-Sharing........................................................................................... 28

TRICARE for Involuntarily Separated Reservists......................................................................... 29

Autism Treatment .......................................................................................................................... 30

*Unified Medical Command ......................................................................................................... 32

TRICARE Mail Order Pharmacy Pilot Program ........................................................................... 34

TRICARE Pharmacy Copayments ................................................................................................ 35

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

TRICARE Coverage of Over-the-Counter Drugs.......................................................................... 37

TRICARE Coverage of Infertility Services ................................................................................... 38

Report on the Availability of TRICARE Prime ............................................................................. 40

Military Psychological Health ....................................................................................................... 42

Tables

Table 1. Administration Proposed TRICARE Pharmacy Copayment Amounts ............................ 35

Contacts

Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 47

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Introduction

Each year, the House and Senate 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 these bills by the respective legislative bodies, a conference committee is usually

convened to resolve the various differences between the House and Senate versions.

In the course of a typical authorization cycle, congressional staffs receive many requests for

information on provisions contained in the annual NDAA. This report highlights those personnelrelated issues that seem likely to generate high levels of congressional and constituent interest,

and tracks their status in the House and Senate versions of the FY2013 NDAA.

The House version of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, H.R. 4310

(112th Congress), was introduced in the House on March 29, 2012; reported by the House

Committee on Armed Services on May 11, 2012 (H.Rept. 112-479); and passed by the House on

May 18, 2012. The entries under the heading “House” in the tables on the following pages are

based on language in this bill, unless otherwise indicated.

The Senate version, S. 3254 (112th Congress), was introduced in the Senate on June 4, 2012, and

reported by the Senate Committee on Armed Services (S.Rept. 112-173) on the same day. The

relevant provisions of S. 3254 have been included in this report. The Senate did not pass S. 3254

as such. Instead, the Senate incorporated this language into an amendment upon receiving H.S.

4310. A conference report was agreed to in both the House and Senate on December 20 and 21,

2012, respectively, and recorded in the Congressional Record as H. Rept. 112-705. The president

signed the legislation on January 2, 2013, P.L. 112-239.

Where appropriate, related 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.

Some issues were addressed in the FY2012 National Defense Authorization Act and discussed in

CRS Report R41874, FY2012 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel

Policy Issues, coordinated by (name redacted). Those issues that were considered previously are

designated with a “*” in the relevant section titles of this report.

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

*Active Duty End Strengths

Background: The authorized active duty end strengths for FY2001, enacted in the year prior to

the September 11 terrorist attacks, were as follows: Army (480,000), Navy (372,642), Marine

Corps (172,600), and Air Force (357,000). Over the next decade, in response to the demands of

wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Congress increased the authorized personnel strength of the Army

and Marine Corps. Some of these increases were quite substantial, particularly after FY2006. By

FY2012, the authorized end strength for the Army was 562,000, with authority for the Secretary

of Defense to increase that to 592,400 if needed to meet operational missions and

reorganizational objectives (P.L. 111-84, §403), while the authorized end strength for the Marine

Corps was 202,100. With the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq in December 2011 and a

drawdown of U.S. forces in Afghanistan beginning in 2012, the Army and the Marine Corps have

announced plans to reduce their personnel strength to 490,000 and 175,000, respectively, by

FY2017. In contrast to the growth of the ground forces in the FY2001-FY2012 time frame, end

strength for the Air Force and Navy decreased over this period. The authorized end strength for

FY2012 was 332,800 for the Air Force and 325,700 for the Navy.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Senate-passed (H.R. 4310)

P.L. 112-239

Section 401 authorizes a total

FY2013 active duty end strength of

1,402,483 including:

Section 401 authorizes a total

FY2013 active duty end strength of

1,401,697 including:

Section 401 authorizes a total

FY2013 active duty end strength of

1,401,697 including:

552,100 for the Army

322,700 for the Navy

197,300 for the Marine Corps

330,383 for the Air Force

329,597 for the Air Force

329,460 for the Air Force

Section 403 requires that any

proposed reductions in Army or

Marine Corps end strength in the

Administration’s FY2014-FY2017

budget requests include a

certification by the President that the

proposed reductions will not “(1)

undermine the ability of the Armed

Forces to meet the requirements of

the National Security Strategy; (2)

increase security risks for the United

States; or (3) compel members of

the Armed Forces to endure

diminished dwell time and repeated

deployments.” Section 403 also limits

strength reductions in the Army to

no more than 15,000 per fiscal year,

and in the Marine Corps to no more

than 5,000 per year, for each year of

FY2014-FY2017. Finally, section 403

required that the President’s annual

budget requests for FY2014-17 be

sufficient to support the minimum

Army and Marine Corps end

strengths specified in 10 USC 691(b)

without relying on “any emergency,

Congressional Research Service

Section 403 limits end strength

reductions in the Army to no more

than 15,000 members during each

fiscal year from FY2014 through

FY2017 in comparison to the end

strength of the preceeding fiscal year.

The provision similarly limits end

strength reductions for the Marine

Corps to no more than 5,000

members during each fiscal year

from FY2014 through FY2017 in

comparison to the end strength of

the preceeding fiscal year.

Section 528 requires the Service

Secretaries to include a statement in

their annual budget justification

material “concerning the extent to

which the number of members of an

Armed Force under the jurisdiction

of the Secretary who are within the

Integrated Disability Evaluation

System impacts—(1) the readiness of

that Armed Force to meet on-going

mission requirements; and (2) dwell

time for other members of that

Armed Force.” If the statement

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Senate-passed (H.R. 4310)

supplemental, or overseas

contingency operations funding.”

Section 404 excludes members of

the Armed Forces who are in the

Integrated Disability Evaluation

System from the calculation of end

strength for fiscal years 2013-2018.

P.L. 112-239

indicates an adverse impact, the

Service Secretary must also include a

plan to mitigate the adverse impact.

Discussion: With the end of the war in Iraq, and a planned drawdown in Afghanistan over the

next few years, the House bill included reductions for the Army (-9,900) and Marine Corps (4,800) end strengths in comparison to their FY2012 authorized levels. It also reduced the end

strengths for the Air Force (-2,417) and the Navy (-3,000). However, the bill mitigated the impact

of these cuts somewhat by specifying that those individuals who are being evaluated for disability

be excluded in the calculation of end strength (sec. 404). Excluding such ill or injured service

members from the end strength “count” would effectively increase the number of individuals who

can remain on active duty. This is particularly relevant for the ground forces, which still have

thousands of wounded personnel in the disability evaluation system. Looking to future years,

Section 403 of the House bill sought to temper the pace of the drawdown for ground forces by

capping the size of future reductions in Army and Marine Corps end strengths, and by requiring

the President to certify that any reductions will not have certain negative impacts.

The Senate bill included end-strengths that were identical to the House bill, except that it

authorized 786 fewer personnel for the Air Force. The conference report included end-strength

levels identical to the House and Senate provisions for the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps, while

authorizing an Air Force end-strength slightly lower than the House and Senate provisions. The

conference report adopted the House limitations on end-strength reductions in the Army and

Marine Corps for FY2014-17, but did not adopt the certification requirement, budgeting

restrictions, or the disability exclusion. However, section 528 of the conference report requires

the Service Secretaries to provide certain information to the Congress on possible adverse

impacts on readiness and dwell time that are related to the presence of service members in the

Integrated Disability Evaluation System.

Reference(s): Previously discussed in CRS Report R41874, FY2012 National Defense

Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues, coordinated by (name redacted),

and similar reports from earlier years. See also CRS Report RL32965, Recruiting and Retention:

An Overview of FY2010 and FY2011 Results for Active and Reserve Component Enlisted

Personnel, by (name redacted).

CRS Point of Contact: (name redacted), x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

*Selected Reserves End Strength

Background: Although the Reserves have been used extensively in support of operations since

September 11, 2001, the overall authorized end strength of the Selected Reserves has declined by

about 2% over the past 10 years (874,664 in FY2001 versus 857,100 in FY2012). Much of this

can be attributed to the reduction in Navy Reserve strength during this period. There were also

modest shifts in strength for some other components of the Selected Reserve. For comparative

purposes, the authorized end strengths for the Selected Reserves for FY2001 were as follows:

Army National Guard (350,526), Army Reserve (205,300), Navy Reserve (88,900), Marine Corps

Reserve (39,558), Air National Guard (108,022), Air Force Reserve (74,358), and Coast Guard

Reserve (8,000).1 Between FY2001 and FY2012, the largest shifts in authorized end strength

have occurred in the Army National Guard (+7,674 or +2%), Coast Guard Reserve (+2,000 or

+25%), Air Force Reserve (-2,958 or -4%), and Navy Reserve (-22,700 or -26%). A smaller

change occurred in the Air National Guard (-1,322 or -1.2%), while the authorized end strength of

the Army Reserve (-300 or -0.15%) and the Marine Corps Reserve (+42 or +0.11%) have been

largely unchanged during this period.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Senate-passed

P.L. 112-239

Section 411 authorizes the following

end strengths for the Selected

Reserves:

Section 411 authorizes the following

end strengths for the Selected

Reserves:

Section 411 authorizes the following

end strengths for the Selected

Reserves:

Army National Guard: 358,200

Army Reserve: 205,000

Navy Reserve: 62,500

Marine Corps Reserve: 39,600

Air National Guard: 106,005

Air National Guard: 106,435

Air National Guard: 105,700

Air Force Reserve: 72,428

Air Force Reserve: 70,880

Coast Guard Reserve: 9,000

Discussion: In both the House and Senate bills, and the conference report, the authorized

Selected Reserve end strengths for FY2013 are the same as those for FY2012 for the Army

National Guard, the Army Reserve, and the Marine Corps Reserve. The Navy Reserve’s

authorized end strength was 66,200 in FY2012, but the Administration requested a decrease to

62,500 (-3,700) which the House and Senate approved, as did the conferees. The Coast Guard

Reserve’s authorized end strength was 10,000 in FY2012, but the Administration requested a

decrease to 9,000 (-1,000), which the House and Senate also approved, as did the conferees. The

Air National Guard’s end strength in FY2012 was 106,700 and the Air Force Reserve’s was

71,400. The Administration proposed reducing these to 101,600 (-5,100) and 70,500 (-900),

respectively. The proposed reductions were largely based on Air Force plans to divest, transfer, or

retire certain aircraft from Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve units. These proposals were

quite controversial, and the House and Senate rejected them, authorizing only a small reduction in

end strength for the Air National Guard (-695 for the House, -265 for the Senate) and increasing

the end strength for the Air Force Reserve (+1,028) in comparison to FY12. The committee report

P.L. 106-398, §411.

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

accompanying the House bill noted that “the committee’s increase to the President’s FY13 budget

request reflects the corresponding manpower requirements for the committee’s limitation on

retiring, divesting or transferring any aircraft assigned to the Air Force.”2 The committee report

accompanying the Senate bill stated, “The committee supports the Department of Defense fiscal

year 2013 request for reserve component end strengths, with the exception of additional Air

National Guard and Air Force Reserve end strength to support force structure changes adopted by

the committee” and later, “The committee believes that there is little justification for the relative

imbalance in the cuts applied to the Air National Guard.”3 The conference report adopted

strength levels below the House and Senate provisions, and below the FY12 levels (-1000 Air

National Guard, -520 Air Force Reserve) but still substantially higher than the Administration

request (+4,100 Air National Guard, +380 Air Force Reserve).4

References: None.

CRS Point of Contact: (name redacted), x7-.....

H.Rept. 112-479, p. 148. §1076 of the House bill would bar the Army and Air Force from using any FY2013 funds

“to divest, retire, or transfer, or prepare to divest, retire, or transfer, any—(1) C–23 aircraft of the Army assigned to the

Army as of May 31, 2012; or (2) aircraft of the Air Force assigned to the Air Force as of May 31, 2012.”

S. Rept. 112-173, p. 100 and 245. § 1701-1707 of the Senate bill would establish a national commission to study the

structure of the Air Force, including its reserve components. With certain exceptions, § 1708 would bar the Air Force

from using any FY2013 funds “to divest, retire, or transfer, or prepare to divest, retire, or transfer, any aircraft of the

Air Force assigned to units of the Air National Guard or Air Force Reserve as of May 31, 2012.”

See sections 141, 361-367, and 1059 of the Conference Report for the legislative provisions related to the restrictions

on the transfer and divestment or airframes and a national commission on the structure of the Air Force

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

*Military Pay Raise

Background: Increasing concern with the overall cost of military personnel, combined with

ongoing military operations in Afghanistan, have continued to focus interest on the military pay

raise. Section 1009 of Title 37 provides a permanent formula for an automatic annual military pay

raise that indexes the raise to the annual increase in the Employment Cost Index (ECI). The

President’s FY2013 Budget request for a 1.7% military pay raise is consistent with this formula.

However, Congress has at times approved pay raises different from the ECI. For example, in

fiscal years 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, and 2010, the pay raise was equal to the ECI plus

0.5%.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Section 601 specifies that the rate of

monthly basic pay for members of

the uniformed services is increased

by 1.7% effective January 1, 2013.

Senate-passed (H.R. 4310)

No similar provision.

P.L. 112-239

Section 601 specifies that the rate of

monthly basic pay for members of

the uniformed services is increased

by 1.7% effective January 1, 2013.

Discussion: Section 601 of the House bill provides an increase identical to that requested by the

Administration, which is also the same as the pay raise specified by 37 U.S.C. 1009. The Senate

bill contains no statutory language; in the absence of statutory language, the automatic pay

increase would be 1.7%. The conference committee adopted the House language, which specifies

a 1.7% pay increase effective January 1, 2013. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates

that the total cost of a 1.7% military pay raise would be $1.3 billion in 2013.5

Reference(s): Previously discussed in CRS Report R41874, FY2012 National Defense

Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues, coordinated by (name redacted)

and earlier versions of this report. See also CRS Report RL33446, Military Pay and Benefits: Key

Questions and Answers, by (name redacted).

CRS Point of Contact: (name redacted), x7-.....

Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate, H.R. 4310: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (As

reported by the House Armed Services Committee on May 11, 2012), May 15, 2012, p. 11, available at

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/H.R. 4310.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

*Retirement, Adoption, Care, and Recognition of

Military Working Dogs.

Background: In 2000, Congress passed P.L. 106-446, “To require the immediate termination of

the Department of Defense practice of euthanizing military working dogs at the end of their

useful working life and to facilitate the adoption of retired military working dogs by law

enforcement agencies, former handlers of these dogs, and other persons capable of caring for

these dogs.” Congress included language that limited liability claims arising from the transfer of

these dogs. With P.L. 112-81, Section 351, Congress expanded the list of those eligible to adopt

these dogs to include the handler (if wounded), or a parent, spouse, child, or sibling of the handler

in cases where the handler is deceased. Military working dogs are classified as “equipment.”

Eligible individuals seeking to adopt one of these dogs must therefore pay for the transportation

costs of transferring the dog.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Senate-passed

Sec. 361 prohibits the military from

classifying these dogs as equipment,

requires retired dogs that will not

adopted at their current location to

be transferred to the 341st Training

Squadron, allows the acceptance of

Frequent Traveler Miles to facilitate

adoption, directs veterinary care be

provided, and directs that dogs that

are killed in action or perform an

“exceptionally meritorious or

courageous act” be recognized.

Sec. 1049 allows the Secretary of

Defense to transfer retired working

dogs to the 341st Training Squadron

or to another location for adoption.

Permissive authority is also provided

for veterinary care as well as

recognition for those dogs killed,

wounded or missing in action.

P.L. 112-239

Sec. 371 incorporates the Senate

language.

Discussion: Those supporting these adoption efforts pushed to have the dogs reclassified as a

military “member,” which would require the military to transport the dogs back to the United

States. Currently, they are classified as “equipment,” which means that anyone interested in

adopting one of these dogs must pay the transportation costs. Military working dogs are trained to

be fearless and aggressive. These traits may not be desired outside of the military or law

enforcement. There is public concern for the welfare of these dogs. There are also concerns for

any family member of deceased or seriously wounded members of the Armed Forces who care

for these dogs. A 2011 article noted that a small percentage of deployed dogs suffer “canine

PTSD,” which can lead to “troubling behavior.”6

In 2011, DOD reported that in that calendar year, 444 dogs left the inventory. It was reported that

the disposition of dogs that left the inventory included: approximately one-quarter died on duty, 7

were killed in action, 1 is missing in action, approximately 10% were euthanized due to medical

conditions, 16 were euthanized because they were unsuitable for law enforcement and too

aggressive for adoption, etc. In addition to the 444 that left the inventory, 44 remained pending

disposition.

“Some [dogs] undergo sharp changes in temperament, becoming unusually aggressive with their handlers or clingy

and timid.” Dao, James, After Duty, Dogs Suffer Like Soldiers, New York Times, December 2, 2011.

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Reference(s): CRS Report R41874, FY2012 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected

Military Personnel Policy Issues, coordinated by (name redacted).

CRS Point of Contact: (name redacted), x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Diversity in Military Leadership and Related

Reporting Requirements

Background: In a number of respects, the military has been a leader in advancing minorities and

women. Minorities and women have served in the military for decades. In the past, limits were

placed on the advancement opportunities for women and minorities. These began to change in

1948 when President Truman issued Executive Order 9981 calling for “equal treatment and

opportunity” in the military.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Senate-passed

P.L. 112-239

Section 507 adds a new section to

Title 10, U.S.C., directing the

Secretaries of Defense and

Homeland Security (in the case of

the Coast Guard) to develop and

implement a plan to measure the

efforts to “achieve dynamic,

sustainable level of members of the

armed force ... that, ... will reflect the

diverse population of the United

States.” Any measures used in this

plan may not undermine merit-based

processes nor serve to be identified

with a quota based system.

Section 521 contains similar language

with regard to reporting

requirements to accurately measure

diversity as defined for active and

reserve component personnel

(including the Coast Guard).

Section 519 adds a new section to

Title 10 as in the House language

with additional modifications

included from the Senate language as

well as reporting requirements.

Discussion: The United States has made advances in the areas of racial and sexual

discrimination; however, issues remain. Diversity advocates view this language as an opportunity

to measure progress in this area. Critics are concerned that an emphasis on measuring “diversity”

will lead to de facto quotas or “goals,” despite a prohibition to the contrary.

Reference(s): CRS Report R42075, Women in Combat: Issues for Congress, by (name redacted).

CRS Point of Contact: (name redacted), x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Authorized Leave Available for Members of the

Armed Forces Upon Birth or Adoption of a Child

Background: According to Title 10, U.S.C., Section 701, the military provides up to 42 days of

maternity leave and up to 10 days of paternity leave. A member who adopts is eligible for 21 days

of leave to be used in connection with the adoption. In the case of a dual military couple adopting,

only one member of the couple can use the adoption leave. This leave may be used in addition to

other leave provisions.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Section 524 affords 42 days of leave

to a member who gives birth or

adopts a child and is the primary

caregiver. A member whose wife

gives birth is eligible for 10 days of

paternity leave. In the case of a dual

service couple adopting, the primary

care giver would be eligible for 42

days of leave and the spouse receives

10 days of leave, which may be used

concurrently.

Senate-passed

No similar language.

P.L. 112-239

No similar language.

Discussion: This language leaves maternity leave at 42 days and increases adoption leave for the

primary caregiver to 42 days. For dual military couples who adopt, it provides 10 days of leave to

the spouse who is not the primary caregiver.

References: None.

CRS Point of Contact: (name redacted), x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Report on Feasibility of Developing Gender-Neutral

Occupational Standards for Military Occupational

Specialties Currently Closed to Women

Background: In February 2012, DOD announced it was opening additional occupations to

women. These positions had previously been closed to women due to the combat exclusion rule.

Currently, the services are evaluating the role women can play in combatant occupations.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Section 526 requires the Secretary of

Defense to submit a report on the

feasibility of “incorporating genderneutral occupational standards for

military occupational specialties ...

closed to female members of the

Armed Forces.”

Senate-passed

No similar language.

P.L. 112-239

Section 526 incorporates the House

language.

Discussion: In announcing the changes in February 2012, Defense officials stated that women

would be held to the same standards as men. What was unclear was whether or not the standards

would change to accommodate women. As noted in the CRS report referenced below, “The use of

the term ‘gender-neutral physical standards’ raises questions on how it is defined. A plain reading

of the term suggests that men and women would be required to meet the same physical standards

(e.g., carry the same load, the same distance at the same speed) in order to be similarly assigned.

However, in the past, the Services have used this and similar terms to suggest that men and

women must exert the same amount of energy (e.g., calories used) in a particular task, regardless

of the work that is actually accomplished by either. Hypothetically speaking, if a female soldier

carries 70 pounds of equipment five miles and exerts the same effort as a male carrying 100

pounds of equipment the same distance, the differing standards could be viewed as ‘genderneutral’ because both exerted the same amount of effort, with differing loads. Such differing

loads, in certain scenarios, may or may not matter, particularly in terms of ammunition, medical

equipment, communications equipment, and medical supplies, commonly carried by foot

soldiers.”

Reference(s): CRS Report R42075, Women in Combat: Issues for Congress, by (name redacted).

CRS Point of Contact: (name redacted), x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Independent Review and Assessment of Uniform

Code of Military Justice and Judicial Proceeding of

Sexual Assault Cases

Background: The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 made a number of

changes to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) particularly with regard to sex crimes

such as rape.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Senate-passed

P.L. 112-239

Section 522 directs the Secretary of

Defense to establish a panel to

conduct an in-depth review and

assessment of judicial proceedings

under the UCMJ involving sexual

assault and related offenses to

develop potential improvements to

such proceedings.

Section 532 adds additional reporting

requirements on the UCMJ under 10

USC 946 including information on

reversed decisions, issues associated

with recently implemented legislation

and measures to ensure the ability of

Judge Advocates to competently

participate in such proceedings,

among others.

Section 532 incorporates a modified

and shortened version of the Senate

language.

Discussion: The issue of sexual assault has been a focus of much congressional attention over the

past few years. With this language, Congress seeks to improve judicial proceedings under the

UCMJ, including the issue of sexual assault and related offenses.

Reference(s): CRS Report R41874, FY2012 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected

Military Personnel Policy Issues, coordinated by (name redacted).

CRS Point of Contact: (name redacted), x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Briefing, Plan, and Recommendations Regarding

Efforts to Prevent and Respond to Hazing Incidents

Involving Members of the Armed Forces

Background: Recent reports of hazing in the military, including cases of hazing-related suicides,

notably that of a nephew of Rep. Judy Chu, prompted the House to hold hearings on the matter on

March 22, 2012.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Senate-passed

P.L. 112-239

Section 535 requires the Secretaries

of Defense and Homeland Security

to provide HASC & SASC a briefing

and plan to prevent hazing and to

respond to/resolve alleged hazing

incidents. The plan requires the

creation of a hazing database. The

recommendations shall include

potential changes to the UCMJ.

Annual reporting requirements are

included as well as a review by the

Comptroller General.

Section 543 requires each Secretary

of a military department to issue a

report on hazing to include the

policies for preventing and

responding to incidents of hazing,

methods to track and report hazing,

an assessment of the scope of the

problem, training on recognizing and

preventing hazing, and, additional

actions.

Section 534 incorporates language

from both the House and Senate

bills.

Discussion: This section reflects the concern the House has over the issue of hazing and its desire

to better track incidents of hazing. In so doing, it is expected the services will take a closer look at

the issue.

References: None.

CRS Point of Contact: (name redacted), x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Protection of Rights of Conscience of Members of

the Armed Forces and Chaplains of Such Members

Background: P.L. 111-321 put in place the mechanism for repealing 10 U.S.C. 654, which served

as the basis for the 1993 policy banning open homosexuality in the military, known as Don’t Ask,

Don’t Tell or DADT. Concerns have been raised over the potential conflicts of DADT and

religious expressions against homosexuality. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution

provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting

the free exercise thereof….” Various federal laws and regulations also seek to protect religious

practices and freedoms, and the Department of Defense has issued regulations concerning

religious exercise in the military. The extent to which service members and chaplains can freely

exercise their religion while complying with policies related to the repeal of DADT is a topic of

ongoing debate.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Section 536 requires the Armed

Forces to accommodate the moral

principles and religious beliefs of

service members concerning

appropriate and inappropriate

expression of human sexuality and

that such beliefs may not be used as

a basis for any adverse personnel

actions.

Senate-passed

No similar language.

P.L. 112-239

Section 533 incorporates the House

language.

Discussion: The language in Section 533 would give service members and chaplains broad

permission to publicly support or condemn certain sexual practices on the grounds of conscience

or religious tenets. Arguably, this is to protect the free speech and religious rights of service

members in the wake of the repeal of DADT. The language also ensures that no disciplinary

actions may be taken against a chaplain who refuses to comply with a direction or duty that is

contrary to either the chaplain’s personal or religious beliefs. The section raises some First

Amendment issues, particularly whether the repeal of DADT limits what chaplains are able to say

within their ministries, and whether, for example, they can be compelled to provide counseling

and other services that run counter to denominational doctrine. Although anti-discrimination

policies are already in place, some groups argue that with the repeal of DADT, service members

are allowed no protections for expressing their religious beliefs regarding same-sex behaviors and

this new provision is needed. Others argue that the provision could create a hostile climate for

openly homosexual members of the military, and possibly incite harassment or violence.

Likewise, concerns exist over the extent that what “equal rights” can be afforded or denied samesex couples who are wed in States that recognize such marriages.

Reference(s): CRS Report R41171, Military Personnel and Freedom of Religion: Selected Legal

Issues, by (name redacted) and Cynt hia Brougher and CRS Report R40782, “Don’t Ask, Don’t

Tell”: Military Policy and the Law on Same-Sex Behavior, by (name redacted).

CRS Point of Contact: Catherine Theohary, x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Use of Military Installations as Sites for Marriage

Ceremonies and Participation of Chaplains and

Other Military and Civilian Personnel in Their

Official Capacity

Background: In 1996, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was enacted (P.L. 104-199). Under

this law, the federal government does not recognize same-sex marriages, states may refuse to

recognize such marriages, and marriage is defined for federal benefit purposes as the union of one

man and one woman. A few states have recognized same-sex marriages. According to reports,

Navy Chief of Chaplains Rear Admiral M.L. Tidd issued a policy memorandum dated April 13,

2011, allowing same-sex marriages to be performed in Navy Chapels on bases in states that

permit same-sex marriages. Following criticism by certain Members of Congress, on May 10,

2011, the policy was “suspended.” Section 544 of the FY2012 National Defense Authorization

Act, P.L. 112-81, allowed military chaplains to opt out of performing any marriage ceremonies as

a matter of conscience or moral principle.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Section 537 precludes marriage and

marriage-like ceremonies from being

conducted on military installations or

other Department of Defense

Property, unless the ceremony

involves the union of one man and

one woman.

Senate-passed

No similar provision.

P.L. 112-239

No similar provision.

Discussion: In February of 2011, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder stated in a letter to

Representative Boehner that a key provision of DOMA violates equal protection rights under the

Constitution. The matter of DOMA is currently being contested in the courts and will remain in

effect until Congress repeals it or a court rules against it. The language in Section 537 reflects the

definition of marriage under DOMA and would prevent any same-sex marriage from being

conducted under the auspices of the Department of Defense, regardless of conscience or moral

principle. This language re-affirms the House’s support of the law.

Reference(s): CRS Report RL31994, Same-Sex Marriages: Legal Issues, by (name redacted).

CRS Point of Contact: Catherine Theohary, x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Transfer of Troops-to-Teachers Program from

Department of Education to Department of Defense

and Enhancements of Program

Background: The “Troops-to-Teachers” program assists certain retired, separated, and

involuntarily discharged service members to obtain certification or licensing as teachers and

facilitates their employment by local education agencies or public charter schools, particularly

those serving low-income populations and those with shortages of highly qualified teachers.7 It is

a Department of Education program, but the statute requires the Secretary of Education to “enter

into a memorandum of agreement with the Secretary of Defense under which the Secretary of

Defense, acting through the Defense Activity for Non-Traditional Education Support of the

Department of Defense, will perform the actual administration of the Program….”8 Troops-toTeachers was at one time a Department of Defense program, originating as a post-Cold War

drawdown transition initiative.9 Responsibility for the program was transferred to the Secretary of

Education in 2000, in accordance with Sections 1701-1709 of the National Defense Authorization

Act for FY2000.10 Section 557 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

required a joint report from the Secretaries of Education and Defense on the status of the

program. The report endorsed returning the program to the Department of Defense.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Senate-passed (H.R. 4310)

P.L. 112-239

Section 541 transfers “the

responsibility and authority for

operation and administration” of the

program from the Secretary of

Education to the Secretary of

Defense. It also restructures the

program in a number of ways,

including servicemember eligibility

requirements, participant selection

priority, and school eligibility.

Section 563 would require the

Secretary of Defense and the

Secretary of Education to enter into

a memorandum of agreement,

pursuant to which the Secretary of

Education would disseminate

information about the program to

eligible schools and advise the

Secretary of Defense on certain

topics related to the program. It

also makes changes in

servicemember and school eligibility

requirements.

Section 541 largely adopts the House

provision, including the transfer of

responsibility for the program to the

Secretary of Defense, but also

incorporates the Senate requirement

for a memorandum of agreement

between the Secretaries of Defense

and Education.

Discussion: In addition to transferring responsibility for the program to the Secretary of Defense,

the House provision would make other changes to the program, including (1) reducing the

number of years of active or reserve service an individual must complete to be eligible to

participate; (2) giving priority for selection into the program to an additional group (those who

agree to teach a foreign language); (3) giving greater weight to military experience to qualify as a

“career or technical” teacher; (4) modifying the student poverty and disability metrics used to

determine the schools in which newly qualified teachers may serve as part of their participation

agreement; and (5) adding counseling and referral services for those not eligible for the program.

20 U.S.C. 6671-77.

20 U.S.C. 6672(c).

P.L. 102-484, §§4441 et seq.

P.L. 106-65.

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

The Senate provision does not transfer responsibility to the Secretary of Defense, but requires the

Secretary of Education to advise the Secretary of Defense on matters such as teacher eligibility

requirements, teacher preparation programs, and academic subject areas and geographic regions

with critical shortages. The Senate provision would also reduce the number of years of active or

reserve service an individual must complete to be eligible to participate and modify the student

poverty and disability metrics used to determine the schools in which newly qualified teachers

may serve as part of their participation agreement. The provision in the conference report

transfers responsibility for the program to the Secretary of Defense, adopts the House

modifications to the program (some of which were the same as Senate modifications), and

incorporates the Senate requirement for a memorandum of agreement between the Secretaries of

Defense and Education.

References: None.

CRS Point of Contact: (name redacted), x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Award of Purple Heart to Members of the Armed

Forces who were Victims of the Attacks at

Recruiting Station in Little Rock, Arkansas, and at

Fort Hood, Texas

Background: The Purple Heart is awarded to any member of the Armed Forces who has been (1)

wounded or killed in action against an enemy, while serving with friendly forces against a

belligerent party, as the result of a hostile foreign force, while serving as a member of a

peacekeeping force while outside the United States; or (2) killed or wounded by friendly fire

under certain circumstances. On June 9, 2009, a civilian who was angry over the killing of

Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan opened fire on two U.S. Army soldiers near a recruiting station

in Little Rock, AK. On November 5, 2009, an Army major opened fire at Ft. Hood, TX, killing 13

and wounding 29. Both the civilian and Army Major were charged with murder and other crimes.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Senate-passed

Section 552 requires the Secretary of

Defense to award a Purple Heart to

the military victims of these two

attacks. It prohibits the award being

presented to a member whose

wound was the result of willful

misconduct (e.g., the alleged shooter

at Ft. Hood, who was wounded by

police).

Section 525 requires the Secretary of

Defense to review the eligibility of

victims of domestic terrorism for the

Purple Heart and the Defense Medal

of Freedom.

P.L. 112-239

No similar provision.

Discussion: Authorities considered these acts to be crimes and not acts perpetrated by an enemy

or hostile force. Because these acts involved Muslim perpetrators angered over U.S. actions in

Iraq and Afghanistan, some believe they should be viewed as acts of war. Still others are

concerned that awarding the Purple Heart in these situations could have anti-Muslim overtones.

Although the decision to award medals and other military decorations traditionally rests with the

executive branch, enacting this language would have represented a rare legislative initiative in

this area.

Reference(s): None.

CRS Point of Contact: (name redacted), x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Retroactive Award of Army Combat Action Badge

Background: The Combat Action Ribbon (CAB) is awarded to any soldier who has actively

engaged or been engaged by the enemy in a combat zone or imminent danger area. The CAB was

established through Department of the Army Letter 600-05-1, dated June 3, 2005, and was

authorized for soldiers who met the requirements after September 18, 2001. As with the coveted

Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB) and Combat Medical Badge (CMB), the CAB recognizes

soldiers who were actively engaged in combat with the enemy, but its award is not restricted by

military occupational specialty.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Section 555 states that “The

Secretary of the Army may award

the Army Combat Action Badge …

to a person who, while a member of

the Army, participated in combat

during which the person personally

engaged, or was personally engaged

by, the enemy at any time during the

period beginning on December 7,

1941, and ending on September 18,

2001.” In order to minimize costs,

the Secretary may make

arrangements for the newly eligible

individuals to procure the CAB

directly from the suppliers.

Senate-passed (H.R. 4310)

No similar provision.

P.L. 112-239

No similar provision.

Discussion: Section 555 of the House bill would have given the Secretary of the Army

permission to retroactively award the CAB to certain individuals. If enacted and utilized by the

Secretary of the Army, Section 555 would have aligned the dates of eligibility with those for the

CIB and CMB, and effectively permit eligible Army veterans from World War II to the present to

be awarded the CAB. Locating records that would justify awarding the CAB might, in some

cases, be difficult. Additionally, the language of Section 555 says that the CAB would be awarded

to “a person who, while a member of the Army, participated in combat during which the person

personally engaged, or was personally engaged by, the enemy.” Therefore, survivors of deceased

service members seemingly could not acquire the CAB on behalf of the service member. The

Senate bill did not have a similar provision, and the conference report did not include the House

provision.

References: None.

CRS Point of Contact: (name redacted), x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

*Protection of Child Custody Arrangements for

Parents Who Are Members of the Armed Forces

Background: Military members who are single parents are subjected to the same assignment and

deployment requirements as are other service members. Deployments to areas that do not allow

dependents (such as aboard ships or in hostile fire zones) require the service member to have

contingency plans to provide for their dependents. (See U.S. Department of Defense, Instruction

No. 1342.19, “Family Care Plans,” May 7, 2010.) Concerns have been raised that the possibility

or actuality of military deployments may encourage courts to deny custodial rights of a service

member in favor of a former spouse or others. Also, concerns have been raised that custody

changes may occur while the military member is deployed and unable to attend court

proceedings.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Section 564 amends the Service

Members Civil Relief Act to require

courts to render temporary custody

orders based on deployments and to

reinstate the service member as

custodian unless the court

determines that reinstatement is not

in the child’s best interest. This

language prohibits courts from using

a deployment, or the possibility of a

deployment, in determining the

child’s best interest. In cases where a

state provides a higher standard of

protection of the rights of the

service member, then the state

standards apply.

Senate-passed

No similar provision.

P.L. 112-239

No similar provision.

Discussion: This House language would allow courts to assign temporary custody of a child for

the purposes of deployment without allowing the (possibility of) deployment to be prejudicially

considered against the service member in a custody hearing.

Reference(s): None.

CRS Point of Contact: (name redacted), x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

*Sexual Assault Provisions

Background: In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (P.L. 112-81),

Congress included a number of provisions to address the issues involving sexual assault in the

military. In Title V (subtitle H) of H.R. 4310, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal

Year 2013, the House is considering numerous additional provisions.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Senate-passed

P.L. 112-239

Section 571 requires the Secretaries

of the military departments to

establish special victim teams for the

investigation, prosecution, and victim

support in connection with child

abuse, serious domestic violence, or

sexual offenses under the Uniform

Code of Military Justice.

Section 542 directs the Secretary of

Defense to modify the sexual assault

prevention and response program.

These changes include an enhanced

investigation, prosecution, and

defense of special victim offenses, a

requirement for records retention,

training requirements for

commanders on sexual assault

prevention, response and policies,

training for new members, unit

climate assessments, providing

administrative discharges in cases

where a punitive discharge is not

directed, and the dissemination of

information on reporting and

responding to sexual assaults.

Section 573 requires the Secretary of

Defense to prescribe regulations

under which the service secretaries

would be required to establish

special victim support and defense

capabilities.

The Senate version contains similar

provisions in sec. 542(a)(3) and (4).

Section 574 calls for enhanced

commanders’ training for sexual

assault prevention and response.

P.L. 112-81 created training and

education programs for the sexual

assault and response program.

Section 572 of this bill amends that

to provide training modules for

commanders to foster a command

climate that does not tolerate sexual

assault. It also encourages others to

intervene to prevent sexual assaults,

encourages victims to report

assaults, and provides for an

understanding of the resources

available and use of the investigative

organizations and disciplinary

options. Also, new members will be

briefed on service policies with

respect to sexual assault and

resources available to victims.

Section 574 requires the Secretaries

of the military departments to

include additional information in the

case synopsis portion of the report

on sexual assaults required by

Section 1631 of P.L. 111-383.

Congressional Research Service

Section 546 calls for the

enhancement of annual reports on

sexual assault via the collection of

specific data to include but not

limited to: disciplinary actions,

rationale for the final disposition,

unit and location, whether the

accused had a previous substantiated

accusation of sexual misconduct,

whether the accused was admitted

to the military under a moral waiver,

whether alcohol was involved in the

In Section 575, the Senate recedes

with a clarifying amendment that

would require additional information

to be included beginning with a

report required to be submitted by

March 1, 2014.

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Senate-passed

P.L. 112-239

incident, whether the accused was

administratively separated or allowed

to resign in lieu of a court-martial as

well as analyses of trends, change of

station requests and specific factors

that may have contributed to sexual

assault over the past year.

Section 575 requires the Secretaries

of the military departments to

include information on sexual

harassment in the annual

Department of Defense report on

sexual assault.

Section 545 calls for a

comprehensive policy to prevent and

respond incidents of sexual

harassment including the collection,

retention and disposition of reports

on sexual harassment, and, annual

reports on sexual harassment.

No similar provision.

Section 576 requires the Secretary of

Defense to submit reports every six

months to the Armed Services

Committees on the progress to

make fully functional the Defense

Incident-Based Reporting System

(DIBRS) and the Defense Sexual

Assault Incident Database. This

reporting requirement terminates

when the Secretary certifies that

DIBRS is fully functional and

operating throughout the services

and each military department is using

DIBRS or providing data for inclusion

in the Defense Sexual Assault

Incident Database.

Section 577 requires DOD to brief

the Armed Services Committees in

2012 and 2013 on DOD efforts to

implement changes in law concerning

sexual assault in P.L. 112-81, the

initiatives announced by the

Secretary of Defense in April 2012,

and any other initiatives, policies, or

programs by the military addressing

sexual assault.

No similar provision.

Section 544 provides for the

retention of records in cases of

restricted reports.

No similar provision.

Section 578 requires the Armed

Forces Workplace and Gender

Relations Survey to be conducted in

2014 and 2015 and every two years

thereafter and include information in

the reports on sexual assault, in

Congressional Research Service

Section 579, Senate recedes with an

amendment for the Secretary of

Defense to develop a comprehensive

policy to prevent and respond to

sexual harassment in the armed

forces and to develop a plan to

collect information and data

regarding substantiated incidents of

sexual harassment involving

members of the armed forces.

No similar provision.

In section 577, the House recedes

with an amendment that would

require retention of these reports at

the request of a service member

who files a restricted report of

sexual assault.

Section 570 amends title 10 U.S.C.

481 to require the Armed Forces

Workplace and Gender Relations

Surveys to solicit information on

assaults involving service members

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

addition to harassment and

discrimination.

Section 581 requires a review of all

unrestricted reports of sexual assault

made by members of the Armed

Forces since October 1, 2000, to

determine the number of members

who were subsequently separated

and the circumstances of and

grounds for such separation.

Section 582 places limitations on

release from active duty or recall to

active duty of reserve component

members who are victims of sexual

assault while on active duty.

Section 583 requires that if a sexual

harassment complaint against a

member of the Armed Forces is

substantiated, a notation to that

effect shall be placed in the service

record of the member. The

definition of substantiated is to be

developed for the annual report on

sexual assaults involving members of

the Armed Forces prepared under

Section 1631 of the Ike Skelton

National Defense Authorization Act

for Fiscal Year 2011 (P.L. 111-383).

Section 579 requires unit

commanders to conduct an

organizational climate assessment “to

obtain information about the positive

and negative factors that may have an

impact on unit effectiveness and

readiness by measuring matters

relating to human relations climate

such as prevention and response to

sexual assault and equal opportunity.

Section 580 places additional

requirements on organizational

climate assessments. Section 585

requires a general education

campaign to notify members of the

Armed Forces regarding the

Congressional Research Service

Senate-passed

P.L. 112-239

and alters the survey timetables.

No similar provision.

Section 578, the Senate recedes with

an amendment to develop a policy

requiring a general or flag officer to

review the circumstances of, and

grounds for, the proposed

involuntary separation of any service

member who (1) made an

unrestricted report of sexual assault:

(2) is recommended for involuntary

separation from the armed forces

within 1 year of making the report;

and (3) request a review on the

grounds that the member believes

the recommendation for involuntary

separation was initiated in retaliation

for making the report. The

concurrence of the general or flag

officer conducting the review is

required in order to separate a

member who requests the review.

Section 541provides the Secretary

concerned with the authority to,

upon request, retain an alleged victim

of sexual assault on duty.

Section 542 that each military

department initiate and retain a

record on the disposition of

allegations of sexual assault.

Section 542 would require additional

elements to be included in the

Department of Defense

comprehensive sexual assault and

prevention policy and would provide

that the revised comprehensive

policy for the Department of

Defense sexual assault prevention

and response program include a

requirement to assign responsibility

to receive and investigate complaints

for the violation or failure to provide

the rights of a crime victim

established by title 18 USC 3771, as

applicable to members of the armed

forces and civilian personnel of the

The House recedes with a technical

amendment in Section 571, that

provides the Secretary with the

authority to retain an alleged victim

of sexual assault on duty.

No similar provision.

Similar to sections 534, 573, 579,

580, and 585 of the House Bill and

section 542 of the Senate

amendment, the House recedes with

an amendment in section 572 that

would require the Secretary of

Defense to modify the revised

comprehensive policy for the

Department of Defense sexual

assault prevention and response

program to include the following

new requirements: (1) that the

service secretaries initiate and retain

for a specified period a record on

the disposition of allegations of

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

authorities available under chapter

79 of Title 10, U.S.C., for the

correction of military records when

a member experiences any

retaliatory personnel action for

making a report of sexual assault or

sexual harassment. Section 573

requires the Secretary of Defense to

prominently post information on

sexual assault prevention and

response at specific locations

throughout the Department of

Defense.

Section 586 would amend chapter 7

of Title 10, U.S.C. to add a section

establishing a Sexual Assault and

Harassment Oversight and Advisory

Council. The Council is to be

comprised of experts and

professionals in the fields of sexual

assault and harassment, including

judicial proceedings or treatment,

and would include the Director of

the Sexual Assault Prevention and

Response Office, Judge Advocates

from the services, and individuals

with relevant experience outside of

the DOD system. The members are

to be appointed for two-year terms

and compensated at a rate equal to

the rate of basic pay prescribed for

the Senior Executive Service. The

section also requires an Annual

Report describing the activities and

recommendations of the council to

be submitted to the Secretary of

Defense and congressional defense

committees.

Senate-passed

Department of Defense

No similar provision.

P.L. 112-239

sexual assault; (2) that commanders

of certain commands and units

conduct within 120 days of assuming

command and at least annually

thereafter a climate assessment for

the purposes of preventing and

responding to sexual assaults; (3) to

post and widely disseminate

information about resources

available to report and respond to

sexual assaults; and (4) for a general

education campaign to notify service

members of the authorities available

for the correction of military records

when a member experiences any

retaliatory personnel action for

making a report of sexual assault or

sexual harassment

No similar provision.

Discussion: Many believe that more can be done to address sexual assault problems in the

military. In some cases, some suggest that legislative and policy changes have already gone too

far. A recent news article noted that “Contrary to public and political impression, an extensive

McClatchey review of military sexual assault finds plenty of Pentagon and congressional action.

Some works. Some falls short. Some goes too far, in a legal arena that’s notorious for its

complications.”11 These new provisions detail congressional attention to the issues of sexual

Doyle, Michael, and Marisa Taylor, “Bureaucracy has blossomed in military’s war on rape,” McClatchy Newspapers,

November 28, 2011, available at http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/11/28/v-print/131524/bureaucracy-has(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

assault, requiring more focus on prevention, reporting, judicial proceedings, and addressing the

needs of victims.

Reference(s): CRS Report R41874, FY2012 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected

Military Personnel Policy Issues, coordinated by (name redacted).

CRS Point of Contact: Catherine Theohary, x7-...., or (name redacted), x7-.....

(...continued)

blossomed-in-militarys.html.

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Extension of Authority to Provide Two Years of

Commissary and Exchange Benefits After

Separation

Background: Section 1146 of U.S.C. 10 allows members who are involuntarily separated during

the period beginning October 1, 2007, and ending on December 31, 2012, to continue to use

commissary and exchange stores during the two-year period beginning on the date of the

involuntary separation.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Section 631 extends this two-year

period for those involuntarily

separated in the period beginning

October 1, 2007 and ending on

December 31, 2018.

Senate-passed

No similar provision.

P.L. 112-239

Section 631 incorporates the House

language.

Discussion: This change would extend the use of commissary and exchange privileges to those

involuntarily separated beyond its original termination date in 2012 until 2018. This benefit

arguably eases the transition out of the military for those who otherwise would have remained in

the service.

Reference(s): None.

CRS Point of Contact: (name redacted), x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Repeal of Requirement for Payments of Survivor

Benefit Plan Premiums when Participant Waives

Retired Pay to Provide a Survivor Annuity Under

Federal Employees Retirement System and

Terminating Payment of the Survivor Benefit Plan

Annuity

Background: The military Survivor Benefit Plan, or SBP, provides annuities to designated

survivors (usually the spouses) of military personnel and retirees. Personnel are automatically

enrolled and can only reduce or eliminate coverage with the signed consent of the spouse. Under

the Civil Service Retirement System, or CSRS, a military retiree who becomes a federal

employee can waive their military retired pay and have their military time credited to their civil

service retirement. A military retiree who does so can halt participation in the military SBP only if

the retiree opts to provide survivor benefits under CSRS. CSRS is a closed retirement system

however, and retirees who now enter the civil service are covered by the Federal Employees

Retirement System (FERS). Prior to enactment of section 641, the law did not provide a SBP opt

out option for retirees under FERS.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Senate-passed

P.L. 112-239

Section 651 allows military retirees

who waive their military retired pay

and who participate in the Federal

Employees Retirement System

(FERS) to opt out of the military SBP

and provide survivor coverage under

FERS.

Section 641 allows for the opt out

from SBP for those who participate

in FERS.

Section 641incorporates the opt out

provision.

Discussion: This change would create parity between CSRS and FERS retirees.

Reference(s): CRS Report RL31664, The Military Survivor Benefit Plan: A Description of Its

Provisions, by (name redacted).

CRS Point of Contact: (name redacted), x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

*TRICARE Beneficiary Cost-Sharing

Background: TRICARE is a health care program serving uniformed service members, retirees,

their dependents, and survivors. H.R. 4310, as passed by the House, does not include the

Administration’s 2013 budget proposals to raise premiums for military retirees using a three-tier

model based on retirement pay brackets, to index the TRICARE catastrophic cap to the National

Health Expenditure, and to introduce enrollment fees for TRICARE Standard/Extra and

TRICARE for Life. The Administration’s proposal would have increased the annual enrollment

for working age retirees in the TRICARE Prime family option between $31 and $128 per month,

with those in the upper-income bracket seeing the larger increase.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Senate-passed

P.L. 112-239

Section 701 expresses the sense of

Congress that “career members of

the uniformed services and their

families endure unique and

extraordinary demands and make

extraordinary sacrifices over the

course of a military career and those

decades of sacrifice constitute a

significant pre-paid premium for

health care during a career member’s

retirement that is over and above

what the member pays with money.”

Section 706 expresses the sense of

Congress that members of the

uniformed services and their families

endure unique and extraordinary

demands and make extraordinary

sacrifices over the course of 20 to 30

years of service in protecting

freedom for all Americans, as do

those who have been medically

retired due to the hardships of

military service; and access to

quality health care services is an

earned benefit during retirement in

acknowledgment of their

contributions of service and sacrifice.

Section 707 expresses the sense of

Congress that members of the

uniformed services and their families

endure unique and extraordinary

demands and make extraordinary

sacrifices over the course of 20 to 30

years of service in protecting

freedom for all Americans, as do

those who have been medically

retired due to the hardships of

military service; and access to

quality health care services is an

earned benefit during retirement in

acknowledgment of their

contributions of service and sacrifice.

Discussion: The enacted bill did not adopt the Administration’s proposals. However, section 712

(discussed in the TRICARE Pharmacy Copayment section of this report) did increase certain

pharmacy copayments. Unlike in some previous years, the enacted bill does not block any

existing statutory authorities to increase TRICARE copayments and enrollment such as the

annual TRICARE Prime enrollment fee for military retirees at 10 U.S.C. 1097(e).

Reference(s): Previously discussed in CRS Report R41874, FY2012 National Defense

Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues, coordinated by (name redacted);

CRS Report R40711, FY2010 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel

Policy Issues, coordinated by (name redacted); and CRS Report RL34590,

FY2009 National

Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues, coordinated by (name red

acted).

CRS Point of Contact: Don Jansen, x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

TRICARE for Involuntarily Separated Reservists

Background: National Guard and Reserve members (collectively known as the “Selected

Reserve”) are eligible to enroll in the TRICARE Reserve Select (TRS) program and TRICARE

Dental Program (TDP). TRS is a health insurance plan administered by the Department of

Defense that is similar to the TRICARE Standard and Extra programs available to active duty

family members and military retirees and their dependents. TDP offers dental insurance to active

duty family members and Selected Reserve members and their families. Both TRS and TDP

require the member to pay a monthly premium. Under current law, coverage under both programs

terminates when a member is separated from the Selected Reserve. However, continued health

coverage can be purchased through the Continued Health Care Benefit Program (CHCBP).

CHCBP coverage may be purchased in 90-day increments for up to 36 months. Premiums are

$1,138 per quarter for individual coverage and $2,555 per quarter for family coverage through

September 30, 2013. CHCBP does not provide dental benefits.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Senate-passed

Section 702 provides 180 days of

TRICARE Standard and TRICARE

Dental coverage to involuntarily

separated members of the Selected

Reserve during the period beginning

on the earlier of the date of the

enactment of the National Defense

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year

2013 or October 1, 2012, and ending

December 31, 2018,

Section 701 provides similar

coverage, however, unlike in the

House bill, the Senate provision does

not expire on December 31, 2018.

P.L. 112-239

Section 701 extends for 180 days

TRICARE Reserve Select and

TRICARE dental coverage to

members of the Selected Reserve

who are involuntarily separated

without cause through December

31, 2018.

Discussion: Section 701 of the enacted bill would amend Title 10 of the United States Code to

authorize the Secretary of Defense to provide TRICARE Reserve Select and TRICARE dental

insurance coverage for 180 days from the date of separation to members of the Selected Reserve

who are involuntarily separated from the Selected Reserve under other than adverse conditions.

By extending the period of TRICARE Reserve Select eligibility by 180 days, the legislation

would in effect extend the period of time an involuntarily separated member of the Selected

Reserve would be able to continue to purchase health care to 42 months.

References: None.

CRS Point of Contact: Don Jansen, x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Autism Treatment

Background: “Applied behavioral analysis” is a method used to modify the behavior of

individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Treatment is generally begun by age 3½ and consists

of up to 40 hours per week of intensive therapy for two years or longer. It aims to teach social,

motor, and verbal behaviors as well as reasoning skills using careful behavioral observation and

positive reinforcement and prompting to teach each step of a behavior. Skills are broken down

into small tasks, which are taught in a very structured manner, accompanied by praise and

reinforcement. Undesirable behaviors are reduced by not reacting to them or introducing more

socially acceptable forms of behavior.

An action memo dated October 24, 2010, and approved by the Assistant Secretary of Defense

(Health Affairs) found that sufficient reliable evidence does not exist to find that applied

behavioral analysis is either medically or psychologically necessary or appropriate medical care

for autism spectrum disorders. It further found that sufficient reliable evidence does not exist to

find it is proven as medically or psychologically necessary or as appropriate medical care, in

accordance with the applicable laws and regulations. The memo found that the majority of the

reliable evidence indicates that applied behavioral analysis is characterized as an educational

intervention and does not meet the TRICARE definition of “medical care.”

Although applied behavior analysis has been determined to be unproven as a medical treatment

under current DOD policy—and therefore, not reimbursable under TRICARE—it is covered

under a TRICARE Extended Health Care Option (ECHO) program demonstration as a nonmedical benefit. ECHO is a supplemental program to the basic TRICARE program. ECHO

provides financial assistance for services and supplies to active duty family members who qualify

based on specific mental or physical disabilities. DOD published a proposed rule in the Federal

program. There is a $36,000 per year limitation on total reimbursements per enrollee.

In April 2011, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality issued Therapies for Children

With Autism Spectrum Disorders. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 26.12 That report found

that “evidence supports early intensive behavioral and developmental intervention” such as

applied behavioral analysis, “but the lack of consistent data limits our understanding of whether

these interventions are linked to specific clinically meaningful changes in functioning.”13 On

April 19, 2012, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued letters to Federal Employees

Health Benefits Program insurance carriers that issued new guidance on coverage of applied

behavioral analysis, stating:

The OPM Benefit Review Panel recently evaluated the status of Applied Behavior Analysis

(ABA) for children with autism. Previously, ABA was considered to be an educational

intervention and not covered under the FEHB Program. The Panel concluded that there is

Warren Z, Veenstra-VanderWeele J, Stone W, Bruzek JL, Nahmias AS, Foss-Feig JH, Jerome RN, Krishnaswami S,

Sathe NA, Glasser AM, Surawicz T, McPheeters ML. Therapies for Children With Autism Spectrum Disorders.

Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 26. (Prepared by the Vanderbilt Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract

No. 290-2007-10065-I.) AHRQ Publication No. 11-EHC029-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and

Quality. April 2011. Available at http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/reports/final.cfm.

Ibid., p. vi.

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

now sufficient evidence to categorize ABA as medical therapy. Accordingly, plans may

propose benefit packages which include ABA.

This would allow insurance plans that provided health coverage to federal civilian plans to

propose benefits packages for the 2013 contract year that include applied behavioral analysis

benefits but would not mandate such benefits. Some observers have suggested that DOD follow

OPM’s example and deem applied behavioral analysis to be a proven, medical treatment.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Section 704 mandates TRICARE

coverage of applied behavioral

analysis.

Senate-passed

Section 705 is similar.

P.L. 112-239

Section 704 requires the Secretary of

Defense to conduct a one-year pilot

program to provide for the

treatment of autism spectrum

disorders, including applied

behavioral analysis, under the

TRICARE program.

Discussion: Section 704 of the enacted bill would require the Secretary of Defense to conduct a

one-year pilot program to provide for the treatment of autism spectrum disorders, including

applied behavior analysis, for all TRICARE beneficiaries covered under the basic program. The

Joint Explanatory Statement of the Committee of the Conference states:

The conferees are aware that the Department of Defense (DOD) has been ordered by the

District Court for the District of Columbia to provide coverage under the basic TRICARE

benefit for applied behavior analysis. The conferees understand that the plaintiffs and DOD

have each submitted motions to reconsider the court order. The conferees have provided

DOD this 1-year authority in order to allow DOD to assess such coverage independent from

litigation proceedings.

References: None.

CRS Point of Contact: Don Jansen, x7-.....

See page 13 at http://www.opm.gov/carrier/carrier_letters/2012/2012-12.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

*Unified Medical Command

Background: The current organizational structure of the Military Health System (MHS) has long

been considered by many observers to present an opportunity to gain efficiencies and save costs

by consolidating administrative, management, and clinical functions. Recent Government

Accountability Office testimony summarized these views, stating that

The responsibilities and authorities for the MHS are distributed among several organizations

within DoD with no central command authority or single entity accountable for minimizing

costs and achieving efficiencies. Under the MHS’s current command structure, the Office of

the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force

each has its own headquarters and associated support functions.

DoD has taken limited actions to date to consolidate certain common administrative,

management, and clinical functions within its MHS. To reduce duplication in its command

structure and eliminate redundant processes that add to growing defense health care costs,

DoD could take action to further assess alternatives for restructuring the governance

structure of the military health system. In 2006, if DoD and the services had chosen to

implement one of the reorganization alternatives studied by a DoD working group, a May

2006 report by the Center for Naval Analyses showed that DoD could have achieved

significant savings. Our adjustment of those savings from 2005 into 2010 dollars indicates

those savings could range from $281 million to $460 million annually, depending on the

alternative chosen and the numbers of military, civilian, and contractor positions

eliminated.15

Section 716 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (P.L. 112-81)

required the Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense committees a report on

military health system reorganization options and prevents the Secretary of Defense from

implementing any restructuring of the defense health system until 120 days after the Comptroller

General submits to Congress a report reviewing the options considered.

DOD reported to Congress on March 2, 2012, on its analysis of options for reorganizing the

military health system organization.16 DOD considered 12 options:

•

Option A: Current MHS Governance

•

Option B: Defense Health Agency, Geographical Model

•

Option C: Defense Health Agency with Service Military Treatment Facilities

(MTFs)

•

Option D: Unified Medical Command, Geographical Model

•

Option E: Unified Medical Command with Service Components

•

Option F: Unified Medical Command

‐ HR 1540 Section 711 Model

U.S. Government Accountability Office, Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government Programs,

Save Tax Dollars, and Enhance Revenue, GAO-11-635T, May 25, 2011, pp. 3-4, available at http://www.gao.gov/

new.items/d11635t.pdf.

http://tricare.mil/tma/congressionalinformation/downloads/MHSGovernanceRTC-Signed.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

•

Option G: Single Service, Geographic Model

•

Option H: Single Service with Components

•

Option I: Split Unified Medical Command and Military-Led Defense Health

Agency

•

Geographic Hybrid

•

Option J: Unified Medical Command with components and DHA Hybrid

•

Option K: Single Service Hybrid with a Unified Medical Command

•

Option L: Defense Health Agency Hybrid with MTFs placed under the Agency

The analysis recommended option C reporting that all of the Unified Medical Command options

would increase costs. GAO has not yet reported on these options.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Section 711 requires the Secretary of

Defense to establish a Unified

Medical Command.

Senate-passed

No similar provision.

P.L. 112-239

Section 731 requires the Secretary of

Defense to develop a detailed plan to

implement reforms to the

governance of the military health

system as described in a March 2012

memorandum summarizing the

recommendation in the report to

Congress of the same month.

Discussion: Section 731 would require the Secretary of Defense to develop a detailed plan to

implement reforms to the governance of the military health system described in the memorandum

of the Deputy Secretary of Defense dated March 2012.17 Initial component of the plan are

required to be submitted to the congressional defense committees by March 31, 2013, and the

remainder by June 30, 2013. Obligation of specified amounts of authorized funds is prohibited

until the Secretary submits the contents of the plan to the congressional defense committees. The

Comptroller General is also required to submit a review of the contents of the plan to the

congressional defense committees.

Reference(s): Previously discussed in CRS Report R41874, FY2012 National Defense

Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues, coordinated by (name redacted).

CRS Point of Contact: Don Jansen, x7-.....

Letter to Senator Daniel K. Inouye from Ashton Carter, Deputy Secretary of Defense, dated March 2, 2102.

Available at: http://tricare.mil/tma/congressionalinformation/downloads/MHSGovernanceRTC-Signed.pdf

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

TRICARE Mail Order Pharmacy Pilot Program

Background: A TRICARE mail order pharmacy option has been available to DOD beneficiaries

since the late 1990s; it accounted for 31.8% of total purchased care prescriptions filled as of

December 2011.18 Prescription medications delivered by mail order save money for DOD since

DOD negotiates prices that are considerably lower than the prices paid for prescriptions filled

through retail pharmacies. Use of the mail order option offers TRICARE beneficiaries a 90-day

supply for the same copayment as a 30-day supply at a retail pharmacy. As an additional incentive

for beneficiaries to use mail order, TRICARE eliminated copayments for generic drug

prescriptions filled by mail order effective October 1, 2011.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Section 717 requires the Secretary of

Defense to conduct a pilot program

to refill prescription maintenance

medications for TRICARE for Life

beneficiaries through the TRICARE

mail-order pharmacy program.

Senate-passed

No similar provision.

P.L. 112-239

Section 716 requires the Secretary of

Defense to conduct a 5-year mail

order pilot program for TRICARE

for Life beneficiaries, but would also

authorized these beneficiaries to fill

prescriptions at military treatment

facilities.

Discussion: Section 716 of the enacted bill would require the Secretary to conduct a five-year

mail-order pilot program for TRICARE for Life beneficiaries, but would also authorize

beneficiaries to fill both initial and refill prescriptions at military treatment facilities, and

authorize the Secretary to promulgate regulations to address instances where a beneficiary

attempts to refill prescriptions at a retail pharmacy rather than through the mail-order program or

at a military treatment facility. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that medications

purchased through the mail-order pharmacy program cost DOD about 19% less than if purchased

through retail pharmacies.19

References: None.

CRS Point of Contact: Don Jansen, x7-.....

Please see page 22 at Evaluation of the TRICARE Program, Fiscal Year 2012, Department of Defense.

http://tricare.mil/tma/congressionalinformation/downloads/TRICARE%20Evaluation%20Report%20-%20FY12.pdf

Congressional Budget Office, Cost Estimate for H.R. 4310, May 15, 2012, page 20.

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/hr4310.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

TRICARE Pharmacy Copayments

Background: The President’s Budget for 2013 proposes a variety of measures to increase costsharing with TRICARE beneficiaries. Among these is a proposal to alter pharmacy copayments to

incentivize beneficiaries to use generic medications and to fill prescriptions at military treatment

facilities (MTFs) or through mail order. Pharmacy copayments would also be indexed to the

National Health Expenditure so that they would reflect changes in the health spending.

Prescriptions would continue to be filled at no cost to beneficiaries at MTFs. Active duty service

members also would continue to pay no fees for prescriptions. The Administration’s proposed copayments for prescriptions filled through the TRlCARE retail and mail order pharmacy are

presented in Table 1:

Table 1. Administration Proposed TRICARE Pharmacy Copayment Amounts

FY2012

FY2013

FY2014

FY2015

FY2016

FY2017

Generic

Brand

$12

$26

$28

$30

$32

$34

NonFormularya

$25

N/A

Generic

Brand

$26

$28

$30

$32

$34

NonFormulary

$25

$51

$54

$58

$62

$66

Retail

(30 day fill)

Mail Order

(90 day fill)

Access to non-formulary pharmaceuticals would be limited in retail pharmacies

Source: See page 5-4 at http://comptroller.defense.gov/defbudget/fy2013/FY2013_Budget_Request_Overview_Book.pdf

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Senate-passed

P.L. 112-239

Section 718 determines the amount of

copayments under the TRICARE

pharmacy benefits program and limits

future increases to the rate of increase

in retired pay.

The Senate-passed version does

not contain a related provision.

The Senate version thus would

allow DOD to implement its

proposal to index future

TRICARE pharmacy copayments

to the National Health

Expenditure.

Section 712 sets the retail pharmacy

copayments for a 30-day supply at $5 for

generics, $17 for formulary brand name

drugs, and $44 for non-formulary drugs.

Mail order copayments for a 90-day supply

are set at $0 for generics, $13 for

formulary, and $43 for nonformulary.

Beginning October 1, 2013, annual

increases in pharmacy copayments would

be capped at the percentage increase in

retired pay for the year, until October 1,

2022, after which the Secretary of Defense

may increase copayments “as considered

appropriate.”

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Discussion: Section 712 would set new cost-sharing rates under the TRICARE pharmacy benefits

program for fiscal year 2013 in statute, and would in fiscal years 2014 through 2022 limit any

annual increases in pharmacy copayments to increases in retiree cost of living adjustments. The

provision would also enable the Department of Defense to delay increasing copayments until the

aggregate increase amounts to at least 1 dollar. Beyond fiscal year 2022, the Secretary of Defense

would be authorized to increase copayments as the Secretary considers appropriate.

References: None.

CRS Point of Contact: Don Jansen, x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

TRICARE Coverage of Over-the-Counter Drugs

Background: The Department of Defense has been providing selected over-the-counter drugs

with no beneficiary copayment under a demonstration project authority for several years.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

No similar provision

Senate-passed

P.L. 112-239

Section 702 authorizes the Secretary

of Defense to implement procedures

to place selected over-the-counter

drugs on the uniform formulary and

to make such drugs available to

eligible covered beneficiaries.

Section 702 authorizes the Secretary

of Defense to place selected overthe-counter drugs on the formulary

and to make them available to

beneficiaries without a copayment.

Discussion: Section 702 of the enacted bill would amend section 1074g of title 10, United States

Code, to authorize the Department of Defense to place selected over-the counter drugs on the

uniform formulary and make such drugs available to eligible beneficiaries. An over-the-counter

drug would only be included on the uniform formulary if the Pharmacy and Therapeutics

Committee finds that the drug is cost-effective and clinically effective. The provision would also

authorize the Secretary of Defense to establish a copayment amount for these drugs or not, as

appropriate. The Joint Explanatory Statement of the Committee of the Conference states:

The conferees note that the Department of Defense has been providing selected over-thecounter drugs with no beneficiary copayment under demonstration authority for several

years, and that the pilot program has resulted in significant savings to the Department. The

conferees encourage the Department to continue to implement the authority provided by this

section in a similar manner.

The Congressional Budget Office issued a cost estimate that states:

Section 702 would allow DoD to provide certain over-the-counter (OTC) medications to

beneficiaries at little or no charge. Similar authority was provided to DoD as part of a

temporary demonstration program under section 705 of the National Defense Authorization

Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364). That authority will expire in November

2012. Certain medications have both OTC and more-expensive prescription versions that

achieve similar therapeutic results. Under the demonstration program, DoD has subsidized

OTC drugs for beneficiaries in place of prescribed versions of those drugs that are more

costly. Based on information from DoD, CBO estimates this authority has reduced spending

for drugs by about $8 million per year. About half of those savings accrue to the Defense

Health Program, a discretionary account that includes pharmacy spending for active-duty

members, working age military retirees, and their dependents. Therefore, CBO estimates that

extending this authority indefinitely would initially decrease spending subject to

appropriations by $4 million per year and the savings would increase in later years because

of inflation. The other half of the savings would accrue to the Medicare-Eligible Retiree

Health Care Fund, a mandatory account... 20

References: None.

CRS Point of Contact: Don Jansen, x7-.....

Congressional Budget Office, Cost Estimate S. 3254 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, June

29, 2012, pages 10-11.

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

TRICARE Coverage of Infertility Services

Background: Artificial insemination, In-Vitro Fertilization (IVF), Gamete Intrafallopian Transfer

(GIFT) and all other noncoital reproductive procedures, including all services and supplies related

to, or provided in conjunction with, those technologies are excluded from coverage under the

TRICARE Policy Manual.21 Nevertheless, under the Supplemental Health Care Program22 for

active duty service members under special circumstances for some severely wounded warriors

such services have been provided. In addition, some Military Treatment Facilities may offer

assisted reproductive technology services as part of their graduate medical education training

programs, however, beneficiaries are required to reimburse DOD for the full cost of the

procedure.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

No similar provision

Senate-passed

Section 712 would provide fertility

preservation treatments for service

members who have been diagnosed

with a condition for which the

recommended course of treatment

could cause infertility.

P.L. 112-239

No provision enacted.

Discussion: The Joint Explanatory Statement of the Conference Committee states:

The conferees note that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs issued policy

guidance to the military departments and TRICARE Management Activity on April 3, 2012,

to make assisted reproductive services available for seriously ill or severely injured active

duty service members, and authorized the use of supplemental health care program funds for

this purpose. The conferees have been informed that the Department of Defense is also

reviewing fertility preservation for service members prior to deployment in support of

contingency operations, and conducting an ongoing review of fertility options for service

members who have sustained genitourinary injuries.

The conferees direct the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the Committees on

Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on implementation of the

“Policy for Assisted Reproductive Services for the Benefit of Seriously or Severely

Ill/Injured (Category II and III) Active Duty Service Members” no later than June 1, 2013.

The report shall include data on experience since issuance of the policy, including an

analysis of the types of injuries or illness of those who sought the procedures, the procedures

that were sought, what procedures or services were provided by both military treatment

facilities and civilian providers, and an assessment of issues concerning quality of life and

costs. In addition, the report shall provide an assessment of the feasibility and advisability of

providing fertility preservation treatment for service members both in relation to deployment

in support of contingency operations and as a result of illness or injury. The conferees expect

the report to include recommendations for changes in policy or legislation that may be

TRICARE Policy Manual, Chapter 4, Section 17.1.

http://manuals.tricare.osd.mil/DisplayManualFile.aspx?Manual=TP02&Change=172&Type=AsOf&Filename=C4S17_

1.PDF&highlight=xml%3dhttp%3a%2f%2fmanuals.tricare.osd.mil%2fPdfHighlighter.aspx%3fDocId%3d51966%26In

dex%3dD%253a%255cIndex%255cTP02%26HitCount%3d2%26hits%3d69%2b74%2b

See 32 CFR 199.16.

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

necessary to provide such services to military service members who, as a consequence of

illness or injury, require assistance for procreative ability.

The Congressional Budget Office issued a cost estimate of the Senate-passed bill that states:

Section 712 would require TRICARE to provide fertility assistance services to active-duty

members who, as a result of medical treatment for illnesses, have difficulty conceiving

children. CBO’s cost estimate for this section comprises two components: the cost of

providing the services and the cost to TRICARE for providing the additional child delivery

services from the resulting pregnancies.

To estimate the number of active-duty members who might make use of this new benefit,

CBO examined the incidence of assisted reproductive technology (ART) services as reported

by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). Based on those data, and making adjustments for

the age of the active-duty population, and for the fact that their infertility must be caused by

a medical treatment to qualify, CBO estimates that about 1,200 active duty members would

utilize this benefit each year. CBO estimates that the cost of those services would be about

$15,000 per user, or about $20 million per year; that estimate is based on publicly available

pricing information from several fertility clinics, and includes the cost of in vitro

fertilization, one of the more popular and accepted procedures.

In addition to the cost of the fertility assistance procedures, CBO also estimates that

TRICARE would incur additional costs for the increased number of resulting pregnancies.

Based on information from the CDC, CBO estimates that about a third of ART services

result in a pregnancy. However, because some military members are currently seeking ART

services on their own and TRICARE is already paying for those pregnancies under current

law, CBO estimates the number of additional pregnancies created by this provision would be

less, about 200 per year. Furthermore, CBO estimates the cost of each pregnancy would be

about $50,000, based on information from private sector studies and DoD cost data, for a

cost of about $10 million per year. This amount is significantly higher than the average cost

of a pregnancy in the United States because it takes into account the higher percentage of

multiple births and preterm deliveries associated with fertility assistance procedures.

In total, CBO estimates that implementing section 712 would increase costs to TRICARE by

$145 million over the 2013-2017 period. Costs would be lower in the first year because of

the time needed to establish rules and regulation.23

References: None.

CRS Point of Contact: Don Jansen, x7-.....

Congressional Budget Office, Cost Estimate S. 3254 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, June

29, 2012, pages 9-10.

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Report on the Availability of TRICARE Prime

Background: TRICARE is administered on a regional basis (North, South, and West) by regional

managed care support contractors. Award of a new round of contracts (known as T-3 contracts)

completed this year after lengthy delays resulting from contract award protests. Part of the

responsibility of the contractors is the process of establishing service areas in which military

retirees are eligible to enroll in TRICARE Prime, the DOD health-maintenance organization style

health insurance option.

The new contracts require TRICARE Prime service areas around Military Treatment Facilities

(MTF) and Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) sites. As a result some beneficiaries will no

longer be offered Prime. These beneficiaries still retain TRICARE coverage under the Standard or

Extra plan. TRICARE Standard is a fee-for-service style health insurance option available

everywhere. TRICARE Extra is a discount given to TRICARE Standard beneficiaries when they

use a TRICARE network provider

A ”Prime Service Area” (PSA) is an area in which the regional managed care support contractor

has established a network of civilian medical providers sufficient to meet TRICARE Prime access

standards. There are currently about 220 MTF and 60 BRAC PSAs as well as 35 “Additional

PSAs” which were established by the previous regional managed care support contracts to serve

concentrations of TRICARE beneficiaries. The TRICARE managed care support contractors are

only required by DOD to establish the MTF and BRAC PSAs. DOD initially planned to

eliminate the Additional PSAs upon commencement of T3 health care delivery on April 1, 2012.

However, on January 10, 2013, DOD announced that reductions in Prime Service Areas would be

delayed until October 1, 2013.24

DOD officials state that elimination of the Additional PSAs would save the government

approximately $55M per year because government yearly per capita costs for Prime have become

much greater than for Standard (approximately $600 greater) due to years of high medical cost

inflation and a Prime annual enrollment fee fixed at the modest 1995 level until 2012. The

government has borne all of this cost increase. In contrast, TRICARE Standard beneficiaries

have paid a portion of the increased costs in the form of their copayments.

DOD officials state that TRICARE retired beneficiaries who lose access to TRICARE Prime due

to the elimination of a PSA will immediately have access to TRICARE Standard or, if they live

within 100 miles of another PSA, they may enroll in that Prime area. Beneficiaries who live

within 100 miles of a PSA will need to submit a new enrollment form, waive the primary and

specialty care travel time standards, and select a new primary care manager in order to remain

enrolled in TRICARE Prime. Nevertheless, many congressional offices have heard from

constituents regarding the impending changes which may explain the adoption of this provision.

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

No similar provision

Senate-passed

Section 704 mandates a report

setting forth DOD policy on the

future availability of TRICARE Prime.

P.L. 112-239

Section 732 requires the Secretary of

Defense to submit a report to the

armed services committees setting

forth policy on the future availability

Amaani Lyle, “Officials Announce TRICARE Prime Service Area Changes” American Forces Press Service, January

10, 2013, http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?ID=118969 .

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Senate-passed

P.L. 112-239

of TRICARE Prime in all regions to

include a plan to provide assistance

to affected individuals in identifying

health care providers in their

transition from Prime to Standard.

Discussion: Section 732 of the enacted bill requires the Secretary of Defense to submit within 90

days to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a

report setting forth the policy of the Department of Defense on the future availability of

TRICARE Prime for eligible beneficiaries in all TRICARE regions throughout the United States.

The report is to include a description of a plan to provide assistance to affected individuals to

identify health care providers in their transition from TRICARE Prime to TRICARE Standard.

References: None.

CRS Point of Contact: Don Jansen, x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Military Psychological Health

Background: For several years, certain military mental health issues have been of concern to

members of Congress as well as others. The executive branch as well as demonstrated concern

about these issues with, for example, the August 31, 2012 issuance of an Executive order entitled

“Improving Access to Mental Health Services for Veterans, Service Members, and Military

Families.”25

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Senate-passed

P.L. 112-239

Sections 705, 725, 728, and 729

address military mental health issues.

Sections 702, 722, 731, 732, 733,

735, 751, 752, 754, 756, 757, 759,

760, and 761 address military mental

health issues.

Section 703 changes the period for

mandatory post-deployment personto-person mental health assessments

from between 180 days and one year

after deployment to between 180

days after deployment to 18 months

after deployment.

Section 706 authorizes a pilot

program on enhancing mental health

in the National Guard through

community partnerships.

Section 724 requires the Secretaries

of Defense and Veterans Affairs to

allow members of the armed forces

to volunteer or be considered for

employment as peer counselors in

VA peer counseling support

programs.

Section 725 requires the Secretary of

Defense to provide for the

translation of research on the

diagnosis and treatment of mental

health conditions into policy on

medical practices. A report is also

required.

Section 726 addresses transparency

in mental health care services

provided by the Department of

Veterans Affairs.

Section 727 addresses access of

members of the armed forces and

their family members to Vet Center

counseling programs.

Section 728 addresses the

organization of the Readjustment

Counseling Service in the

Department of Veterans Affairs.

Section 729 requires the Secretary of

E.O. 13625, https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2012/09/05/2012-22062/improving-access-to-mental-healthservices-for-veterans-service-members-and-military-families.

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

House-passed (H.R. 4310)

Senate-passed

P.L. 112-239

Veterans Affairs to conduct a

recruitment program for mental

health service providers.

Section 730 requires the

Department of Veterans Affairs to

establish a peer support counseling

program.

Discussion: The House and Senate bills contained numerous provisions related to efforts by

DOD and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to address concerns about military

psychological health issues. Additional measures were included in the enacted bill.

In the House-passed bill, section 705 would require a mental health assessment of a member

deployed in support of a contingency operation once during each 180-day period of such

deployment. It also allows these assessments to be performed by personnel in deployed units

whose responsibilities include providing unit health care services if such personnel are available

and their use for such purpose would not impair their capacity to perform higher priority tasks.

This measure was not adopted in the enacted bill. The Joint Explanatory Statement of the

Conference Committee states “The conferees encourage the Secretary of Defense to develop a

policy to provide mental health assessments to service members while they are deployed in a

contingency operation, if personnel in deployed units whose responsibilities include providing

unit health care services are available and the use of those services for this purpose would not

impair their capacity to perform higher priority tasks.”

Section 725 would authorize the Secretary of Defense, through community partnerships with

private nonprofit organizations, to carry out a three-year pilot program assessing the enhancement

of DOD efforts in research, treatment, education, and outreach on mental health and substance

use disorders and traumatic brain injury (TBI) in members of the National Guard and Reserves

and their family members and caregivers. The section allows the Secretary, using a competitive

and merit-based process, to award grants to these community partners, provided that the awardee

agrees to make matching contributions from nonfederal sources of at least $3 for each $1

provided under the grant.

Section 728 would direct the Secretaries of Defense and Veterans Affairs to carry out a five-year

pilot program for third party treatment under which each Secretary establishes a process for

providing payments to facilities for treatments of TBI or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)

received by members and veterans in facilities other than military or VA medical facilities. The

section further requires the VA Secretary to notify each veteran with a service-connected injury or

disability of the opportunity to receive such treatment or protocol. The section also requires the

Secretaries to jointly: (1) develop and maintain a database containing each patient case involving

the use of such treatments; and (2) report annually to Congress on the implementation of this

section. This provision was not included in the enacted bill.

Section 729 would promote efforts by the Secretaries to educate members, veterans, their

families, and the public about the causes, symptoms, and treatment of PTSD. It also requires the

creation of an advisory commission on PTSD to coordinate the efforts of DOD, VA, and other

executive departments and agencies for PTSD prevention, diagnosis, and treatment. This

provision was not adopted in the enacted bill, however, the enacted bill does express the sense of

Congress in support of greater awareness for PTSD.

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

In the Senate-passed bill , section 722, similarly to section 725 of the House-passed bill, would

authorize the Secretary of Defense to carry out a research program to assess the feasibility and

advisability of enhancing the efforts of the DOD in research, treatment, education, and outreach

on mental health and substance use disorders and TBI in members of the National Guard and

Reserves, their family members, and their caregivers.

Sections 731 and 733 would require DOD to report to the Armed Services committees on,

respectively, performance data on Warriors in Transition programs, and, a plan to eliminate gaps

and redundancies in DOD programs on psychological health and TBI.

Section 735 expresses the sense of Senate that the Secretaries of Defense Veterans Affairs should

develop a plan to ensure a sustainable flow of qualified counselors to meet the long-term needs of

members of the Armed Forces, veterans, and their families for counselors. The plan should

include the participation of accredited schools and universities, health care providers, professional

counselors, family service or support centers, chaplains, and other appropriate resources.

Section 751 would require the Secretary of Defense to establish within the Office of the Secretary

of Defense a position with responsibility for oversight and management of all suicide prevention

and resilience programs and all preventative behavioral health programs within DOD.

Section 752 would require the Secretary of Defense to develop and implement a comprehensive

suicide prevention program.

Section 754 would require the Secretary of Defense to, not later than 180 days after enactment of

the bill, enter into a contract with an appropriate entity to make an independent assessment

whether the mental health care benefits available for members of the Armed Forces and other

covered beneficiaries under the TRICARE program are adequate to meet the needs of such

members and beneficiaries for mental health care.

Section 756 would require the Secretaries of Defense and Veterans Affairs to jointly enter into a

memorandum of understanding providing for members of the Armed Forces to volunteer or be

considered for employment as peer counselors under the peer support counseling program under

subsection (j) of section 1720F of title 38, United States Code and the peer support counseling

program carried out under section 304(a)(1) of the Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health

Services Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-163).

Section 757 would require the Secretary of Defense to establish within DOD an organization to

(1) carry out programs and activities designed to provide for translational research on the

diagnosis and treatment of mental health conditions into policy on medical practices; (2) make

recommendations to the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs on the translation of

such research into the policies of the Department of Defense on medical practices with respect to

members of the Armed Forces; and (3) discharge such other responsibilities relating to research

and medical practices on mental health conditions, and the policies of the Department on such

practices with respect to members of the Armed Forces, as the Secretary or the Assistant

Secretary shall specify.

Section 759 would require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to develop and implement a

comprehensive set of measures to assess mental health care services furnished by the VA.

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Section 760 would expand the population of individuals eligible for counseling services at Vet

Center programs to include certain active duty and reserve service members and their families.

Section 761 would authorize the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to furnish mental health care

through facilities other than Vet Centers to immediate family members of members of the Armed

Forces deployed in connection with a contingency operation.

In the enacted bill, section 580 (similar to section 751 of the Senate-passed bill) requires the

Secretary of Defense, acting through the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and

Readiness, to establish within the Office of the Secretary of Defense a position with responsibility

for oversight of all suicide prevention and resilience programs of DOD and each of the military

departments.

Section 581 (similar to section 512 of the Senate-passed bill) amends chapter 1007 of title 10,

United States Code, to codify the Suicide Prevention and Community Health and Response

Program for National Guard and reserve component members, to require the Secretary of Defense

to provide training on suicide prevention, resilience, and community healing and response at

Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program events and activities, to move the program from within the

Office for Reintegration Programs to the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and to repeal

subsection (i) of section 582 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (10

U.S.C. 10101 note). The program would terminate on October 1, 2017.

Section 582 (similar to section 752 of the Senate-passed bill) requires the Secretary of Defense,

acting through the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, to develop within the

Department of Defense a comprehensive policy on the prevention of suicide among service

members.

Section 583 (similar to section 528 of the Senate-passed bill) requires the Secretary of the Army

to conduct a study of resilience programs within the Army that would draw upon professionally

accepted measurements and assessments to evaluate the impact of these programs.

Section 703 (similar to section 713 of the Senate-passed bill) amends section 1074m(a) of title 10,

United States Code, to align mandatory post-deployment person-to-person mental health

assessments for certain service members with other existing health assessments by changing the

required assessment period from between 180 days after deployment to 1 year after deployment,

to between 180 days after deployment to 18 months after deployment.

Section 706 (similar to section 725 of the House-passed bill) authorizes the Secretary of Defense

to carry out a pilot program to enhance the efforts of DOD in research, treatment, education, and

outreach on mental health, substance use disorders, and traumatic brain injury in members of the

National Guard and reserves, their family members, and their caregivers through agreements with

community partners.

Section 723 (similar to section 755 of the Senate-passed bill) requires the Secretary of Defense

and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to jointly enter into a memorandum of understanding

providing for the sharing between departments of the results of examinations and other records on

members of the armed forces that are retained and maintained with respect to the medical

tracking system for members deployed overseas.

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Section 724 (similar to section 756 of the Senate-passed bill) requires the Secretary of Defense

and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to jointly enter into a memorandum of understanding

providing for certain members of the armed forces to volunteer or be considered for employment

as peer counselors under certain peer support counseling programs carried out by the Secretary of

Veterans Affairs.

Section 725 (similar to section 757 of the Senate-passed bill) requires the Secretary of Defense to

provide for the translation of research on the diagnosis and treatment of mental health conditions

into policy on medical practices.

Section 726 (similar to section 759 of the Senate-passed bill) requires the Secretary of Veterans

Affairs to develop and implement a comprehensive set of measures to assess mental health care

services provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Section 727 (similar to section 760 of the Senate-passed bill authorizes the Secretary of Veterans

Affairs to provide counseling and mental health services to certain members of the armed forces

and their family members at vet centers.

Section 729 (similar to section 763 of the Senate-passed bill) requires the Secretary of Veterans

Affairs to carry out a national program of outreach to societies, community organizations,

nonprofit organizations, and government entities in order to recruit mental health providers to

provide mental health care services for the Department on a part-time, without compensation

basis.

Section 730 (similar to section 764 of the Senate passed-bill) amends section 1720F(j) of title 38,

United States Code, to require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to establish and carry out a peer

support counseling program as a part of the existing comprehensive program designed to reduce

the incidence of suicide among veterans.

References: None.

CRS Point of Contact: Don Jansen, x7-.....

Congressional Research Service

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Author Contact Information

(name redacted), Coordinator

Analyst in National Security Policy and Information

Operations

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

(name redacted)

Specialist in Military Manpower Policy

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

(name redacted)

Specialist in Military Manpower Policy

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

(name redacted)

Analyst in Defense Health Care Policy

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

Congressional Research Service

EveryCRSReport.com

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) is a federal legislative branch agency, housed inside the

Library of Congress, charged with providing the United States Congress non-partisan advice on

issues that may come before Congress.

EveryCRSReport.com republishes CRS reports that are available to all Congressional staff. The

reports are not classified, and Members of Congress routinely make individual reports available to

the public.

Prior to our republication, we redacted names, phone numbers and email addresses of analysts

who produced the reports. We also added this page to the report. We have not intentionally made

any other changes to any report published on EveryCRSReport.com.

CRS reports, as a work of the United States government, are not subject to copyright protection in

the United States. Any CRS report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without

permission from CRS. However, as a CRS report may include copyrighted images or material from a

third party, you may need to obtain permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or

otherwise use copyrighted material.

Information in a CRS report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public

understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to members of Congress in

connection with CRS' institutional role.

EveryCRSReport.com is not a government website and is not affiliated with CRS. We do not claim

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.