FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Congressional research reportSep 30, 2008
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act:
Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
(name redacted), Coordinator
Specialist in Military Manpower Policy
(name redacted)
Specialist in Military Manpower Policy
(name redacted)
Specialist in Military Manpower Policy
(name redacted)
Specialist in National Defense
September 30, 2008
Congressional Research Service
7-....
www.crs.gov
RL34590
CRS Report for Congress
Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Summary
Military personnel issues typically generate significant interest from many Members of Congress
and their staffs. Ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan in support of what the Bush
Administration terms the Global War on Terror, along with the emerging operational role of the
Reserve Components, further heighten interest and support for a wide range of military personnel
policies and issues.
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) selected a number of the military personnel issues
that Congress considered as it deliberated the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2009. In
each case, this report provides a brief synopsis of sections that pertain to personnel policy. It
includes background information and a discussion of the issue, along with a table that contains a
comparison of the bill (H.R. 5658) passed by the House on May 22, 2008, the bill (S. 3001)
passed by the Senate on September 17, 2008, and the final version (S. 3001) passed by the House
on September 24, 2008 and by the Senate on September 27, 2008. Where appropriate, other CRS
products are identified to provide more detailed background information and analysis of the issue.
For each issue, a CRS analyst is identified and contact information is provided. Note: some issues
were addressed in the FY2008 National Defense Authorization Act and discussed in CRS Report
RL34169 concerning that legislation. Those issues that were previously considered in CRS
Report RL34169 are designated with a “*” in the relevant section titles of this report.
This report focuses exclusively on the annual defense authorization process. It does not include
appropriations, veterans’ affairs, tax implications of policy choices or any discussion of separately
introduced legislation.
This report will be updated as needed.
Congressional Research Service
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Contents
Tricare Fee Increases...................................................................................................................2
Tricare Reserve Select Fees.........................................................................................................3
Active Duty End Strengths ..........................................................................................................4
*Military Pay Raise.....................................................................................................................5
Use of Reserve Component Personnel to Respond to Certain Domestic Disorders .......................6
Use of Reserve Component Personnel to Respond to Certain Disasters or Emergencies ...............7
*Continuation of Authority to Assist Local Education Agencies that Benefit Dependents
of Members of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense Civilian Employees ...................8
Authority for Educating and Training for Military Spouses Pursuing Portable Careers.................9
Career Intermission Pilot Program............................................................................................. 10
Incentives for Foreign Language Proficiency and Foreign Cultural Studies................................ 11
Travel Allowances for Family of Service Members with Serious Psychiatric Conditions............ 12
Limitation on Simultaneous Deployments to Combat Zones of Dual-Military Couples
who have Minor Dependents .................................................................................................. 13
Sole Surviving Sons and Daughters........................................................................................... 14
Revised Disability Pay Computation Formula for Reserve Component Personnel
Wounded in Action................................................................................................................. 15
Searchable Military Decorations Database................................................................................. 16
Award of the Vietnam Service Medal To Veterans Who Participated in the Mayaguez
Rescue Operation................................................................................................................... 17
Protective Orders ...................................................................................................................... 18
*Implementation of Information Database on Sexual Assault Incidents in the Armed
Forces .................................................................................................................................... 19
Paternity Leave for Members of the Armed Forces .................................................................... 20
Presentation of Burial Flag to the Surviving Spouse and Children of Members of the
Armed Forces who Die in Service .......................................................................................... 21
Secretary of Defense Review of the Deferment from Deployment Policy following the
Birth of a Child ...................................................................................................................... 22
Effect of Termination of Subsequent Marriage on Payment of Survivor Benefit Plan
Annuity to Surviving Spouse or Former Spouse who Previously Transferred Annuity to
Dependent Children ............................................................................................................... 23
*Extension to Survivors of Certain Members who Die on Active Duty of Special
Survivor Indemnity Allowance for Persons Affected by Required Survivor Benefit Plan
Annuity Offset for Dependency and Indemnity Compensation................................................ 24
Enhanced Enforcement of Prohibition on Sale or Rental of Sexually Explicit Material on
Military Installations .............................................................................................................. 25
Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (JROTC)..................................................................... 26
Congressional Research Service
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Contacts
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 27
Congressional Research Service
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
E
ach year, the Senate and House Armed Services Committees report their respective
versions of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). These bills contain
numerous provisions that affect military personnel, retirees and their family members.
Provisions in one version are often not included in another; are treated differently; or, in certain
cases, are identical. Following passage of each by the respective legislative body, a Conference
Committee is typically convened to resolve the various differences between the House and Senate
versions. This year, however, a formal Conference Committee was not appointed. Rather, a final
bill was drafted by leaders of the House and Senate Armed Services Committee, who also
published a “joint explanatory statement” which was essentially the equivalent of a conference
report. The House amended this final version into the Senate-passed version of S. 3001, and
adopted it on September 24, 2008. The Senate then approved the bill on September 27th, clearing
it for Presidential consideration.
In the course of a typical authorization cycle, congressional staffs receive many constituent
requests for information on provisions contained in the annual NDAA. This report highlights
those personnel-related issues that seem to generate the most intense congressional and
constituent interest, and tracks their status in the FY2009 House and Senate versions of the
NDAA. The Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009, H.R. 5658,
was introduced on March 31, 2008, reported by the House Committee on Armed Services on May
16, 2008 (H.Rept. 110-652), and passed by the House on May 22, 2008. The National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009, S. 3001, was introduced on May 12, 2008, reported by
the Senate Committee on Armed Services on that same day (S.Rept. 110-335), and passed the
Senate on September 17, 2008. The entries under the headings “Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)” and “Original Senate-passed version (S. 3001)” in the following pages are based on
language in these bills, unless otherwise indicated. The entries under the heading “Final version
(S. 3001)” are based on the language of the bill negotiated by leaders of the House and Senate
Armed Services Committee and amended into S. 3001, as discussed above.
Where appropriate, other CRS products are identified to provide more detailed background
information and analysis of the issue. For each issue, a CRS analyst is identified and contact
information is provided. Note: some issues were addressed in the FY2008 National Defense
Authorization Act and discussed in CRS Report RL34169 concerning that legislation. Those
issues that were previously considered in CRS Report RL34169 are designated with a “*” in the
relevant section titles of this report.
Congressional Research Service
1
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Tricare Fee Increases
Background: For several years the Administration has proposed increases in co-payments and
enrollment fees for retirees and their dependents who are not Medicare-eligible. The
Administration argues that the growing costs of Defense health care, both in absolute terms and
as a percentage of the defense budget, require efforts to seek greater contributions by users. It
argues that inasmuch as Tricare Prime enrollment fees were set in 1995 and have not been raised
since, it is reasonable that they should be increased. Congress has thus far refused to give DOD
the requested authority to raise the fees.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
Section 701 & 702 preclude DOD
from altering co-payment levels and
enrollment fees through the end of
FY2009.
Provides an additional $1.2 billion
over the Administration request to
cover rejection of the
Administration’s plans to raise
Tricare fees (according to SASC
Press Release 5/1/2008).
Section 701extends for one year the
prohibition of increases in premiums,
deductibles, and copayments under
Tricare. Section 702 prohibits for
one year increases in copayments for
pharmaceuticals in the Tricare retail
pharmacy program.
Discussion: The health care portion of the Defense budget has grown from $19 billion in FY2001
to over $42 billion in FY2008. Since 2006 DOD has been attempting to raise co-payment and
enrollment fees for retired military personnel and their dependents who are not eligible for
Medicare. (Medicare-eligible retirees can use the Tricare for Life program which would not be
affected by the proposed fee increases.) DOD asserts that retirees using Tricare Prime paid
approximately 27 percent of their health care costs in 1995 but now pay only 12 percent.
Consistent with recommendations of the Department of Defense Task Force on the Future of
Military Health Care, the proposed DOD budget for FY2009 would have gradually raised
enrollment fees for those using Tricare Prime, the HMO-like option, from the current $460
(self+dependents) to 2011 rates as high as $1,750 for retirees making over $40,000 annually.
DOD also proposed creating an enrollment fee for retirees who use Tricare Standard, the fee-forservice option, of $120 per year. In addition, DOD maintains that retail prescription usage and
costs have contributed significantly to the growth in health care spending and recommended
increases in pharmacy co-payments (along with eliminating co-payments for pharmaceuticals
provided by the DOD Mail Order Pharmacy). According to DOD, these fee increases would save
some $1.2 billion in FY2009. Opposition from beneficiary organizations has been strong and the
Government Accountability Office concluded in May 2007 that DOD’s estimates of cost savings
were over-estimated. Congress has twice denied DOD authority to increase Tricare fees in
FY2007 and FY2008, and has encouraged DOD to find other approaches to restraining the
growth of the health care budget.
Reference(s): CRS Report RS22402, Increases in Tricare Costs: Background and Options for
Congress. Task Force on the Future of Military Health Care, Final Report, December 2007
http://www.dodfuturehealthcare.net/images/103-06-2-HomeTask_Force_FINAL_REPORT_122007.pdf. Government Accountability Office, Military Health
Care: TRICARE Cost-Sharing Proposals Would Help Offset Increasing Health Care Spending,
but Projected Savings are Likely Overestimated, May 2007 http://www.gao.gov/new.items/
d07647.pdf.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): Dick Best, x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
2
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Tricare Reserve Select Fees
Background: The FY2005 Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act (P.L. 108375) established the Tricare Reserve Select program which permitted some drilling reserve
personnel to utilize Tricare but required that they pay enrollment fees interpreted to be equivalent
to the 28 percent charged to Federal civil servants under the Federal Employees Health Benefits
Program (FEHBP). The FY2007 John Warner National Defense Authorization Act (P.L. 109-364)
extended the benefit to all drilling reservists. In December 2007 the Government Accountability
Office (GAO) found that the premiums DOD established had actually exceeded the costs of
providing the Tricare benefit.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
Section 705 requires DOD to
recalculate premiums for Tricare
Reserve Select.
Section 701 requires DOD to base
fees on reported costs in the
previous year rather than using Blue
Cross/Blue Shield benchmarks.
Section 704 requires that for 2009
calculations for Tricare Reserve
Select premiums be based on the
actual cost of the coverage during
2006 and 2007.
Discussion: Tricare Reserve Select (TRS) provides a health care benefit to reservists who are in
drilling status and not on active duty. (Reservists called to active duty have regular Tricare
benefits that have no enrollment fees.) Current monthly premiums are $81/self or
$253/self+family. Enrollment in TRS has been lower than estimated, suggesting that premium
rates discourage selection or that reservists have access to more affordable civilian health care
options. A GAO report published in December 2007 concluded that the premiums DOD
established exceeded the reported average cost of providing care through TRS. This situation
resulted, according to GAO, from DOD having used FEHBP Blue Cross/Blue Shield rates as
benchmarks that in practice proved to be higher than necessary to cover DOD’s costs. GAO
recommended that DOD base premiums on actual costs and DOD has indicated its support for
that approach consistent with available cost data.
Reference(s): GAO Report Military Health Care: Cost Data Indicate that TRICARE Reserve
Select Premiums Exceeded the Costs of Providing Program Benefits, GAO-08-104, December
2007 http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08104.pdf.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): Dick Best, x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
3
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Active Duty End Strengths
Background: Continuing combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have stressed the nation’s
armed forces, especially the Army and Marine Corps. The FY2008 NDAA supported increasing
the Army end strength by 65,000 to 547,400 by FY2012 and increasing the Marine Corps end
strength by 27,000 to 202,000, also by FY2012. While the Army and Marine Corps grow, the
Navy remains stable and the Air Force continues manpower reductions that began in 2005 to
support the recapitalization of modernized aircraft. The Air Force is projected to reduce from
359,700 in FY2005 to approximately 300,000 in FY2009.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed
version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
Section 401 authorizes a FY2009
end strength of 532,400 for the
Army, 326,323 for the Navy,
194,000 for the Marine Corps and
317,050 for the Air Force.
Section 401 authorizes a FY2009
end strength of 532,400 for the
Army, 325,300 for the Navy,
194,000 for the Marine Corps and
316,771 for the Air Force.
Section 401 authorizes a FY2009
end strength of 532,400 for the
Army, 326,323 for the Navy,
194,000 for the Marine Corps, and
317,050 for the Air Force.
Section 402 establishes new
minimum end strengths of 532,400
for the Army, 326,323 for the
Navy, 194,000 for the Marine
Corps and 317,050 for the Air
Force.
No similar provision.
Section 402 authorizes new
minimum end strengths of 532,400
for the Army, 325,300 for the
Navy, 194,000 for the Marine
Corps and 317,050 for the Air
Force.
Discussion: The Army and Marine Corps have been successful, so far, in growing to meet the
congressional goals. The Army plans to meet its ultimate goal of 547,400 by 2010, two years
earlier than the congressional benchmark. The Secretary of Defense recently recommended that
the Air Force end strength not fall below 330,000, a strength that has not yet been integrated into
the FY2009 NDAA. The House version authorized 1,023 more Navy personnel and 450 more Air
Force personnel above the budget request to restore military positions in the military medical
community. The Senate committee version authorized 171 more Air Force personnel above the
budget request to support the operation and maintenance on 76 B-52 aircraft.
Reference(s): CRS Report RL31334, Operations Noble Eagle, Enduring Freedom, and Iraqi
Freedom: Questions and Answers About U.S. Military Personnel, Compensation, and Force
Structure, by (name redacted).
CRS Point of Contact (POC): Charles Henning, x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
4
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
*Military Pay Raise
Background: Ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, combined with end strength
increases and recruiting challenges, continue to highlight the military pay issue. Title 37 U.S.C.
1009 provides a permanent formula for annual military pay raises that indexes the raise to the
annual increase in the Employment Cost Index (ECI). The FY2009 President’s Budget request for
a 3.4 percent military pay raise was consistent with this formula. Congress, in FY2004, FY2005,
FY2006, and FY2008 approved the raise as the ECI increase plus 0.5 percent. The FY2007 pay
raise was equal to the ECI.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
Section 601 supports a 3.9 percent
(0.5 percent above the President’s
Budget) across-the-board pay raise
that would be effective January 1,
2009.
In Section 601, the Senate also
supports a 3.9 percent pay raise to
be effective on January 1, 2009.
Section 601 authorizes a 3.9 percent
across-the-board pay increase
effective January 1, 2009.
Section 608 requires a guaranteed
pay raise of 0.5 percent above the
ECI for FY2010 through FY2013.
No similar provision.
Discussion: A military pay raise larger than the permanent formula is not uncommon. Mid-year,
targeted pay raises (targeted at specific grades and longevity) have also been authorized over the
past several years. This year’s proposed legislation includes no mention of targeted pay raises.
Reference(s): CRS Report RL33446, Military Pay and Benefits: Key Questions and Answers, by
(name redacted).
CRS Point of Contact (POC): Charles Henning at x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
5
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Use of Reserve Component Personnel to Respond to
Certain Domestic Disorders
Background: Chapter 15 of Title 10, sometimes referred to as the Insurrection Act, provides the
President with the authority to call the militia into federal service and to use “the armed forces” to
respond to certain domestic disorders, including aiding state governments in suppressing
insurrection (10 USC 331), enforcing the laws of the United States and suppressing rebellion (10
USC 332), and preventing domestic violence which interferes with the execution of federal and
state laws (10 USC 333).
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
Section 591 would amend 10 USC
331-333 to specify that the
President’s use of the “armed
forces” under these provisions
includes “units and members of the
Army Reserve, Navy Reserve, Air
Force Reserve, Marine Corps
Reserve and Coast Guard Reserve
ordered to active duty for this
purpose.”
No similar provision.
No language was included.
Discussion: The amendments contained in Section 591 of the H.R. 5658 would specify that the
President’s authority to use the armed forces to respond to these domestic disorders includes the
ability to activate members of the federal reserve components (Army Reserve, Navy Reserve, Air
Force Reserve, Marine Corps Reserve, and Coast Guard Reserve) and use them as part of the
response effort. Activation of the Army National Guard and Air National Guard is already
provided for under the original language authorizing the President to order the militia into federal
service (the militia includes, but is not limited to, the National Guard).1
Reference(s): CRS Report RL30802, Reserve Component Personnel Issues: Questions and
Answers, by (name redacted).
CRS Point of Contact (POC): (name redacted), x7-.....
1
10 USC 311(a) defines the militia as follows: “The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at
least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age, who are, or who have
made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who
are members of the National Guard.” 10 USC 311(b) divides the militia into the organized militia (members of the
National Guard and Naval Militia) and the unorganized militia (those members of the militia who are not members of
the National Guard or the Naval Militia).
Congressional Research Service
6
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Use of Reserve Component Personnel to Respond to
Certain Disasters or Emergencies
Background: Section 12304 of Title 10 allows the President to activate certain reservists for a
period of up to 365 days for specified purposes. This authority is commonly referred to as
Presidential Reserve Call-up (PRC) authority. A subparagraph of section 12304 prohibits the
President from using this authority for “providing assistance to either the Federal Government or
a State in time of a serious natural or manmade disaster, accident, or catastrophe,” unless
responding to an certain emergencies involving weapons of mass destruction or terrorist attacks.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
Section 594 would amend 10 USC
12304 to allow the President to
order Selected Reserve units from
the Army Reserve, Navy Reserve,
Air Force Reserve, Marine Corps
Reserve, or Coast Guard Reserve to
active duty to assist in the response
to certain disasters or emergencies.
No similar provision.
No language was included.
Discussion: Section 594 of H.R. 5658 would allow the President to use PRC authority to activate
Selected Reserve units from the purely federal reserve components (but not the National Guard)
to respond to disasters or emergencies which met the definitions of the Stafford Act.2 A somewhat
similar provision was passed as part of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for
FY2007 (P.L. 109-364, section 1076); however, among other differences, it applied to the
National Guard as well as the federal reserves and was opposed by many state governors. It was
later repealed by section 1068 of P.L. 110-181.
Reference(s): CRS Report RL30802, Reserve Component Personnel Issues: Questions and
Answers, by (name redacted).
CRS Point of Contact (POC): (name redacted), x7-.....
2
See 42 USC 5122 for these definitions.
Congressional Research Service
7
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
*Continuation of Authority to Assist Local
Education Agencies that Benefit Dependents of
Members of the Armed Forces and Department of
Defense Civilian Employees
Background: Last year Congress authorized $30 million for continuation of assistance to eligible
local agencies impacted by enrollment of DOD military and civilian employee dependents, and
$10 million for assistance to agencies with significant changes due to base closures, force
structure changes, or force relocations.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
Section 571 of the House bill asks
for ‘impact aid’ of $50 million for
local educational agencies and $15
million to those with significant
changes due to base closures, force
structure changes, or force
relocations.
Section 561 of the Senate bill calls
for $30 million for local agencies to
be authorized in ‘impact aid’ and $10
million for those with significant
changes due to base closures, force
structure changes, or force
relocations.
Section 551 authorizes $35 million in
‘impact aid’ for local agencies and
$15 million to local educational
agencies where significant changes in
enrollment are expected due to base
closures, force structure changes or
force relocations.
Section 562 would authorize $5
million in ‘impact aid’ for educational
agencies that benefit children with
severe disabilities.
Section 552 is identical to the Senate
provision.
Discussion: The language contained in the final version of S. 3001 is similar to last year’s efforts
regarding impact aid.
Reference(s): CRS Report RL34169, The FY2008 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected
Military Personnel Policy Issues, p. 7-8.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): (name redacted) at x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
8
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Authority for Educating and Training for Military
Spouses Pursuing Portable Careers
Background: Military families are relocated quite frequently during a military career. Nonmilitary spouses seeking employment at a new duty location are often frustrated because many of
the skills they have may not be portable to a new location. Often, work skills must be learned
anew. It has been reported that local employers prefer a more stable workforce with less turnover
and less training needed.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
The House bill contained a provision (Sec.
582) that would authorize the Secretary of
Defense to establish programs to assist
the spouse of an active duty service
member to receive education/training or
credit required for a degree, credential, or
licensing. The provision would also
authorize tuition assistance.
Section 571 amends 10 USC 1784
(“Employment opportunities for
military spouses”) by adding
language allowing the Secretary of
Defense to carry out programs to
provide or make available to eligible
spouses education and training to
facilitate the pursuit of a portable
career.
Section 582 “includes the
House provision with an
amendment that would clarify
that these programs may be
used to enable a spouse to
pursue a portable career, and
would clarify the definition of
portable career.” (Joint
Explanatory Statement, p. 68)
Discussion: Although this language is permissive in nature, if implemented, spouses may be
more likely to continue a career following relocation to a new duty station.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): (name redacted) at x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
9
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Career Intermission Pilot Program
Background: Each service supports educational programs that permit selected members to
temporarily attend civilian educational institutions and then return to the parent service without
interrupting their normal career pattern. However, there is currently no program that allows an
extended break in service for personal or professional reasons.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
Section 532 would authorize a pilot
program that allows a Service
Secretary to release selected
personnel from active duty for a
maximum period of three years to
pursue personal and professional
goals. Up to 20 officer and 20
enlisted members annually from each
armed force under the Secretaries
jurisdiction could participate in this
program during the period January 1,
2009 through December 31, 2014.
Members would incur a service
obligation of two months for every
month of program participation.
Participants and their families would
remain eligible for medical and dental
care and access to military facilities.
Section 585 would authorize a
similar program. Interim reports
would be required in 2010 and 2012
with a final report in 2015.
Section 533 authorizes a “Career
Flexibility” pilot program.
Participation is limited to 20 enlisted
personnel and 20 officers per service
per year. Service members will leave
active duty for a period up to three
years and return in the same grade
and years of service that they held
when inactivated. Time in the
program does not count for
retirement eligibility, retired pay or
years of service. Pilot program begins
on January 1, 2009 and ends on
December 31, 2014. Interim reports
are required in 2010 and 2012 with a
final report on March 1, 2015.
Discussion: These programs, called “Career Intermission” in the House report and “Career
Flexibility” in the Senate committee version, are aimed at enhancing retention by allowing
personnel an opportunity to pursue other personal or professional goals. The House and Senate
programs would be capped at 40 service members per year for each armed force and require a
service obligation of two months for every month of program participation.
Reference(s): None
CRS Point of Contact (POC): Charles Henning, x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
10
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Incentives for Foreign Language Proficiency and
Foreign Cultural Studies
Background: In recent years, both Congress and the Department of Defense have shown
significant interest in increasing the ability of military personnel to operate in foreign countries by
enhancing their cultural knowledge and foreign language proficiency. However, building these
language and cultural skills has proven challenging due to the intensive study required for
mastery and the competing demands of other training and operational requirements for currently
serving personnel. There is currently statutory authority to provide bonuses to those who are
already proficient in designated foreign languages (37 USC 316), but not for those who are
seeking to become proficient.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed
version
(S. 3001)
Section 619 would amend 37 USC
353 to allow the Service
Secretaries to pay a proficiency
bonus of up to $12,000 per year to
regular or reserve personnel, and
to those enrolled in an officer
training program, who are “in
training to acquire proficiency in a
critical foreign language or
expertise in foreign cultural studies
or a related skill designated as
critical by the Secretary
concerned.” It also allows the
Service Secretaries to provide
those in officer training programs
who pursue such studies with up
to $1,000 per month in incentive
pay. It mandates that the Secretary
of Defense establish a pilot
program through 2013 to offer
bonuses to reservists who pursue
such studies.
Section 619 would add section
316a to Title 37. It would
authorize the Secretary of Defense
to provide up to $3,000 per year
to participants in the Senior
Reserve Officers Training Corps
and the Marine Corps Platoon
Leaders Class who participate “in a
language immersion program
approved for purposes of the
Senior Reserve Officer’s Training
Corps, or in study abroad, or is
enrolled in an academic course
that involves instruction in a
foreign language of strategic
interest to the Department of
Defense....” This section also
contains a provision to recoup
such payments if the individual
does not complete participation in
the language program or the precommissioning program.
Final version
(S. 3001)
Section 619 incorporates the
language of both the House and
Senate provisions.
Discussion: Section 619 of the original House-passed and Senate-passed bills both sought to
improve the language skills of new officer accessions by giving them a financial incentive to
study foreign languages and cultures before they begin active service. The original House
provision would have also required the Secretary of Defense to establish a pilot program for
currently serving reserve personnel who undertake such studies, and it permits the Service
Secretaries to use such financial incentives for currently serving active and reserve personnel who
pursue such studies. The original House-passed language also had a higher maximum payment
cap. The final version of S. 3001 combines both of these provisions, resulting in three distinct
options (one bonus authority and two incentive pay authorities) for compensating individuals who
seek to acquire foreign language proficiency or cultural skills. Existing provisions of law (37
USC 353(b) and 371(b)) would prevent an individual from receiving more than one proficiency
bonus or incentive pay at a time for the same period of service and skill.
Congressional Research Service
11
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): (name redacted), x7-.....
Travel Allowances for Family of Service Members
with Serious Psychiatric Conditions
Background: Section 411h of Title 37, U.S.C., authorizes the military departments to pay travel
and transportation allowances for family members of service members who are seriously injured,
seriously ill, or in a situation of imminent death when the appropriate authority (physician,
commander of the military medical facility concerned, for example), determines that the family’s
presence may contribute to the service member’s health or welfare.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
No similar language.
The committee report (p. 346-7)
notes: “The committee strongly
believes that service members who
suffer from serious psychiatric
conditions meet the seriously injured
or seriously ill threshold under
section 411h of title 37, United
States Code, and that family
members should be afforded travel
and transportation allowances in
accordance with that section. The
committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to report to the
congressional defense committees by
June 1, 2008 on the Department of
Defense policies regarding the
eligibility of family members of such
service members to receive travel
and transportation allowances under
that section.”
No language was included.
Discussion: This Senate report language makes no change in law but suggests that the Secretary
of Defense broaden the current travel and transportation policy for family members of those with
serious psychiatric conditions.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): (name redacted), x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
12
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Limitation on Simultaneous Deployments to
Combat Zones of Dual-Military Couples who have
Minor Dependents
Background: Section 586 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (P.L.
110-181) contains the following provision: “The Secretary of Defense shall establish appropriate
procedures to ensure that an adequate family care plan is in place for a member of the Armed
Forces with minor dependents who is a single parent or whose spouse is also a member of the
Armed Forces when the member may be deployed in an area for which imminent danger pay is
authorized under section 310 of title 37, United States Code. Such procedures should allow the
member to request a deferment of deployment due to unforeseen circumstances, and the request
for such a deferment should be considered and responded to promptly.”
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
Section 596 would remove the
second sentence of the above cited
legislation, and specify that “In the
case of a member of the Armed
Forces with minor dependents who
has a spouse who is also a member
of the Armed Forces, and the spouse
is deployed in an area for which
imminent danger pay is authorized
under section 310 of title 37, United
States Code, the member may
request a deferment of a deployment
to such an area until the spouse
returns from such deployment.”
No similar provision.
No language was included.
Discussion: Under the change proposed in H.R. 5658, a military member with minor children
who has a spouse already serving in an imminent danger pay area and facing simultaneous
deployment may request a deferment to such an area until the spouse returns from such a
deployment, regardless of the existence, or lack thereof, of “unforeseen circumstances.”
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): (name redacted), x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
13
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Sole Surviving Sons and Daughters
Background: The Department of Defense defines sole survivors as the only remaining son or
daughter in a family where the father or mother, or one or more sons or daughters, while serving
in the Armed Forces, was killed, died as a result of wounds, is captured or missing, or is
permanently 100% disabled. Sole survivors may voluntarily enlist if they waive their right to
separation as a sole surviving son or daughter but may apply for a protective assignment which
precludes their assignment to an overseas area designated as a hostile-fire or imminent danger
area. Enlisted service members who become sole survivors after entering the service may apply
for separation.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
No similar provision.
Section 651 authorizes separation
pay, transitional health care,
commissary, and exchange privileges
for service members voluntarily
separated as surviving sons and
daughters.
No language was included, as similar
language was included in the
Hubbard Act (P.L. 110-317) which as
enacted on August 29, 2008.
Discussion: The administrative discharge of a sole survivor is considered a voluntary separation.
Under current policy, if the separation occurs prior to the completion of the initial enlistment,
there are no benefits associated with the discharge. Section 651 of the Senate bill would authorize
certain benefits, typically associated with involuntary separations, for sole surviving sons and
daughters who elect to separate.
Reference(s): CRS Report RL31334, Operations Noble Eagle, Enduring Freedom, and Iraqi
Freedom: Questions and Answers About U.S. Military Personnel, Compensation, and Force
Structure, by (name redacted).
CRS Point of Contact (POC): Charles Henning, x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
14
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Revised Disability Pay Computation Formula for
Reserve Component Personnel Wounded in Action
Background: National Guard and Reserve personnel who qualify for disability retirement or
placement on the temporary disability retired list (TDRL) have their disability retired pay
calculated using a formula that factors in “years of service” or disability rating, whichever is more
favorable to the service member. However, unlike regular component personnel – who are on
duty every day of the year and receive a year of service for each year of duty—reserve
component personnel, who normally serve part-time, have their years of service calculated using
a more complex formula based on their level of participation. This method sums up a reservist’s
participation “points”3 and divides by 360 to produce the number of equivalent years of activeduty service. Given the less-than-full-time nature of reserve service, this means that an individual
who has been serving in the reserves for 20 years may only have four or five years of service for
retired pay computation purposes.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
Section 641 would amend 10 USC
1208 so that reserve component
personnel who qualify for disability
retirement or placement on the
TDRL due to an disability for which a
Purple Heart was awarded, shall have
their years of service calculated
under 10 USC 12732 rather than 10
USC 12733.
No similar provision.
No language was included.
Discussion: Section 641 of H.R. 5658 would have modified the method of calculating “years of
service” for reservists who become eligible for disability retirement or are placed on the TDRL
based on a combat-related injury. Rather than using the reservist’s participation points to calculate
active-duty equivalent years of service, as is currently done, this provision would have awarded a
year of service for each year in which a reservist met the minimum participation standard of 50
points. Hence, under this provision, a reservists with 20 qualifying years of reserve service would
have been awarded 20 years of service for his disability retired pay computation. It would have
benefitted some combat-injured reservists, particularly those with a modest disability rating (3040%) but many years of reserve service.
Reference(s): CRS Report RL30802, Reserve Component Personnel Issues: Questions and
Answers, by (name redacted).
CRS Point of Contact (POC): (name redacted), x7-.....
3
For more information on reserve retirement points, see CRS Report RL30802, Reserve Component Personnel Issues:
Questions and Answers, by (name redacted), p. 14-15.
Congressional Research Service
15
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Searchable Military Decorations Database
Background: The House Committee notes that there have been a number of recent incidents in
which individuals have fraudulently claimed to have been awarded the Congressional Medal of
Honor or other decorations of valor. The committee believes that false claims reduce the prestige
of these decorations and that the valor of these decorations could be preserved if the general
public had access to a searchable database listing individuals and the decorations for valor they
have been awarded.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
This report language directs the
Secretary of Defense to study the
potential for establishing a searchable
database listing individuals who have
been awarded medals for valor.
Topics considered should include
cost, administrative challenges,
options of public access, as well as
issues concerning the privacy of
those listed. The study should
consider the feasibility of listing
recipients of multiple valor
decorations, but at a minimum,
report the feasibility of a database
listing only Medal of Honor
recipients. The Secretary of Defense
is directed to report the findings and
recommendations to HASC and
SASC by March 31, 2009.
No similar provision.
No language was included.
Discussion: The House bill’s report language is exploratory in nature. It is expected that this
would discourage false claims as such a list would allow for easy verification of their validity.
Such a database may raise privacy issues.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): (name redacted), x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
16
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Award of the Vietnam Service Medal To Veterans
Who Participated in the Mayaguez Rescue
Operation
Background: On May 12, 1975, in the aftermath of the Vietnam War (approximately two weeks
after the fall of Saigon), a U.S. merchant ship, S.S. Mayaguez, was seized by the Khmer Rouge
Navy. Thirty-nine sailors were captured and taken to the island of Koh Tang. A rescue operation
was mounted and the battle began on May 15. By most accounts, the result was a failure with four
U.S. helicopters shot down or disabled and 41 Marines killed. Ironically, the number killed
outnumbered the number of sailors captured by the Khmer Rouge. Shortly thereafter, all 39
sailors were released.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
Section 565 states “The Secretary of
the military department concerned
shall, upon application of an
individual who is an eligible veteran
[as defined], award that individual the
Vietnam Service Medal,
notwithstanding any otherwise
application requirements for the
award of that medal. Any such award
shall be made in lieu of any Armed
Forces Expeditionary Medal awarded
the individual for the individual’s
participation in the Mayaguez rescue
operation.”
No similar provision.
No language was included.
Discussion: This language in H.R. 5658 would authorize the Vietnam Service Medal for
participants in the Mayaguez rescue. It is not clear what other benefits, if any, would accrue from
recognizing these individuals in this manner.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): (name redacted), x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
17
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Protective Orders
Background: Chapter 80 of Title 10 United States code is concerned with “Miscellaneous
Investigation Requirements and Other Duties.” It includes provisions concerning complaints of
sexual harassment, civilian orders of protection and domestic violence data.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
Section 552 amends Chapter 80 of
Title 10 to specify that a protective
order issued by a military
commander remains a standing order
until the incident has been resolved
by investigation, courts martial or
other command determined
adjudication, or a new order is
issued.
No similar provision.
Section 561amends Chapter 80 of
Title 10 to specify that “A military
protective order issued by a military
commander shall remain in effect
until such time as the military
commander terminates the order or
issues a replacement order.”
Section 553 amends Chapter 80 of
Title 10 to state that if a military
protective order is issued against a
military member and any individual
involved in the order does not reside
on a military installation, the
commander of the military
installation must notify appropriate
civilian authorities of the issuance of
the order, the duration of the order,
and the individuals involved.
No similar provision.
Section 562 amends Chapter 80 of
Title 10 to state that if a military
protective order is issued against a
military member and any individual
involved in the order does not reside
on a military installation, the
commander of the military
installation must notify appropriate
civilian authorities of the issuance of
the order, the individuals involved,
any changes to the order, and
termination of the order.
Discussion: The intent of these provisions is to maintain a protective order until it has been
officially resolved and to ensure that civilian authorities are aware of such orders when the
individual(s) involved do not reside on a military installation.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): (name redacted), x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
18
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
*Implementation of Information Database on
Sexual Assault Incidents in the Armed Forces
Background: Over the years reports of sexual assault involving military personnel have brought
about a number of reforms, including changes in the Uniformed Code of Military Justice,
training, and creation of the Defense Incident Based Reporting System which tracks criminal acts,
especially sex crimes, and reports these data to the Justice Department.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
Section 554 of the House bill
contains language requiring the
Secretary of Defense to implement a
centralized, case-level database of
information regarding sexual assaults.
This database builds on earlier
congressionally mandated reporting
requirements.
No similar provision.
Section 563 adopted the House
language with an amendment
requiring the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report which contains “a
description of the current status of
the Defense Incident-Based
Reporting System” and an
explanation of how the Defense
Incident-Based Reporting System will
relate to the new sexual assault
database required by this section.
Discussion: This language would provide more centralized, more detailed and arguably better
reporting of sexual assault incidents in the Armed Forces.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): (name redacted) at x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
19
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Paternity Leave for Members of the Armed Forces
Background: At present, when a member of the armed forces becomes the father of a child and
wishes to take time off for paternity purposes, he uses his regular leave. Such leave accumulates
at the rate of 2 ½ days per month of active service.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
No similar provision.
Section 583 of the Senate bill
modifies Chapter 40 (“Leave”)
section 701 (“Entitlement and
accumulation”) of Title 10 to afford
a member of the armed forces who
is the husband of a woman who
gives birth to a child up to 21 days of
leave to be used in connection with
the birth of the child.
Section 532 amends section 701 of
Title 10 to provide that “Under
regulations prescribed by the
Secretary concerned, a married
member of the armed forces on
active duty whose wife gives birth
to a child shall receive 10 days of
leave to be used in connection with
the birth of the child.”
Discussion: The language in the final version would provide a new type of leave for paternity
purposes, which would be in addition to the service member’s regular leave. It would apply only
to children born on or after the date of enactment.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): (name redacted), x7-....
Congressional Research Service
20
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Presentation of Burial Flag to the Surviving Spouse
and Children of Members of the Armed Forces who
Die in Service
Background: Under 10 USC 1482(a), when a member of the armed forces dies in service, a
burial flag is presented to the person designated to direct disposition of the remains and to the
parents of the service member.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
Sec 581 of the House report would
amend 10 USC 1482 to allow the
Service Secretary to pay the
expenses necessary to provide a
ceremonial burial flag to a surviving
spouse (including a remarried
surviving spouse), if the person
authorized to direct the disposition
of remains is other than a spouse.
Section 641 of the Senate bill would
amend 10 USC 1482 to allow the
Service Secretary to pay the
expenses necessary to provide a
ceremonial burial flag to the surviving
spouse (including a remarried
surviving spouse), if the person
authorized to direct the disposition
of remains is other than the spouse,
and to each surviving child.
Section 581 amends 10 USC 1482 to
authorize the Secretary concerned
to pay the expenses necessary to
provide a flag to the surviving spouse
of a deceased servicemember
(including a remarried surviving
spouse), if the person authorized to
direct the disposition of remains is
other than the spouse, and to each
surviving child.
Discussion: The House and Senate-passed bills both proposed authorizing the provision of a
burial flag to a surviving spouse if someone else is authorized to direct the disposition of remains;
the Senate-passed bill also allowed for providing a flag to the surviving children of the decedent.
The final version of the bill permits a burial flag to be presented to the surviving spouse and each
surviving child.
Reference(s): CRS Report RL32769, Military Death Benefits: Status and Proposals, by (name red
acted) and (name redacted).
CRS Point of Contact (POC): (name redacted), x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
21
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Secretary of Defense Review of the Deferment from
Deployment Policy following the Birth of a Child
Background: Current DOD policy requires a minimum of four months following the birth of a
child before a military mother can be assigned to a dependent-restricted or unaccompanied tour.
The Secretary of the military department has the authority to extend that time. The Army and the
Air Force provide a minimum of four months, while the Marine Corps defers for six months and
the Navy for up to one year.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
No similar provision.
The committee report (p. 341)
directs the Secretary of Defense to
review the policies concerning such
deployments. The review shall take
into account readiness, recruitment
and retention of female service
members, and consider differing
deployment and manpower needs,
family care plans, psychological
readiness of the member for
deployment, and personal hardship
(such as a newborn with special
medical needs). The Secretary is
directed to contact outside experts.
The committee directs the Secretary
to report to HASC and SASC by
May 1, 2009
No language was included.
Discussion: The Senate report directs the Secretary of Defense to describe changes to DOD or
service policies as the result of this review.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): (name redacted) at x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
22
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Effect of Termination of Subsequent Marriage on
Payment of Survivor Benefit Plan Annuity to
Surviving Spouse or Former Spouse who Previously
Transferred Annuity to Dependent Children
Background: The Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) provides annuities to the surviving spouse,
children, former spouse, or spouse/former spouse and children. If a spouse or former spouse
remarries before age 55, SBP annuities cease. Children remain eligible until age 18 or 22, if a
full-time student. An eligible child who marries loses SBP. If a spouse is eligible to receive
benefits under the Veterans Affairs Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC), the SBP is
offset or reduced on a dollar- for-dollar basis. A surviving spouse of a service member killed in
the line of duty is eligible to receive both SBP and DIC. To avoid the offset, Congress allowed
survivors in this example to designate their children as SBP beneficiaries, allowing the surviving
spouse to receive VA’s DIC.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
Section 642 would amend 10 USC
1450(b)(3) by adding this sentence at
the end: “The payment of an annuity
to a surviving spouse or former
spouse under this paragraph shall be
resumed even though the surviving
spouse or former spouse previously
transferred the annuity to a child or
children under section 1448(d)(2)(B)
of this title if, when the marriage is
so terminated, the child or children,
due to loss of dependent status,
death, or other cause, are no longer
eligible for the annuity under such
section.’‘
No similar provision.
No language was included.
Discussion: Essentially, this House language would return eligibility for SBP to a surviving
spouse or former spouse, who allowed the dependent child or children to be designated as SBP
beneficiaries to avoid the SBP/DIC offset, following the termination of the remarriage and the
end of eligibility for the child or children.
Reference(s): CRS Report RL31664, The Military Survivor Benefit Plan: A Description of Its
Provisions, by (name redacted).
CRS Point of Contact (POC): (name redacted), x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
23
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
*Extension to Survivors of Certain Members who
Die on Active Duty of Special Survivor Indemnity
Allowance for Persons Affected by Required
Survivor Benefit Plan Annuity Offset for
Dependency and Indemnity Compensation
Background: A Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) eligible spouse who is eligible for Dependency and
Indemnity Compensation will have his or her SBP reduced or offset on a dollar-for-dollar basis by
Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (see previous page). For certain beneficiaries affected
by the offset, section 644 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, created
a new survivor indemnity allowance to be paid to survivors of service members who are entitled
to retired pay, or would be entitled to reserve component retired pay but for the fact they were not
yet 60 years of age. This monthly allowance, effective October 1, 2008, would be $50, and would
increase annually by $10 through FY2013.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Section 643 would extend the special
survivor indemnity allowance for
offset-effected survivors of active
duty members. Note: This special
survivor indemnity allowance is an
additional benefit and does not
represent a repeal of the SBP/DIC
offset.
No similar provision.
Final version
(S. 3001)
Section 631 adopts the House
provision.
Discussion: This final version of S. 3001 provides additional benefits to offset-affected survivors
of active duty service members.
Reference(s): CRS Report RL31664, The Military Survivor Benefit Plan: A Description of Its
Provisions, by (name redacted).
CRS Point of Contact (POC): (name redacted), x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
24
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Enhanced Enforcement of Prohibition on Sale or
Rental of Sexually Explicit Material on Military
Installations
Background: The National Defense Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (P.L. 104-201, September 23, 1996,
110 Stat. 2489) contained language that prohibited the sale of sexually explicit material on
military installations. An eight-member board (Resale Activities Board of Review) was
established to review materials for resale. Once the board determined that an item was ‘sexually
explicit,’ it was removed and not available for resale or rental on military installations. The
review board reviewed 473 titles in 1998 and determined 319 to be sexually explicit. In May,
2006, the board reversed its decision with regard to Playgirl and Penthouse. A Christian group
(Alliance Defense Fund) wrote a letter to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates protesting the sale of
these and other items.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Section 654 would amend 10 USC
2495b to establish a new ninemember “Resale Activities Review
Board” not later than 120 days after
the enactment of this act. The Board
would be required to meet within
one year after the date of
appointment and may consider all
materials previously reviewed.
No similar provision.
Final version
(S. 3001)
Section 642 adopts the House
language.
Discussion: The House language would re-establish the existing review board and modifies its
composition. Its intent grew out of efforts to ban particular items for rental or resale. This
provision was included in the final version.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): (name redacted), x7-.....
Congressional Research Service
25
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (JROTC)
Background: JROTC is a federal program sponsored by the Armed Forces in high schools to
instill the values of citizenship, service to the nation, personal responsibility and a sense of
accomplishment. Current law does not establish a minimum or maximum number of JROTC
programs for the Department of Defense or the Services.4 However, there are approximately
3,300 JROTC units currently operating in high schools and overseas in the Department of
Defense School System.
Original House-passed version
(H.R. 5658)
Original Senate-passed version
(S. 3001)
Final version
(S. 3001)
Section 547 supports the expansion
of JROTC to 4,000 units by 2020. It
also requires DOD to submit a
report to the defense committees by
March 31, 2009 on how the services
will achieve this goal.
No similar provision.
Section 548 authorizes the expansion
of JROTC to 3,700 units by 2020.
Requires the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report to the defense
committees by March 31, 2009 on
how the services will achieve this
goal.
Discussion: JROTC was created in 1916 and the program has been expanded several times.
While generally viewed as a positive influence on high school youth, some have criticized the
program as a military recruiting tool for the Services or a program that tends to militarize schools.
Reference(s): None.
CRS Point of Contact (POC): Charles Henning at x7-.....
4
In 1992, Congress established the maximum number of JROTC units at 3,500. However, this statutory limit was
rescinded by Section 534 of the FY2001 National Defense Authorization Act.
Congressional Research Service
26
FY2009 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues
Author Contact Information
(name redacted), Coordinator
Specialist in Military Manpower Policy
*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)
Specialist in National Defense
*redacted*@crs.loc.gov, 7-....
Congressional Research Service
27
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
copyright on any CRS report we have republished.
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.