Letter to Undersecretary Of Defense David S. Chu

In a letter sent to Under Secretary of Defense David Chu today, Senator Jim Webb reiterated his concerns that the Defense Department has a systemic problem with the way service members are returned to military service or transitioned to care with the Department on Veterans Affairs.

"In my view, we have a clear breakdown at the point of transition," said Webb. "If the data that we're seeing from the Department of Defense is accurate, it suggests that fewer soldiers are being retired on disability today—while the country is at war—than were so retired five years ago during peace time. This strikes me as inexplicable."

Many of the problems associated with the military's disability-determination process are well-documented in a Government Accountability Office report issued in March 2006. In his letter to Under Secretary Chu, Senator Webb questions why the total number of Army disability evaluations has not changed appreciably and why the classification of permanent disability retirements has declined so significantly in the five years the United States has been at war.

The Senator's serves as a follow-up to the Under Secretary's testimony before the Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday. The letter follows.

///

March 7, 2007

The Honorable David S. Chu

Undersecretary of Defense

(Personnel and Readiness)

4000 Defense Pentagon Washington, DC 20301-4000

Dear Dr. Chu:

I listened with interest to your testimony of March 6 before the Senate Armed Services Committee, especially with regard to some of the overarching issues associated with the Department of Defense disability system. In my view, conditions at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center are part of a systemic problem with the way service members, and particularly the wounded, are returned to military service or transitioned to care with the Veterans Administration. There was a clear breakdown at the point of transition at Walter Reed attributable to a lack of priorities and military leadership. I am confident that you will make an important contribution to the eventual resolution of the problems we find today.

The process and policies for disability determinations clearly warrant close review given the disturbing revelations of recent weeks. A Government Accountability Office report (GAO-06-362) issued in 2006 found that the number of active service members evaluated by the Army for a disability determination in 2001 totaled 6,378. In 2005, the Army reported a total of 6, 465 active members were evaluated. During the same period, the Army's number of permanent disability retirements declined from 642 to 209.

With thousands of soldiers wounded in action since 2001, and others injured in operational accidents, I do not understand why the total number of Army disability evaluations has not changed appreciably—or why Army separations without disability retirements are up while permanent disability retirements are down so significantly—over a five-year span. These data, if accurate, suggest that fewer soldiers are being retired on disability today—while the country is at war—than were so retired five years ago during peace time. This strikes me as inexplicable.

As I mentioned yesterday, it is possible that the data is merely flawed. If so, I would appreciate seeing the actual data. If it is not, I am curious to know if delays in medical evaluation and processing are so long that service members throw their hands up in frustration and accept a cash severance. It is possible that soldiers are not being counseled properly, as our system requires, or availing themselves of their right to appeal the ruling of their Physical Evaluation Board. Some critics also maintain there is a conscious effort to interpret the Schedule for Rating Disabilities more narrowly to hold down the costs of permanent disability retirements. There may well be fundamental shortcomings with the Army's personnel reporting system.

I would appreciate your looking into the matter. If the Army data is accurate, what accounts for the trends—and do similar problems exist with the other branches of the armed forces?

Sincerely,

Jim Webb

United States Senator

http://webb.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=270261&