Hearing of the House Armed Services Committee

HEADLINE: HEARING OF THE HOUSE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE

SUBJECT: TROOP ROTATIONS IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN AND MOBILIZATION OF THE ARMY'S INDIVIDUAL READY RESERVE

CHAIRED BY: REPRESENTATIVE DUNCAN HUNTER (R-CA)

WITNESSES: DAVID CHU, UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, PERSONNEL AND READINESS; LIEUTENANT GENERAL NORTON A. SCHWARTZ, USAF, DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS (J-3), JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF; GENERAL RICHARD A. CODY, VICE CHIEF OF STAFF, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY; LIEUTENANT GENERAL JAN C. HULY, DEPUTY COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS, PLAN, POLICIES, AND OPERATIONS

LOCATION: 2118 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING, WASHINGTON, D.C.

BODY:
REP. ROBIN HAYES (R-NC): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I didn't know we had gotten there.

General Cody, I think it's important to talk for just a minute about Army transformation and how the new rotations affect the actual manpower availability of the Army. You're doing a number of different things, forming more brigades and units of action, while at the same time providing stability for families, extending tours of duty.

Could you talk more in detail about how the reorganization you and Dr. Chu will provide stability in terms of predictability, but also the efficiencies from a business standpoint that will be provided when you take so many of the Army members who are now, for example, in the midst of a move and giving them longer deployments? Explain for the committee how that makes more manpower available at any given time. In other words, that ties in very accurately and well with your efforts and ours to increase the number of available troops, but at the same time does not create the financial burden of bringing new folks on board. If you could expand on that.

GEN. CODY: Yes, sir.

You know that-and it's a complex answer, so bear with me. I threw a chart up there, and I probably won't brief off it, but what those patches show you is OIF1, OIF2 and OIF3 brigade sets. And what it shows you is the 3rd Infantry Division, which came home, we put into the 1st Division to be changed under our transformation. By that, we take its three-brigade division set that have nine maneuver companies and move it into a four-brigade set that has 11 maneuver companies in each brigade-more combat power-we embed all the combat service support at the brigade level, and that gives us a brigade that can sustain itself in combat much better, much more mobile, adaptive.

That transformation was ongoing while we're doing OIF2. In order to do that, you have to get the right sergeants, the right officers and the right grade structure as you built that extra brigade, that fourth brigade. At the same time we were doing that, we were also attacking and working the restructuring that we briefed this committee on before of the high demand-low density MP units, civil affair units, PsyOps units and other units. We thought we could do it faster, but quite frankly, the brigade requirements for OIF2 and OIF3 stayed, as General Schwartz has talked to you about, about 17- to 18-brigade sets. We thought initially, as we laid this thing out, we'd be at a lesser requirement. We're not. So that makes this a little bit tougher to do.

End of the day, for '04, we'll build three brand new brigades in the Army: one in the 3rd Infantry Division-it's done; it'll deploy for OIF3 -- and we're starting with the 101st and 10th Mountain Division, units that just came back, and we'll build another brigade in each one of those divisions in '04. And in '05 we'll build three more brigades while we're executing OIF3, units that are coming back, 4th Infantry Division being one of them, 10th Mountain being the second. And then in '06 we'll build four more to give us 10 more brigades as well as restructure the divisions. And we still believe, even at the 17 brigade requirement for OIF and OEF we can do this. But that's why we need the 30k. And that's why we need to have that inject of the 30k early, so that we could get the right grade structure, the right MOS in balance across our force while we're building the new transformed Army in still sustaining the global war on terrorism.

REP. HAYES: I appreciate that. And let me add my thanks to all the others for not only your service, but the men and women that serve under you.

Schedule-wise, I think you've touched on it, but just to be specific, field-the plans to complete and field a new brigade-six this year, six next, plus an additional four-are we on-is that schedule working out pretty well?

GEN. CODY: It's working out. We do have some challenges, in the MI community in particular. Because there's such a demand for MI and MP units, we're having to watch that particularly close. You can't grow an MI soldier or officer very quickly. And with the demand and the growth and the investment we have to make in them, we're challenged a little bit there. But we are on track. I have great confidence that we'll build our first 10 new brigades on time in the first three years, and then we'll make a decision in '06, with the secretary and the chief and everybody else, as to whether we go to the 15 brigades or we stop at 10.

REP. HAYES: Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, one more quick question, if I may.

Secretary Chu, if you could think in terms of a chart, Reserve and Guard/then, now, and hoped for, how are we doing in terms of meeting our needs on scheduling deployments, equipment, matching folks up-just a quick overview, and briefly touch on how NATO taking over some of the training is going to help relieve some of the pressure on us.

Thank you.

MR. CHU: I think, sir-I thank you for the question-that we've made major progress in improving the Reserve mobilization process. As you know, early in this sequence of events there were a lot of short notice to units. We entirely cured that, thanks importantly to the Joint Staff's fine work. As you've also heard this morning, we've, I think, straightened out the equipment problems for the Guard and Reserve in large extent, although there may be some in this unit that Mr. Taylor has mentioned. We'll look into that.

I do think it is important, as you point out, that NATO has accepted important responsibilities in Afghanistan. We're counting on NATO forces in that regard. There is, of course, three dozen or so countries that are participating in Iraq, and we're grateful for their contributions as well.

So there's been, I think, a major shift, much as General Cody described for the active Army. This has been done sort of on the move, and moving to a different construct for how we're going to employ Reserve forces, what their role is going to be, what they can expect over time. It's, at the same time, respectful of the fact that these are not active duty troops, and that they will serve periodically, but not continuously.

REP. HAYES: Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.