Senator: DoD should be ordered to reimburse body-armor costs
By Rick Maze
Times staff writer
Tired of waiting for the Pentagon to launch an authorized program to reimburse troops who buy their own personal protective gear for combat deployments, the chief congressional sponsor of the program wants to wrest control of it from defense officials.
Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., attached a provision to last year’s defense authorization bill authorizing — but not requiring — the Defense Department to reimburse troops up to $1,100 for the expense of body armor and other protective gear and health and safety equipment not provided by the military.
The Pentagon has never paid a dime. Defense officials have said in letters to Dodd that they are still working on the regulations, and that part of the delay is the result of responsibility passing between various offices. Pentagon insiders said a final regulation that would allow reimbursement to begin immediately has been drafted but has not been approved by all the services.
At a Thursday news conference, Dodd said he is not sure why it is taking so long and wonders whether the Pentagon intends to actually reimburse anyone.
“The administration is either showing complete incompetence or utter indifference,” he said. “It feels as if I am getting a rope-a-dope with them, hoping I would go away.”
Dodd apologized to service members, their family and friends for the delay and vowed to try to get a provision attached to another defense bill — probably the 2006 defense appropriations bill — ordering reimbursement and putting unit commanders, not Pentagon officials, in charge.
Dodd said he trusted military commanders to ensure troops are reimbursed for buying necessary safety equipment.
Appearing with Dodd at the news conference was Marine Sgt. Todd Bowers, now a reservist attending college who pulled two tours in Iraq. On his last deployment, Bowers said he was fired on by a sniper but saved by equipment — a rifle scope hit by the sniper bullet and goggles that protected his eyes from shrapnel — that were not supplied by the Marine Corps.
Bowers bought the goggles for about $100, and his father bought the scope for about $600.
Dodd has the backing of major military and veterans’ groups.
“We share your disappointment that the Defense Department still has not implemented it 11 months after it was enacted,” said retired Vice Adm. Norbert Ryan Jr., president of the Military Officers Association of America.
Retired Army Master Sgt. Michael Cline, executive director of the Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States, said the Pentagon’s refusal to pay is hard to understand, given the 91-0 vote by the Senate last year in favor of Dodd’s original proposal.
Noting the ongoing stream of casualties in Afghanistan and Iraq, Cline said the military should support any effort to get more protection to troops.
“How many of those killed could have been saved with the proper equipment?” Cline said.
The shortage of armor for Humvees in Iraq has left many of our troops vulnerable. Two years after military brass first recognized the shortage, the problems still aren't resolved, and troops are still improvising their protection with sandbags and "Hillbilly Armor" -- glass and scrap metal welded to an unprotected Humvee.
"...In Baghdad our vehicles we to be turned in for low armor, light skin HUMMVVs. We had been taking fire for some time and the vehicles were too unequipped for the missions that we performed. We lined our vehicles with sandbags and proceeded with our missions. Toward the end of our rotation in Iraq we were performing a routine TCP mission when a small truck swerved in front of one of our squad leader's vehicles and dropped an IED [Improvised Explosive Device, or roadside bomb]. It exploded immediately, tore through the sandbags, shattering both of the squad leaders legs and sending shards of metal into the head of his driver. That is just one example of many where an up-armored HUMMVV would have saved these soldiers from injury..." -- Futomara, an Infantryman who served in Iraq.
The shortage of armor for Humvees in Iraq has left many of our troops vulnerable. Two years after military brass first recognized the shortage, the problems still aren't resolved, and troops are still improvising their protection with sandbags and "Hillbilly Armor" -- glass and scrap metal welded to an unprotected Humvee.
Check out a clip from the new movie Gunner Palace, in which some troops describe the "effectiveness" of their hillbilly armor.
Is there still a shortage of Humvee armor?
Yes. According to an April 6th Associated Press article:
"For the fifth time in the past year, U.S. commanders running the war in Iraq have told the Army to send more armored Humvee utility vehicles to protect U.S. troops. Just as the Army was reaching its target of 8,279 factory-built armored Humvees for delivery to Iraq, U.S. Central Command last month raised the bar again, to 10,079, Army officials disclosed Tuesday."
How long has the Pentagon been aware of the armor shortage?
In June, 2003, the Army was already aware of the shortage. (USA Today) But 18 months later, the problem still wasn't resolved.
On December 8, 2004, during a meeting of soldiers in Iraq with U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Specialist Thomas Wilson alerted the American public to the issue of armor shortages when he asked:
"Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles and why don't we have those resources readily available to us?"
After applause from the troops, Rumsfeld replied:
"It's essentially a matter of physics. It isn't a matter of money. It isn't a matter on the part of the Army of desire. It's a matter of production and capability of doing it...You can have all the armor in the world on a tank and a tank can be blown up. And you can have an up-armored humvee and it can be blown up." (Department of Defense)
Is the shortage, as Rumsfeld said, "a matter of physics?"
Sec. Donald Rumsfeld said that armor for the Humvees was being produced at maximum capacity. However, a company that makes armored Humvees said they offered to increase production by 22%, which would create an additional 50-100 Humvees per month. Sierra Army Depot, a company that makes Humvee kits, said they could increase production by 150%. The Pentagon, however, never responded to the offers. (USA Today) Since Specialist Wilson spoke up about the armor shortage, armor production has increased, but is still not reaching demand.
How do you armor Humvees?
There are two ways to make armored Humvees.
1. Add armor to unprotected Humvees, or
2. Build armored Humvees from scratch at the factory.
The latter, known as up-armored Humvees, offer more protection those who have armor added afterwards but take longer to produce. As of April 2005, there are about 22,000 armored Humvees in Iraq (USA Today), of which less than 10,000 are factory-built (Associated Press).
How serious is the shortage?
Estimates indicate that anywhere between one-fifth to one-half of the 1,320 troops killed and 9,000 troops wounded in Iraq were victims of hidden roadside bombs that penetrated poorly armored Humvees or trucks ambushed on military convoys. (Indystar, Scripps Howard News Service)
There are also armor shortages for medium and heavyweight trucks that transport food, fuel, and supplies. According to the House Armed Services Committee, only 10% of 4,814 medium-weight transport trucks and 15% of 4,314 heavy trucks are armored. (LA Times)
Want to know more about the human cost of the armor shortage? Read the New York Times article, "Bloodied Marines Sound Off About Want of Armor and Men," about Company E, the Marine unit that has suffered the highest casualty rate of the war.
And check out these stories posted at Operation Truth by Iraq vets:
Why do we have a shortage of armored Humvees?
When the White House first decided to deploy troops into Iraq, the Pentagon was largely unprepared for the kind of response the troops received. Iraqi exiles told officials that U.S. troops would be greeted as liberators, and didn't expect this kind of insurgency months after the collapse of Saddam's regime. As a result, the Pentagon didn't make requests for many armored vehicles, relying primarily on the Humvee as a vehicle that would not see much combat. As time passed and the situation in Iraq proved to be one where insurgents were common and a long-term occupation proved necessary to restore the peace, more armored vehicles were needed, and the Pentagon failed to provide them in any timely manner.
What are defenders of the Pentagon saying?
Defenders of the Pentagon say that even with armored trucks, soldiers are still not fully protected from roadside bombs.
While this may be true, armored Humvees can still save lives and should therefore be used. No excuses.
Some officials claim that armor makes Humvees too heavy, which places stress on the engine, transmission and suspension. The Humvee's versatility and maneuverability are also reduced, as armored Humvees are restricted to roads, have a larger turning radius, and move slower than they would without armor. But as Executive Director and founder of Operation Truth Paul Rieckhoff has commented, troops would rather be in a slow Humvee than one that leaves them vulnerable to attack.
____________________
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." -- George W. Bush
posted on September 29, 2005 03:55:17 PM new
If you had ever served you would know the old axiom "Hurry up and wait"
This is red tape at its finest and they are not kidding about making regulations and probably creating dozens of forms to fill out.
The Senator would of been better off making it a requirement or just making it a bonus payment check to all the military. Might of cost a bit more, but those who should of been reimbursed would of had the money by now even at the expense of those who didn't spend the money.
WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 - The Pentagon has not completed guidelines for allowing soldiers, their families and charities to be reimbursed for some combat equipment they bought for use in Iraq and Afghanistan, a year after the passage of legislation calling for such a program.
The measure, which allows for groups and individuals to make claims of up to $1,100, called for the Department of Defense to set rules for a reimbursement program by February 2005.
The sponsor of the original legislation, Senator Christopher J. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut, says he plans to introduce an amendment to a defense bill this week to take authority for the program from Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and give it to military commanders in the field.
"We should not be sending our young men and women into harm's way less than as well prepared as their nation can prepare them and provide them with the kind of protection they deserve," Mr. Dodd said. "The Pentagon has never acted on this legislation despite the fact that it is the law of the land."
"It has been frustrating," he said. "And the problem still persists."
On Friday, a Pentagon spokeswoman, Lt. Col. Ellen Krenke, said in an e-mail message that Defense Department officials were "in the final stages of putting a reimbursement program together and it is expected to be operating soon." Colonel Krenke declined to discuss a reason for the delay.
Army surveys have shown that infantry members spend hundreds of dollars of their own money each year on gloves, boots, flashlights and other tools used in combat.
The reimbursement program, to be open to troops in combat zones, would cover spending on health, safety and protective equipment - items like body and vehicle armor, special hydration gear, global positioning devices and advanced combat helmets.
Some troops in Iraq have complained that equipment is either lacking or worn, and that they sometimes do not have the necessary gear to protect them from roadside bombs and snipers.
Sgt. Todd B. Bowers, a Marine Corps reservist attending George Washington University here, has served two tours in Iraq. Sergeant Bowers said a rifle scope and goggles that his father bought for him saved his sight when he was shot in the face by a sniper last October. Mr. Bowers spent about $900 for the equipment.
"There are a lot of people serving in the military who do not have the income to pay for some equipment," he said in a telephone interview. "It is not fair that those who have the money can be better prepared than others."
Officials in the Defense Department initially opposed the program last year, arguing that it would be a financial burden and could undermine the accountability and effectiveness of equipment used in combat.
The Army has its own program, called the Rapid Fielding Initiative, to develop and outfit soldiers with the most modern equipment available.
Michael P. Kline, a retired master sergeant who is executive director of the Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States, said families and charities, and soldiers themselves, had had to fulfill the military obligation to provide proper combat equipment.
"National Guard and reservists have been especially adversely impacted by the Pentagon's decision not to move this program forward," Sergeant Kline said. "Due to equipment shortages in the Guard, these soldiers spend a lot of money out of pocket. These patriotic men and women deserve to have their expenses reimbursed."
____________________
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." -- George W. Bush
