CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF WASHINGTON, D.C. 2D31IMl999 ACTION MEMO Clt-1232-03 30 September 2003 FOR: SECRETARY OF DEFENSE .L DepSec Action --~ FROM: General Richard 8. Myers, CJCs~C/(f'( SUBJECT: Service Deployment Force Ratios 1 In response to your inquiry . the following information is provided. 1 As you know. Services' Force Rotation Goals were discussed at length during ELABORATE CROSSBOW m, culminating in a brief to you on 15 September. As a result, a common method of force deployment ratio measurement has been agreed upon: number of months deployed versus number of months non­ deployed. • As \Ve have discussed, force ratios will continue to differ by Services for a variety of reasons, and each Service builds its force deployment ratio goals based on the competing demands of long-standing global contingency commitments, sustaining readiness and managing force tempo. , Current Service Ratio -Goals (by Service) are: • Navy I :3: 6 months deployed for every 18 months non-deployed. Unit of measure is each fleet unit. • Marines I :3: 6 months deployed for every l 8 months non-deployed. Unit of measure is a battalion. • Anny I :4: 6 months deployed for every 24 months nonwdeployed. Unit of measure is a brigade. • Air Force 1:4: 3 months deployed for every 12 months non-deployed. Unit of measure is the Air Expeditionary Force. • Recommend an upcoming session be set aside to meet with Service Chiefs to further explore underlying force rotation goal rationales. RECOMMENDATION: OSD and CJCS staffs coordinate meeting with Service Chiefs regarding force rotation goal rationales. Approve J;-A.- Disapprove Other ____ 11-L-0559/0SD/18577 This document is made available through the declassification efforts and research of John Greenewald, Jr., creator of: The Black Vault The Black Vault is the largest online Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) document clearinghouse in the world. The research efforts here are responsible for the declassification of hundreds of thousands of pages released by the U.S. Government & Military. Discover the Truth at: http://www.theblackvault.com ·' COORDINATION: . Attachments: As stated 5 Prepared By: Lt Gen N. A. Schwartz, USAF; Director, J-3;,._!<b_)<_) _ ____, 11-L-055g/0SD/18578 COORDINATION PAGE USA LTC (P) Hooker 6 August 2003 USN CAPT Thompson 6 August 2003 USAF Col Ball 6 August 2003 USMC Col Van Dyke 6 August 2003 11-L-0559/0SD/18579 1,'t July,.24, 2003 TO: Gen. Keane ADM Clark Gen. Jumper Gen. Hagee CC: Gen. Myers FROM: Donald Rumsfeld ~I\ SUBJECT: Core Competencies Attached is an information paper from Ray DuBois about the Army prison system. As you will see on page three, the cost per inmate at the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks is $46,000, versus $15,000 in a federal penitentiary and $12,000 in the Kansas penitentiaries. Clearly that is not a core competence of the U.S. mibtary. There are dozens of examples like this. We need to do more benchmarking and get about the task of transferring these things to the private sector. Thanks. Attach. 7/22/03 DuBois memo re: Transfer of the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks DHR:dh 072403,22 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Please respond by----------- V,rl1l to It; U2094J 103 11-L-0559/0SD/18580 /f'UU',' INFORMATION PAPER £.... ~ OM1n-, July 22, 2003 ";2 • ' z.. " 3.,-d 1,1- ~ MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD SUBJECT: Transfer of the United States Disciplinary Barracks Reference: The Senior Executive Council (SEC) meetings on August 15 and September 24, 2002, the Army outlined a plan to outsource the operations of military prisons. Background: New Disciplinary Barracks opened Oct 02 and houses 428 prisoners of all Services Federal Bureau of Prisons houses without compensation 330 other DoD prisoners at various security levels. • 70 at maximum security, under a 1994 Memorandum of Agreement The Services Secretaries agreed, outsourcing long-term incarceration of DoD prisoners at the US disciplinary Barracks to the Fed bureau of Prisons was appropriate. Based on the agreement of the Service Secretaries, the Army has begun negotiations for transfer of responsibility for both DoD Level Ill prisoners and the US Disciplinary Barracks. • Negotiations should be completed by Sep 03 • Will free-up 393 military police, 103 other mHltary and 94 civilian spaces , Estimated annual saving of $30 million POC: Rich Whiston, SASA-Business Transformation 11-L-0559/0SD/18581 The Army Prison Systen 11-L-0559/0SD/18582 The Prison Decision Long term incarceration of prisoners is not a core competency of the Army. Therefore, the Army will no longer manage prisons. Prisoners will be sent to the Federal Bureau of Prisons (FBOP) and/or FBOP contracted private or state facilities. The new facility at Leavenworth will either be turned over to the Federal Bureau of Prisons or sold to a private company. Note: This BIG proposal was approved by the Secretary of the Army on June 27, 2002. 11-L-0559/0SD/18583 Facts • Army operates 6 prisons. - One Level Ill: USDB at Fort Leavenworth - Three Level II: Fort Sill, Fort Lewis, Fort Knox - Two Level I: Mannheim Germany, Camp Humphreys~ Korea • Army has 1603 inmates (1051 in Army prisons; 552 elsewhere (Navy/USMC 99, FBOP 383, and local facilities 70)). • Army is DOD executive agent for Level Ill prisoners. • USDB, DOD1s only Level Ill facility, replaced by a new $68M facility that holds one third of the previous capacity (521 ). • Navy/Marine Corps operates Level II prisons at Charleston, Miramar, Norfolk, Pendleton, Lejeune and Quantico. • Air Force does not operate Level II facilities. '1., 11-L-0559/0SD/18584 Statistics • Cost Per Inmate Per Year - Leavenworth area prisons Federal penitentiary $15,300 KS penitentiary $12,100 CCA facility $16,100 USDB $46,000 - FBOP FY 2003 budget $23,700 - DOJ Bureau of Justice statistics Kentucky $16,300 (Fort Knox, KY $50,500) Washington $26,700 (Fort Lewis, WA $63,400) Oklahoma $10,600 (Fort Sill, OK $61,300) Nationwide $20,100 • Cost Drivers Facility size: DOD 200 - 400 inmates; Leavenworth federal penitentiary 2,095; state and private about 1,000 - Inmate to employee ratio: DOD 1.5 - 2.0; private and federal 3.3 - 4.6 3 11-L-0559/0SD/18585 Issues • While cost comparisons with other facilities are not completely on an "apple to apple0 basis, Army costs are significantly higher. • For the Army, using non-Army prison facilities frees up approximately 1 ,000 soldiers for reallocation to other priorities. The cost of reallocating the soldiers would be less than adding to the end strength. • Army would retain Level I capability for pre-trial and short term incarceration and return to duty; retention of any residual Level 11 capability will be an issue for consideration. • Legal Counsel opine .... - No legal objection to contracting out prisons. - No legal issues that need to be addressed regarding rehabilitation, return to duty, or welfare of inmates. • There are 819 active 95Cs and 119 RC 95Cs in the Army inventory. When the Level Ill and Level II guards are removed there are 167 active and 119 RC remaining. The use of Army prisons. as training for war time missions for 95Cs is not a critical issue. • Repeat offender rates. Army lower but population is different. 11-L-0559/0SD/18586 t Possible Steps to Implement the Proposal - USDB and some land at Fort Leavenworth (100 acres) transferred to FBOP ownership and operation. • Annual cost of operations for DOD prisoners could be offset to recoup cost of new facility. - Army will continue to send female prisoners to Miramar. s " 11-L-0559/0SD/18587 ~- Snowflake z.'1 July l,4', 2003 TO: Larry Di Rita CC: Col. Bucci FROM: Donald Rumsfeld </ • SUBJECT: Iceland Meeting w/Feith, Crouch I need to meet with Doug Feith and J.D. Crouch on Iceland. Please set up a meeting, and give me: this note on Iceland for the meeting. Thanks. DHR:dh 072403-27 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ·r, 0 - U20944 103 1J,\ • July ~2003 TO: LTGCasey CC. Gen. Myers FROM: Donald Rumsfeld <"}J-, SUBJECT: Metrics in Daily Report Please add a metric in your daily reports on the number of people who are .bei!_lg ~sted and what happens to them. Do they get released? Are they put in jail? Also you need a metric on the number of weapons we are capLuring every day. Thanks . DHR:dh 072403-29 • ........................................................................ , Please respond by ___'i-/_1 r/_::i_3__ _ • U20945 /03 11-L-0559/0SD/18589 .. "Iii cJh July 24, 2003 eJ=-- 6 3Z/ I- 03/01os1-3 Doug Feith Paul Wolfowitz SUBJECT: American Iraqis I believe we simply have to get more American Iraqis in there working with our people. Thanks. DHH.:dh 07240).)J ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Please respond by __f,..../r.....,/ ..... 0_1 __ _ U20946 /0} 29- -03 11-L-0559/0SD/18590 .• FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY -- INFO MEMO EF-632 1 I. 03/010573-ES Deputy Secretary__ FOR: SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FROM: SUBJECT: More Iraqi-Americans in Iraq • You asked what we are doing to get more Iraqi-Americans working with our forces in Iraq. - With the Army as executive agent, we are about to start contracting for Iraqi expatriates to serve with our forces in haq as interpreter-advisors. - These individuals will not only interpret Arabic or Kurdish, but will also advise their U.S. commander on local, politics, atmospherics, and culture. - Those hired will probably include Iraqis with citizenship or permanent resident alien status in the U.S., Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and members states of the European Union. • Our goal is to contract 1,000 qualified Iraqi expatriates and place them with U.S. units down as far as company level by the end of the year.