Guard, reserve reset too slow, lawmakers say - Army News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Army Times

Guard, reserve reset too slow, lawmakers say

National Guard and reserve force readiness is not progressing fast enough for some lawmakers.

Army Lt. Gen. H. Steven Blum, chief of the National Guard Bureau, said April 1 that the levels of equipment available to Army Guard units for domestic missions, which had fallen to 40 percent of requirements in 2006, has climbed to 61 percent today, and will rise to about 70 percent at the end of 2009 and 77 percent by 2013.

Blum called the progress “one illustration of the unprecedented support and commitment” that Congress and the Pentagon have given the issue.

“We will be in an acceptable place in 2013,” Blum said.

But some lawmakers didn’t share the joy. “Well, we will just hope nothing happens between now and 2013,” said Rep. Solomon Ortiz, D-Texas, chairman of the House Armed Services readiness subcommittee, which heard Blum and other Guard and reserve officials testify about readiness gaps largely caused by the heavy demand of equipment and spare parts for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

“It is no secret that all of the services are experiencing readiness shortfalls,” Ortiz said. “These reports cause great concern about the ability to sustain ongoing operations as well as potential future missions.”

Guard officials may cite progress, but having only 61 percent of equipment needs is still bad, Ortiz said.

“A 39 percent equipment shortage creates an unacceptable risk for an emergency response force,” he said. “We certainly would not want our fire or police services to be equipped with 61 percent of their equipment, and I understand that because I used to be a sheriff.”

Rep. Randy Forbes of Virginia, the subcommittee’s ranking Republican, said many of the Guard and reserve equipment issues pre-date operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, but that does not make them any less serious.

“Years of under-funded procurement accounts are manifesting in aging fleets of aircraft, ships and vehicles,” Forbes said.

But he also acknowledged that Blum’s timetable for improving readiness seems realistic. “We must realize that we cannot snap our fingers and produce a reserve component that is full ready, regardless of the funds provided,” Forbes said.

Lt. Gen. Jack Stultz, chief of the Army Reserve, said the long-range Army budget includes about $7 billion to take care of some of the component’s most pressing needs, but that funding is not guaranteed, since higher-priority needs may push reserve programs aside.

Lt. Gen. John Bradley, chief of the Air Force Reserve, said one current problem is under-funding of maintenance, which “reduces aircraft availability for training and operations.”

Blum said he is concerned about the long-term readiness of Air Guard units. “While the Air National Guard has most of its required equipment, the primary challenge is modernizing the aging fleet,” he said.