Veteran Issues Digest Number 1686

[admin]

1. FW: INTERNAL REVENUE RULING 78-161 DISABLED MILITARY RETIREES AFFE From: Colonel Dan
2. VA says more Marion, Ill., surgeons placed on leave From: Colonel Dan 3. Faster OK sought for Agent Orange claims From: Colonel Dan
4. In some States, Veterans' tuition breaks expand From: Colonel Dan
5. Navy facility blamed in MRAP production delay From: Colonel Dan

1. FW: INTERNAL REVENUE RULING 78-161 DISABLED MILITARY RETIREES AFFE

Posted by: "Colonel Dan" colonel-dan@sbcglobal.net coloneldan1

Fri Nov 9, 2007 7:52 am (PST)

contact RetAirForceMan@ aol.com

_____

From: RetAirForceMan@ aol.com [mailto:RetAirForceMan@ aol.com]
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 8:02 AM
To: colonel-dan@ sbcglobal. net;
Subject: INTERNAL REVENUE RULING 78-161 DISABLED MILITARY RETIREES AFFECTED

I received this notification from DFAS Cleveland Retired Pay office
concerning retroactive VA decisions that change reported taxable income for military retirees. CRDP came into effect on Jan 1 2004 and all previous years military retirees had a dollar for dollar offset on the retired military pay for awarded VA disability compensation which if awarded retroactively affected previous tax years reported by DFAS to the Internal Revenue Service. These retroactive years awarded by the VA under current federal law for the Internal Revenue Service guidelines only goes back three years unless this recent IRS RULING changes that. I do not know the answer to that question as of yet. I do know that according to DFAS's recent email notification to me that a military retiree with a VA retroactive decision is suppose to contact the IRS who is suppose to change all taxable years affected by that VA retroactive decision. I do not know if the notification that I received was coordinated with the IRS, DoD, Congress and the Senate.
Supposedly they are referring to a Supreme court ruling that supports their email to me and a recent IRS Ruling.

If you would be willing to share this with your contacts and membership for feedback and any other information you would be willing to share with me and Congressman Higgins office and Senator Clinton's office I would be grateful.

kindness regards and thank you for your service to our great country,

MSgt LeRoy G. Foster, USAF, Retired
1967 to 1987 active duty Vietnam War and Cold War Veteran
100% unemployable 70% Service connected disabled
Disabled retired DoD, DFAS and Air Force civil servant 1993 - 2004
Operation Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom direct support with the 48th Tactical Fighter Wing 2000-2003
Life Member of the NY State Disabled American Veterans



Congressman Higgins, Donna Coughlin and Theresa Kennedy, Senator Young, Mary Alice Demler WGRZ News, Mary Fiona - WGRZ News reporter, Mr Robertson of the American Legion National Legislative Office, Dunkirk Observer Dispatch, Jamestown Post Journal, Westfield Republican, New York Times News, George Noory, DAV NY, AND OTHERS,

I just received the below email from DFAS Cleveland Retired Pay section IRS RULING 78-161 which clearly gives new light and new direction for service connected disabled military retirees and the change to taxable income reported by the Department of Defense on 1099R's to IRS and all previous years of retroactive VA disability decisions will be adjusted by the IRS with a copy of the VA Disability decision and the impact on taxable income on all previously reported taxable income amounts by the Department of Defense. This is a huge decision and a huge mess for the IRS. This undoubtedly is so complex that a computer program must be developed in order that all tax tables, tax rulings, etc that affected disabiled military retirees with such a huge change with this decision. In my VA case, it went back twenty years. This is so huge that I could not even comprehend its final outcome or payment of refunds on lost untaxable income and I am a retired accountant. I can't even imagine how this would seem for a regular military retiree.

I wanted to pass along this information and to see what others think of it.
It should be disseminated as quickly as possible for our country's disabled military retirees right before Veterans Day. Thank you very much. I hope the IRS has sent up some sort of team to handle disabled military retirees accounts and retroactive VA decisions.It looks like DFAS and DoD has put the burden on this with the IRS and the VA.

Sincerely,

MSgt LeRoy Foster, USAF, Retired
100% service connected disabled
LIFE MEMBER OF THE DAV OF NY
716-348-1970



Inquiry provided answer by Retired Pay DFAS Cleveland Center

In a message dated 11/8/2007 12:36:18 PM Eastern Standard Time,
CCL-MB-RETIRED- PAY@DFAS. MIL writes:

Dear MSG Foster,

Internal Revenue Ruling 78-161, which is based on the Strickland
Decision, provides that military retirees may receive the tax benefit
derived from retroactive awards of VA disability compensation. When a
retiree receives an initial award or an increase in disability
compensation from the VA which is retroactive, the retroactive portion
of the compensation may be excluded from his/her taxable retired pay.

For initial awards, the retroactive portion is the disability
compensation entitlement from the effective date shown on the VA award letter through the day before the reduction of retired pay.

For increases in awards, the retroactive portion is the difference
between the increased award and the amounts by which retired pay was
reduced from the effective date of the increased award as shown on the
VA award letter through the day before the reduction of retired pay.

It should be noted that the amount you exclude may not exceed your
monthly taxable retired pay for any given month.

Because your retired pay was reduced after the effective date of the
award, you may exclude the retroactive portion when you file your annual tax return. We suggest that you attach copies of the VA award letter with your 1099-R to your tax return to substantiate your entitlement to the exclusion. In addition, it may benefit you to file amended tax returns for any previous years for which retroactive disability compensation was awarded. Consult the IRS to determine for which years you can file amended returns.

Your local Internal Revenue Service office will assist you in obtaining
any tax benefit due as a result of this ruling.

We request that if you need to contact us again, please provide a
detailed description of your previous e-mails in your subsequent e-mail.
Please click on the following link to begin your e-mail response and be
sure to answer the verification questions:

We are committed to providing quality service to our customers. If you
have any questions or require additional information, please don't
hesitate to contact us again by e-mail or by calling 1-800-321-1080.
Customer Service Representatives are available Monday through Friday
from 7:00 a.m. to 7:30 p.m., Eastern Time.

Sincerely,

J. Kitchen
Retired and Annuity Pay Contact Center

_____

See what's new at AOL.com <http://www.aol. com/?NCID= AOLCMP0030000000 1170>
and Make AOL Your
<http://www.aol. com/mksplash. adp?NCID= AOLCMP0030000000 1169> Homepage.

------------ -----
Forwarded Message:

Subj: Inquiry
Date: 11/8/2007 12:36:18 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: CCL-MB-RETIRED- PAY@DFAS. MIL
To: RETAIRFORCEMAN@ aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details) <aolmsg://05b23068/ inethdr/2>

Dear MSG Foster,

Internal Revenue Ruling 78-161, which is based on the Strickland
Decision, provides that military retirees may receive the tax benefit
derived from retroactive awards of VA disability compensation. When a
retiree receives an initial award or an increase in disability
compensation from the VA which is retroactive, the retroactive portion
of the compensation may be excluded from his/her taxable retired pay.

For initial awards, the retroactive portion is the disability
compensation entitlement from the effective date shown on the VA award letter through the day before the reduction of retired pay.

For increases in awards, the retroactive portion is the difference
between the increased award and the amounts by which retired pay was
reduced from the effective date of the increased award as shown on the
VA award letter through the day before the reduction of retired pay.

It should be noted that the amount you exclude may not exceed your
monthly taxable retired pay for any given month.

Because your retired pay was reduced after the effective date of the
award, you may exclude the retroactive portion when you file your annual tax return. We suggest that you attach copies of the VA award letter with your 1099-R to your tax return to substantiate your entitlement to the exclusion. In addition, it may benefit you to file amended tax returns for any previous years for which retroactive disability compensation was awarded. Consult the IRS to determine for which years you can file amended returns.

Your local Internal Revenue Service office will assist you in obtaining
any tax benefit due as a result of this ruling.

We request that if you need to contact us again, please provide a
detailed description of your previous e-mails in your subsequent e-mail.
Please click on the following link to begin your e-mail response and be
sure to answer the verification questions:
https://ca.dtic. mil/dfas/ s-retired/ ret1-pay. htm

We are committed to providing quality service to our customers. If you
have any questions or require additional information, please don't
hesitate to contact us again by e-mail or by calling 1-800-321-1080.
Customer Service Representatives are available Monday through Friday
from 7:00 a.m. to 7:30 p.m., Eastern Time.

Sincerely,

J. Kitchen
Retired and Annuity Pay Contact Center



LeRoy G. Foster, MSgt, USAF, Retired
100% Service Connected Disabled
Life Member of the D.A. V.

<http://www.usdr. org/index. php?option= com_content& task=category& sectionid= 4&
id=19&Itemid= 34> President
SGM
<http://www.usdr. org/index. php?option= com_content& task=view& id=98&Itemid= 34>
Tony Nathe (USA-Retired) - USDR President

nathe_tony.jpg
<http://www.usdr. org/images/ stories/national officers/ nathe_tony. jpg>

Getting ready for the USDR Annual Meeting the past fours years has always been a busy time for the Nathe Family, especially the past two years. When we finished putting together the registration packets on Friday afternoon, I knew I still had two days to pack and write the content for this flyer. Over the course of the past few months, the USDR has been experiencing financial problems, so on several occasions I wondered how much value there was in holding an annual meeting and being financially responsible at the same time. Several months ago I asked myself why many of our USDR members went AWOL once the Congress passed CRDP and CRSC. Maybe they were just
tired of the fight and felt this was the only fulfillment of promised
entitlements they would ever receive from our government, no one really knows. I finally realized those who left USDR should not be our focus, it should be those who have not yet heard about USDR. The number of prospective members for the USDR is almost unlimited, so when I hear people talk about downsizing or disbanding the USDR, I guess that is one course of action. But I honestly believe that it is not the course of action that our founding members would choose. It's not the course that I see in my vision for the future of our organization. Every day the USDR receives emails and letters from hurting, disabled military retirees who ask for our help! Some times it's for information, other times it's for money, but mostly they want to know that someone cares about their feelings of betrayal caused by believing military recruiters and government leaders. The broken promise of retirement entitlements if they chose a career of military service! This almost daily interaction with retirees (and their families) is an experience that at times is disheartening. How could the United States of America lower its' disabled military retirees to such a neglected, forgotten segment
of our society? No major media outlet has stepped forward to pick up our cause, because they are constantly focused on the sexual escapades of the "Hollywood elite" and the often staged "political bickering" of our two major political parties. The consistent story we hear from military
retirees, their widows, and their adult sons and daughters is always the
same, "Promises Made and Promises Broken, but the USDR was always in there fighting for us!" All we can offer them are our prayers and our care and concern. Adding to their pain is the fact that many of our current leaders in the Administration and the US Congress are co-conspirators, as they truly believe by throwing money at the DoD, our problems will be solved, and that "just isn't so"! According to recent Federal Financial Management Reports, the DoD routinely lacks basic accounting requirements. Since the Federal Financial Management Act of 1996 was passed and required major federal agencies to comply substantially with generally accepted accounting standards, all independent audit opinions show that the DoD, with its 460 billion dollar budget, has never even come close to passing. Don't get me wrong, I am not an "anti-defense" advocate, for I did not spend the last 40 years of my life serving the military, the government, my country, non-profit organizations, and my fellow man, just to give up now. However, occasionally I become disillusioned that there are so many in government, media and politics, who have such a casual attitude about keeping promises, unless it applies to their own situation. There was a day in this country
when a handshake was a promise, but that is not the norm inside the
"beltway" of Washington, DC. But, I believe the tide is turning, because
more and more American citizens are realizing that many leaders have no common sense, no personal ethics, no leadership ability, and no concept of what serving our country means. The USDR has great members, and within that membership are good leaders, who are tried and true...we just need to find them. These leaders have the experience and the patience to stick to the mission of USDR. We must find them and bring them forward and we can only do this through continued dedication, hard work and motivation. I hope to help in this search now that you have elected me the USDR President.

_____

See what's new at AOL.com <http://www.aol. com?NCID= AOLCMP0030000000 1170>
and Make AOL Your Homepage
<http://www.aol. com/mksplash. adp?NCID= AOLCMP0030000000 1169>
2. VA says more Marion, Ill., surgeons placed on leave

Posted by: "Colonel Dan" colonel-dan@sbcglobal.net coloneldan1

Fri Nov 9, 2007 8:31 am (PST)

a number of stories have appeared about the Marion IL, VAMC in southern IL some info from them below
http://www.durbin. senate.gov/ showRelease. cfm?releaseId= 284067

WREX TV :: Rockford, IL News/index. php?ID=23171

http://www.kentucky .com/471/ story/223298. html
Nov6, 2007

VA says more Marion, Ill., surgeons placed on leave

By JIM SUHR

Associated Press Writer

Sen. Dick Durbin pledged Tuesday to push federal legislation to reform
hiring practices at Veterans Affairs hospitals nationwide after the VA
revealed three more doctors have been placed on leave by an Illinois site that already has stopped performing surgeries.

VA officials who testified Tuesday before the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs did not offer specifics about the three surgeons recently placed on leave at the VA in Marion, Ill.

Scrutiny in Marion has mushroomed since August, when Dr. Jose Veizaga-Mendez resigned three days after a Kentucky man bled to death following gallbladder surgery the surgeon performed.

Shortly afterward, that hospital suspended inpatient operations because of a spike in post-surgical deaths and reassigned or placed on leave four
officials, including the chief of surgery.

The VA says 10 patients died under the care of Veizaga-Mendez, whose
Illinois license was indefinitely suspended last month by regulators.

********
1. Did Dr. Veizaga-Mendez treat any patients who have died at the facility?
If so, how many and what was his role in each case?
2. How long has Dr. Veizaga-Mendez been employed at the Marion VAMC? Please describe in detail the background check that the VA performed before hiring Dr. Veizaga-Mendez, including whether the National Practitioner Data Bank was queried?
3. Was the VA aware that the Illinois Department of Financial and
Professional Regulation was investigating whether to suspend or revoke his Illinois license? If so, when did you become aware of that fact and what action did you take?
4. In general, what kind of background checks are performed by the VA before hiring medical staff who will be providing direct care to our veterans?
5. What interim and long term steps is the VA taking to improve its system in order to ensure these problems do not arise in any other VA medical facilities?
6. What plans are underway within the VA to discuss these tragedies with the affected families and provide compensation?

***********

* The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) announced it will send a
multi-disciplinary assessment team to the VA Marion, Ill., Hospital to
review recent allegations made by hospital employees relating to operations at the facility.

The team will assess personnel practices and procedures at the
facility; review issues related to equal employment opportunity; assess how well employees and managers are communicating; and evaluate how well the facility is implementing hiring processes and procedures. The team will be comprised of experts from human resources and employee and labor relations; a representative from VHA's National Center for Organizational Development; a representative from VA's Office of General Counsel; an environment of care expert; an Office of Resolution Management representative; and VA leaders and managers from other health care facilities.

Team members will also assess the impact of issues that have already
been raised at Marion on the manner in which care is delivered to veterans at the hospital and will educate employees about issues they have raised concerning possible retaliation.

Upon completion of their review, team members will provide
recommendations for improvements at the facility to acting VA Secretary Mansfield. They will also suggest follow-up activities to ensure their recommendations are fully implemented.

VA began its review of issues at Marion as a result of a June 2007
statistical analysis by its National Surgical Quality Improvement Program that indicated higher levels of mortality than expected among patients at the facility over a six-month time frame. As a result, VA's Office of the Medical Inspector conducted an on-site review of the facility to determine if community standards of care were met for certain patients who underwent surgery there between October 2005 and September 2007. This clinical review is ongoing.

VA's Office of the Inspector General

is also conducting an investigation at the request of Department
leadership, which includes, but is not limited to, a review of surgical care
at the hospital over the last 12 months. The Inspector General's review of
Marion's quality of care is also ongoing, and the office will carefully
review all relevant information to include the assessment team's report to see if the information the team gathers will shed light or add additional information to the Inspector General's investigation.
<http://www1. va.gov/opa/ pressrel/ pressrelease. cfm?id=1408>
http://www1. va.gov/opa/ pressrel/ pressrelease. cfm?id=1408

* On Nov. 7, 2007The Boston Globe reported that Jose Veizaga-Mendez,
the doctor allegedly linked to the deaths of 10 patients at the Marion Ill.
veteran's hospital has been permanently barred from practicing medicine in Massachusetts.

The board said it accepted the resignation of Veizaga-Mendez' s right
to renew his medical license, a disciplinary action that permanently removes a physician from the practice of medicine.

The resignation also requires Veizaga-Mendez to resign any other
state medical licenses he may hold, as well as to withdraw any pending
license applications.

Veizaga-Mendez was under investigation in Massachusetts on
allegations of substandard care made against him in 2004 and 2005. He was being investigated for botching seven cases, two of which ended in deaths, before he relocated to Illinois in 2006.

The board had issued formal allegations that Veizaga-Mendez provided
substandard care to several patients. The case was slated to be heard by an administrative magistrate when Veizaga-Mendez opted to resign instead.

Veizaga-Mendez is still under investigation in connection with the
deaths of the nine veterans in Illinois. The deaths all occurred in a
six-month period ending in March, during which the hospital would have
expected only two deaths.

Even before Veizaga-Mendez was hired at the Veterans Administration
hospital in Illinois, he had made payouts in two malpractice suits in
Massachusetts.
<http://www.boston. com/news/ local/massachuse tts/articles/ 2007/11/07/ doctor_l
inked_to_deaths_ barred_from_ practicing_ medicine/ >
http://www.boston. com/news/ local/massachuse tts/articles/ 2007/11/07/ doctor_li
nked_to_deaths_ barred_from_ practicing_ medicine/ .

3. Faster OK sought for Agent Orange claims

Posted by: "Colonel Dan" colonel-dan@sbcglobal.net coloneldan1

Fri Nov 9, 2007 8:44 am (PST)


Faster OK sought for Agent Orange claims

By Rick <mailto:rmaze@atpco. com?subject=Question from ArmyTimes.com reader>
Maze - Staff writer
Posted : Friday Nov 9, 2007 8:16:08 EST
http://www.armytime s.com/news/ 2007/11/military _filnervets_ 071108w/

The chairman of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee has a radical idea to cut the huge and seemingly intractable backlog of veterans' benefits claims.

To focus on handling new claims from Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans, Rep. Bob Filner, D-Calif., says the Department of Veterans Affairs should approve - with minimal questioning - claims filed by Vietnam veterans, especially those whose claims deal with exposure to the toxic herbicide Agent Orange.

In an interview Thursday, Filner said he sees no way for VA to make headway in reducing the backlog of more than 400,000 claims without "radical" reforms that must include eliminating an adversarial process that puts veterans in a defensive position.

"We know Agent Orange is a carcinogen, and that people could be exposed directly or indirectly in Vietnam," he said. "We don't need to be demanding scientific proof any longer."

Expanded compensation would include paying the disputed claims of Navy veterans who served in the waters off Vietnam and never came ashore but think they still have herbicide-related health problems.

Filner's idea would require an act of Congress. He envisions linking it with other disability legislation.

Filner, a longtime advocate of improved Agent Orange benefits, has another motive in pushing for VA approval of Vietnam-era claims. He thinks it will be easier to pass disability benefits reforms aimed at helping Iraq and Afghanistan veterans - including a controversial plan that would consider income loss, quality of life and a veterans' continued participation in rehabilitation when setting monthly benefits payments - if older veterans think the government is also doing something to help them.

"We have to do something for both groups," Filner said.

To cut the backlog, Filner thinks VA needs a system that quickly approves relatively simple claims and provides partial benefits - maybe 30 percent or 40 percent of full payment - for veterans while they are waiting for their claims to be verified and approved.

VA and some veterans groups oppose such a system out of concern that
automatically approving claims with no prior verification could encourage fraud.

4. In some States, Veterans' tuition breaks expand

Posted by: "Colonel Dan" colonel-dan@sbcglobal.net coloneldan1

Fri Nov 9, 2007 9:08 am (PST)

By <http://www.usatoday .com/community/ tags/reporter. aspx?id=428> Mary Beth
Marklein and Clair Lorell, USA TODAY


<http://www.usatoday .com/news/ education/ 2007-07-10- gi-bill_N. htm?loc=interst
itialskip>
http://www.usatoday .com/news/ education/ 2007-07-10- gi-bill_N. htm?loc=intersti
tialskip

A growing number of states are cutting college tuition for recent veterans in a show of gratitude, but also in some cases to fill gaps in the federal GI Bill. Though most of the state laws honor veterans for their sacrifices, some also address disparities between the treatment of members of the regular military - Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force - and of National Guard troops, over whom states have jurisdiction.

SPECIAL REPORT:
<http://www.usatoday .com/news/ education/ 2007-07-10- gi-bill-report_ N.htm>
http://www.usatoday .com/news/ education/ 2007-07-10- gi-bill-report_ N.htm

Until 9/11, National Guard units were rarely deployed to combat zones or for long periods of time. Since then, about 240,000 Guard members, many of them college students, have been called up.

"The National Guard has been mobilized in a way that no one anticipated, " says Texas state Sen. Leticia Van de Putte, president of the National
Conference of State Legislatures. "So yes, (state legislation) is bubbling
up."

The number of states offering a tuition break to recent veterans has more
than tripled, from six to 19, since 9/11. Five states passed laws this year;
several have proposals in the pipeline. Benefits range from a full ride for
veterans in Illinois to a tuition freeze in Tennessee for Guard and Reserves mobilized for at least six months. They typically must attend a state school and meet residency and academic requirements.

Nearly every state today also offers tuition help for Guard members who
attend college while enlisted, but those benefits end when members leave the service. They also end for members of the Reserves.

STATES:
<http://www.usatoday .com/news/ education/ 2007-07-10- gi-bill-states_ N.htm>
http://www.usatoday .com/news/ education/ 2007-07-10- gi-bill-states_ N.htm
coverage for various States

Congress has tinkered with federal laws, and several Senate proposals would expand benefits even more. But University of Kansas senior Dan Parker, 25, a Marine who served two tours in Iraq, says states have some responsibility because rapidly rising tuitions and shrinking higher education budgets contribute to the problem.

"If you want (to get) a four-year education on the GI Bill, you're going to
have to go in debt or work all the time," says Parker, who helped craft a
bill this year that led to a $250,000 scholarship fund for Kansas veterans.

But as states face tight budgets, lawmakers struggle with where to draw the line.

. In Wisconsin, where a 100% waiver kicked in this month, some lawmakers want to pare back eligibility.

. Maryland placed 40 applicants on a waiting list after exhausting its
$500,000 scholarship budget.

. Last year, Massachusetts enacted only part of a proposal, providing a fee waiver to National Guard members but not to other veterans.

Illinois

Veterans have generally been given a free ride at state schools since 1920, but state funding in recent years has come up short. A proposal this year would ensure colleges that absorb the cost get reimbursed by the state.

Contributing: Heather Collura, Marissa DeCuir; Ben Jones, The Post-Crescent in Appleton, Wis.

TELL US YOUR STORIES
<http://images. usatoday. com/_common/ _images/clear. gif>

USA TODAY will write more in coming months about recent veterans and their GI Bill experiences, positive or negative. If you are willing to be interviewed, e-mail your name, phone number and a brief description of your experience to <mailto:mmarklein@usatoday. com> mmarklein@usatoday. com

5. Navy facility blamed in MRAP production delay

Posted by: "Colonel Dan" colonel-dan@sbcglobal.net coloneldan1

Fri Nov 9, 2007 9:24 am (PST)


Note the war may be over before they get there

15,274 MRAPs to be built are needed to protect U.S. troops , expected to
handle 50 MRAP installations a day

Navy facility blamed in MRAP production delay

By Richard Lardner - The Associated Press
Posted : Friday Nov 9, 2007 8:03:16 EST
http://www.navytime s.com/news/ 2007/11/ap_ mrap_071109/

The Pentagon's $23 billion program to rush thousands of lifesaving vehicles to Iraq is bogged down by production delays and the demands of the military services, members of Congress said Thursday.

At a hearing by the House Armed Services Committee, lawmakers said a Navy warfare center in Charleston, S.C., being used to install the radio jammers and communications systems on the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, is not organized to do the work.

"It kind of reminded me of the middle of the night before Christmas
assembling my kid's toys," said Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Miss., who recently
visited the Charleston facility. "I'm still not convinced we're doing
everything we can do."

Even though the 15,274 MRAPs to be built are needed to protect U.S. troops from the common threat of roadside bombs, each branch of the armed services has its own unique gear it wants installed, said Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii.

As defense contractors build greater numbers of vehicles, this variety of
models further slows the integration process in Charleston, Abercrombie said, and creates support problems once the MRAPs are fielded.

John Young, the Defense Department's top acquisition official, defended the decision to use the Charleston facility, which is expected to handle 50 MRAP installations a day by mid-December.

According to Young, much of the gear being put into the MRAPs is very
sensitive and requires specialized testing facilities the private-sector
manufacturers don't have.

Young said he's pressed hard to make the MRAPs as uniform as possible.

"But at the end of the day, I have to respect the senior military leaders'
decision that says, 'Certain things have to be unique,'" Young said.

The Marine Corps, for example, insisted on a radio frequency jammer that differs greatly in size, weight and power from those used by the other services.

In May, Defense Secretary Robert Gates made the MRAP the Pentagon's top acquisition priority. Young said more than 560 vehicles have been fielded and monthly production will top 1,000 by the end of the year.

Taylor, whose home state of Mississippi was devastated two years ago by
Hurricane Katrina, also questioned the decision to make a single location in a coastal city the chokepoint for such critical work. If a natural disaster were to hit Charleston, Taylor said, it could cripple the ability to get the vehicles to the troops in combat.

Navy Capt. Red Hoover, commander of the naval center in Charleston, said the government has an alternate facility in Orangeburg, S.C., about 60 miles northwest of Charleston.

In the event of an emergency, Hoover said, his center could shift their
operations to Orangeburg within 72 hours.

Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md., asked why this alternate location is not now
being used to increase the output of MRAPs.

Young said the Charleston center should eventually be able to handle all the vehicles delivered by the manufacturers, which would make operating the second plant unnecessary.

But he acknowledged the military and the MRAP contractors are learning as they go.

"This is one of the risk areas," he said. "It's not clear to us that the
[Navy] won't be able to handle the workload, but we are looking at options for backup."