Pentagon cuts by third places where U.S. troops get danger pay

WASHINGTON Fri Jan 3, 2014 5:41pm EST

Related Topics

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon said on Friday it had cut by about a third the list of places where U.S. troops get imminent danger pay, dropping locations like Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf in a move expected to reduce costs by about $100 million a year.

"The imminent threat of physical harm to U.S. military personnel due to civil insurrection, civil war, terrorism, or wartime conditions has been significantly reduced in many countries. As a result, IDP will be discontinued in those areas," the Pentagon said in a statement.

Among the more than 20 locales dropped from the new list, which takes effect June 1, is Bahrain, headquarters to the U.S. Fifth Fleet, plus the waterways of the neighboring Gulf, Arabian Sea and Red Sea, where the Navy regularly deploys its ships.

Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan also were removed as countries where U.S. forces receive imminent danger pay. The U.S. military has forces in several of those countries as well. In many cases, the airspace above the country or waterway also was removed from the list.

Military personnel will continue to receive imminent danger pay for serving in countries like Afghanistan and Iraq, where the United States fought wars over the last decade. They will also get it in Jordan and Turkey, which border Syria, where a civil war is raging.

The sea near Somalia, where pirates have been active, is on the imminent danger list. So is Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the home of the U.S. prison for captured enemy combatants, as well as Israel, Azerbaijan and the city of Athens, Greece.

Army Colonel Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman, said the Defense Department spent about $500 million on imminent danger pay in 2012. Military personnel receive $7.50 per day when working in areas where they are eligible for the special pay, up to a maximum of $225 per month, he said.

Warren said the decision to drop places from the list followed a regular review and was not budget-driven. The reviews take place every couple of years, he said, with the last one being in 2011.

"This is a routine recertification. ... The combatant commands take a look at the security situation in their areas and make recommendations," he said.

Warren said 194,189 military personnel received imminent danger pay in 2012, the most recent year for which there were records. As a result of the changes, about 50,000 fewer people will receive the pay, reducing costs by about $100 million, he said.

A defense official said the cost reduction would be driven by two main factors - the continuing drawdown of U.S. troops in Afghanistan and the removal from the list of so many places where the United States regularly deploys personnel.

(Reporting by David Alexander; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama and Andrew Hay)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (2)
SKYDRIFTER wrote:
Of all the mistakes and judgment errore coming out of DC, there has never been a “cost overrun” when it comes to military pay.

As so often heard in the DC area: “There are no coincidences inside the Beltway.”

In light of the DoD “lost trillions,” there is a distinct sadness lingering in the air, about this.

It’s almost funny that none of the employees of the “civilian contractors” or the surrogate military “Private Military Companies,” such as “Blackwater,” complained about their pay.

Was Kissinger THAT correct in his contemptuous description of the American G.I.?

But, the never-ever-ending cost overrun in the F-35 project goes onward; with Chinese parts included.

Is it true? –

“What’s good for America; is bad for Americans.”

Jan 04, 2014 4:51am EST  --  Report as abuse
GSRyder wrote:
Sounds like they, the “Dept of OFFENSE / War Dept.”, is opening up some cash for their next evil invasion some where on the planet . They know no shame and show no disgrace .

Jan 04, 2014 6:19am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.

A tourist takes a plunge as she swims at Ngapali Beach, a popular tourist site, in the Thandwe township of the Rakhine state, October 6, 2013. Picture taken October 6, 2013. REUTERS/Soe Zeya Tun (MYANMAR - Tags: SOCIETY) - RTR3FOI0

Where do you want to go?

We look at when to take trips, budget considerations and the popularity of multigenerational family travel.   Video