Back to Top Skip to main content Skip to sub-navigation

Brief Report: Male Infertility, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2013–2017

Image of Sperm is the male reproductive cell  Photo: iStock. Click to open a larger version of the image. Sperm is the male reproductive cell Photo: iStock

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

BACKGROUND

Infertility, defined as the inability to achieve a successful pregnancy after 1 year or more of unprotected sexual intercourse or therapeutic donor insemination, affects approximately 15% of all couples.1–3 Male infertility is diagnosed when, after testing both partners, reproductive problems have been found in the male.1 A male factor contributes in part or whole to about 50% of cases of infertility.4–6 However, determining the true prevalence of male infertility remains elusive, as most estimates are derived from couples seeking assistive reproductive technology in tertiary care or referral centers, population-based surveys, or high-risk occupational cohorts, all of which are likely to underestimate the prevalence of the condition in the general U.S. population.2,7–12

Infertility in men is typically evaluated using semen analysis to assess sperm concentration, motility, and morphology. The most common causes of male infertility are low sperm production, abnormal sperm function, or problems that affect sperm transport.10 However, the cause of male infertility is unknown (idiopathic male infertility) in up to 40% of cases,7,10 and while many infertile men have oligospermia (low sperm concentrations compared with reference ranges) or azoospermia (the absence of motile sperm in semen), some infertile men have normal sperm concentrations.7 Illness, infection, injury, chronic medical conditions, hormonal disorders, genetic disorders, and lifestyle choices (e.g., heavy alcohol use, smoking, or illicit drug use) also may contribute to male infertility.13 In addition, frequent exposure to certain environmental elements such as high temperatures, toxins, medications, and radiation can adversely affect sperm production and/or sperm function.13 

The current report updates and expands on the findings of the previous MSMR analysis of infertility among active component service men.14 Specifically, the current report summarizes the frequencies, rates, temporal trends, types of infertility, and demographic and military characteristics of infertility among active component service men during 2013–2017.

METHODS

The surveillance period was 1 January 2013 through 31 December 2017. The surveillance population consisted of active component service members of the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps who served at any time during the surveillance period. Diagnoses were ascertained from administrative records of all medical encounters of individuals who received care in fixed (i.e., not deployed or at sea) medical facilities of the Military Health System (MHS) or civilian facilities in the Purchased CareThe TRICARE Health Program is often referred to as purchased care. It is the services we “purchase” through the managed care support contracts.purchased care system. These data are maintained in the electronic database of the Defense Medical Surveillance System (DMSS). 

For surveillance purposes, an incident case of male infertility was defined by a case-defining diagnosis (Table 1) in the first diagnostic position of a record of an inpatient or outpatient medical encounter.15 These cases were then grouped into 5 types of male infertility based on the ICD coding system: male infertility unspecified, azoospermia, oligospermia, other male infertility, and infertility due to extratesticular causes. Infertility due to extratesticular causes (ICD-9) was considered a type of male infertility during 2013–2015 only. Other male infertility was considered a type during 2015–2017 only. 

The incidence date was considered the date of the first hospitalization or outpatient medical encounter that included a case-defining diagnosis of male infertility. An individual could be counted as an incident case of male infertility only once during the surveillance period; service men with a documented diagnosis of infertility prior to the surveillance period were excluded from the analysis. Incidence rates were calculated as incident male infertility diagnoses per 10,000 person-years (p-yrs) and were stratified by infertility type as well as by demographic and military characteristics. To assess the healthcare burden associated with male infertility, medical encounters were analyzed separately. The number of inpatient or outpatient encounters with a case-defining diagnostic code recorded in the primary position and the total number of unique individuals affected were computed for each calendar year in the surveillance period.

RESULTS

During the 5-year surveillance period, a total of 17,542 active component service men received incident diagnoses of male infertility, for a crude overall incidence rate of 32.3 cases per 10,000 p-yrs (Table 2). The majority of incident male infertility cases were unspecified male infertility (71.3%), followed by azoospermia (9.3%), oligospermia (8.2%), other male infertility (6.9%), and infertility due to extratesticular causes (4.2%). Azoospermia (3.0 per 10,000 p-yrs) and oligospermia (2.7 per 10,000 p-yrs) were diagnosed at much lower rates than male infertility, unspecified (23.0 per 10,000 p-yrs).

Compared to their respective counterparts, crude overall rates of incident infertility diagnoses were highest among service men aged 30–34 years (60.1 per 10,000 p-yrs), non-Hispanic blacks (36.5 per 10,000 p-yrs), those who were married (52.1 per 10,000 p-yrs), senior enlisted service men (45.1 per 10,000 p-yrs), those working as pilots/air crew (40.9 per 10,000 p-yrs), and those who had 2 or more prior deployments (44.4 per 10,000 p-yrs). Across the services, overall rates of male infertility diagnoses were highest among Army (38.8 per 10,000 p-yrs) or Air Force members (36.6 per 10,000 p-yrs) and lowest among Marine Corps members (20.2 per 10,000 p-yrs) (Table 2). 

Annual rates of incident diagnoses of total male infertility decreased slightly from 35.2 per 10,000 p-yrs in 2013 to 30.3 per 10,000 p-yrs in 2017 (Figure 1). Rates of diagnoses of male infertility, unspecified showed a steady decrease (35.7%) over the course of the 5-year period from 28.0 per 10,000 p-yrs in 2013 to 18.0 per 10,000 p-yrs in 2017. Annual rates of incident azoospermia diagnoses increased from 2.2 per 10,000 p-yrs in 2013 to 4.3 per 10,000 p-yrs in 2017, while annual rates of incident oligospermia diagnoses were relatively stable during the period. Annual incidence rates of other male infertility diagnoses (ICD-10 only) increased markedly, rising from 1.2 per 10,000 p-yrs in 2015 (first year of use of this diagnostic code) to 5.3 per 10,000 p-yrs in 2017. Annual rates of infertility due to extratesticular causes (ICD-9 only) remained relatively low and stable during 2013–2015 (Figure 1).

Stratification of annual incidence rates of male infertility diagnoses by age group showed that rates among service men aged 30–34 years were consistently higher than rates among those in other age groups (data not shown). During the 5-year surveillance period, annual rates of incident diagnoses of male infertility decreased in each service (Figure 2). During each year of the period, incidence rates of male infertility diagnoses were highest among Army and Air Force members. Annual rates of male infertility diagnoses were intermediate among Navy members and lowest among Marine Corps members. However, compared to their respective counterparts, service men in the Army showed the greatest decrease (16.3%) in male infertility rates over time. Decreases over time in annual rates of incident male infertility diagnoses were seen in all race/ethnicity groups; Hispanic service men showed the greatest decrease over time and those of other/unknown race/ethnicity and non-Hispanic black service men showed the smallest decreases (Figure 3). 

From 2013 through 2017, annual numbers of medical encounters during which male infertility was recorded as a primary (first-listed) diagnosis decreased 21.8% between 2013 and 2017 (Figure 4). Because there was a comparable decrease (21.4%) in the number of individuals affected, the ratio of medical encounters per individual affected remained steady at 1.6 throughout the surveillance period.

EDITORIAL COMMENT

Annual rates of incident diagnoses of total male infertility among active component service men decreased slightly during 2013–2017. The overall trend in annual rates closely reflected and was primarily influenced by the trend in incident diagnoses of unspecified male infertility. Data on trends in the incidence of male infertility in the general U.S. population during a comparable time period were not available at the time of this report, precluding com­parisons to the current results.

Similar to the findings of the 2014 MSMR analysis of incident diagnoses of male infertility among active component service men during 2000–2012, annual rates were consistently higher among service men aged 30–34 years compared to those in other age groups.14 The overall rate of incident diagnoses of male infertility was also highest among non-Hispanic black service men, which is consistent with the findings of the prior MSMR analysis.14 U.S. data on male factor infertility by race/ethnicity are limited in the current literature. In age-adjusted analyses of data from U.S. veterans, Hispanic men had the highest frequency of treatment for male infertility, followed by non-Hispanic black men and non-Hispanic white men.16 However, a 2001 retrospective study using a centralized database of patient records at a single military male infertility clinic found that race did not appear to be a significant factor influencing the prevalence of male infertility (i.e., the racial background of the study population mirrored that of all MHS beneficiaries).17 More recently, in samples of U.S. men seeking infertility evaluation and/or treatment, non-Hispanic blacks were found to have lower mean semen volume, sperm concentration, total sperm count, and total motile sperm than non-Hispanic whites or Hispanics.18–21 

In the current analysis, azoospermia accounted for 9.3% of the incident diagnoses of infertility. This finding is similar to prior literature, which found that 10–15% of all infertile men produce semen devoid of viable sperm.22–24 

The results presented here must be interpreted in light of several important limitations. First, to the extent that some affected service men did not seek care for infertility or sought care outside of the MHS, the counts and rates reported here underestimate the actual counts and rates of male infertility in the active component of the U.S. Armed Forces. Another limitation of the current analysis is related to the implementation of MHS GENESIS, the new electronic health record for the MHS. For 2017, medical data from sites that were using MHS GENESIS are not available in DMSS. These sites include Naval Hospital Oak Harbor, Naval Hospital Bremerton, Air Force Medical Services Fairchild, and Madigan Army Medical Center. Therefore, medical encounter data for individuals seeking care at any of these facilities during 2017 were not included in the analysis. Finally, because incident cases were identified based on the presence of a qualifying ICD-9 or ICD-10 diagnosis code for male infertility recorded during a healthcare encounter, the validity of the results depends upon the accuracy of a physician-assigned diagnosis of male infertility and the resultant diagnostic coding generated by a given encounter. However, a recent claims-based study of 11,068 male patients at a single U.S. institution to assess whether ICD-9 codes accurately identified men with abnormal semen analyses25 found that the specificity of diagnostic coding for azoospermia, oligospermia, infertility due to extratesticular causes, and unspecified male infertility were all greater than 90%. However, sensitivity was not calculated, as not all patients had a documented semen analysis.26

REFERENCES

1. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Definitions of infertility and recurrent pregnancy loss: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(1):63.

2. Thonneau P, Marchand S, Tallec A, et al. Incidence and main causes of infertility in a resident population (1,850,000) of three French regions (1988-1989). Hum Reprod. 1991;6(6):811–816.

3. Thoma ME, McLain AC, Louis JF, et al. Prevalence of infertility in the United States as estimated by the current duration approach and a traditional constructed approach. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(5):1324–1331.

4. Dupree JM. Insurance coverage for male infertility care in the United States. Asian J Androl. 2016;18(3):339–341. 

5. Hull MG, Glazener CM, Kelly NJ, et al. Population study of causes, treatment, and outcome of infertility. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1985;291(6510):1693–1697. 

6. Mehta A, Nangia AK, Dupree JM, Smith JF. Limitations and barriers in access to care for male factor infertility. Fertil Steril. 2016;105(5):1128–1137.

7. Jungwirth A, Giwercman A, Tournaye H, et al. European Association of Urology guidelines on male infertility: the 2012 update. Eur Urol. 2012;62(2):324–332.

8. Agarwal A, Mulgund A, Hamada A, Chyatte MR. A unique view on male infertility around the globe. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2015;13:37.

9. Martinez G, Daniels K, Chandra A. Fertility of men and women aged 15–44 years in the United States: National Survey of Family Growth, 2006–2010. Natl Health Stat Report. 2012;(51):1–28.

10. Winters BR, Walsh TJ. The epidemiology of male infertility. Urol Clin North Am. 2014;41(1):195–204.

11. Alavanja MC, Sandler DP, McMaster SB, et al. The Agricultural Health Study. Environ Health Perspect. 1996;104(4):362–369.

12. Sallmen M, Sandler DP, Hoppin JA, Blair A, Baird DD. Reduced fertility among overweight and obese men. Epidemiology. 2006;17(5):520–523.

13. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Reproductive Health. Infertility FAQs. https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/infertility/. Accessed 28 February 2019.

14. Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center. Surveillance snapshot: male infertility, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2000–2012. MSMR. 2014;21(2):13.

15. Armed Forces Health Surveillance Branch. Surveillance Case Definitions. Male Infertility. https://health.mil/Military-Health-Topics/Combat-Support/Armed-Forces-Health-Surveillance-Branch/Epidemiology-and-Analysis/Surveillance-Case-Definitions. Accessed 28 February 2019. 

16. Meacham RB, Joyce GF, Wise M, Kparker A, Niederberger C. Urologic Diseases in America Project. Male infertility. J Urol. 2007;177(6):2058–2066.

17. Costabile RA, Spevak M. Characterization of patients presenting with male factor infertility in an equal access, no cost medical system. Urology. 2001;58(6):1021–1024.

18. Redmon JB, Thomas W, Ma W, et al. Semen parameters in fertile US men: the Study for Future Families. Andrology. 2013;1(6):806–814.

19. Povey AC, Clyma JA, McNamee R, et al. Modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors for poor semen quality: a case-referent study. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(9):2799–2806.

20. Walsh TF, Feigenbaum SL, Smith JF, Croughan MS, VanDenEeden SK. Epidemiologic characteristics of men evaluated for infertility in a large, pre-paid insurance plan. Fertil Steril. 2008;90(suppl):S63.

21. Khandwala YS, Zhang CA, Li S, Behr B, Guo D, Eisenberg ML. Racial variation in semen quality at fertility evaluation. Urology. 2017;106:96–102.

22. Eisenberg ML, Lathi RB, Baker VL, Westphal LM, Milki AA, Nangia AK. Frequency of the male infertility evaluation: data from the National Survey of Family Growth. J Urol. 2013;189(3):1030–1034.

23. Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine in collaboration with Society for Male Reproduction and Urology. Evaluation of the azoospermic male. Fertil Steril. 2008;90:S74–S77.

24. Gudeloglu A, Parekattil SJ. Update in the evaluation of the azoospermic male. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2013;68(suppl 1):27–34.

25. World Health Organization. WHO Laboratory Manual for the examination of human semen and sperm-cervical mucus interaction. 4th ed. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1999.

26. Khandwala YS, Zhang CA, Li S, Cullen MR, Eisenberg ML. Validity of claims data for the identification of male infertility. Curr Urol Rep. 2017;18(9):68.

Annual rates of incident male infertility diagnoses, by infertility type, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2013–2017

Annual rates of incident male infertility diagnoses, by service, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2013–2017

Annual rates of incident male infertility diagnoses, by race/ethnicity group, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2013–2017

Numbers of medical encounters for male infertility and individuals affected, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2013–2017

ICD-9 and ICD-10 diagnostic codes used to identify cases of male infertility in electronic health records, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2013-2017

Incidence counts and rates of male infertility, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2013–2017

You also may be interested in...

Diagnosis of hepatitis C infection and cascade of care in the active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2020

Article
2/1/2022
Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Cecil Dorse, left, and Navy Petty Officer 3rd Class Janet Rosas test blood samples aboard the Military Sealift Command hospital ship USNS Comfort while the ship is in New York City in support of the nation’s COVID-19 response, April 6, 2020. Photo By: Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Sara Eshleman

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection rates are rising in the U.S. despite widely available tools to identify and effectively treat nearly all of these cases. This cross-sectional study aimed to use laboratory data to evaluate the prevalence of HCV diagnoses among active component U.S. military service members.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

A new approach to categorization of ocular injury among U.S. Armed Forces

Article
2/1/2022
Air Force and Space Force Surgeon General Lt. Gen. Dorothy Hogg receives an eye exam from Air Force Reserve Maj. Leslie Wilderson at Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling, Washington, D.C., March 26, 2021. Photo By: Air Force Staff Sgt. Kayla White

Ocular injuries present an ongoing threat to readiness and retention of service members. This report describes a new approach to categorizing ocular injury using Military Health System data, the application of an algorithm to a dataset, and the verification of the results using an audit of clinical data.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Surveillance snapshot: Health care burden attributable to osteoarthritis and spondylosis, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2016–2020

Article
2/1/2022
Air Force security forces trainees climb a hill during a 3-mile ruck march to commemorate National Police Week at Joint Base San Antonio, May 13, 2019. Photo By: Sarayuth Pinthong, Air Force

This snapshot summarizes the total numbers of inpatient and outpatient encounters with an OA or spondylosis diagnosis in the first diagnostic position and the total numbers of unique individuals affected by these conditions during the same 5-year surveillance period.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Description of a COVID-19 Beta Variant Outbreak, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA, February–March 2021

Article
1/1/2022
U.S. Army Soldiers from 1-17th Infantry Battalion, 2nd Stryker Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, clear an objective during the training exercise Bayonet Focus 19-02 at Yakima Training Center, Wash., May 6, 2019. Bayonet Focus is a training exercise designed to assess Soldiers’ ability to preform tasks and complete objectives under conditions experienced during combat situations. (U.S. Army photo by Spc. Angel Ruszkiewicz)

This report describes an outbreak of SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19, that peaked during 21–26 February 2021 and was tied to a single military training event. A total of 143 laboratory-confirmed cases were identified.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

COVID-19 and Depressive Symptoms Among Active Component U.S. Service Members, January 2019–July 2021

Article
1/1/2022
With the holiday season upon us, the cold, dark days that winter brings, and the social distancing and movement restrictions brought about by COVID-19, it’s not uncommon for people to feel depressed. (Photo by Erin Bolling)

This study examined the rates of depressive symptoms in active component U.S. service members prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic and evaluated whether SARS-CoV-2 test results (positive or negative) were associated with self-reported depressive symptoms.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Surveillance Snapshot: Lengths of Hospital Stays for Service Members Diagnosed with Sepsis, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2011–2020

Article
1/1/2022
The (left to right) Senior Airman Austin Shrewsbury, 88th Diagnostics and Therapeutic Squadron medical laboratory technician, works with student, Airman 1st Class Taylor Altman, 88th Diagnostics and Therapeutic Squadron medical laboratory technician, to identify bacteria of patient’s cultures inside the microbiology laboratory at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base medical center June 30, 2017.

Sepsis is a serious and life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection. In the U.S., sepsis is a leading cause of in-hospital mortality and 1 of the most expensive conditions treated in U.S. hospitals.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Incident COVID-19 Infections, Active and Reserve Components, Jan. 1, 2020–Aug. 31, 2021

Article
12/1/2021
U.S. Marines with Marine Rotational Force - Darwin receive a second COVID-19 test during quarantine on Royal Australian Air Force Base Darwin in Darwin, NT, Australia, June 12, 2020. The COVID-19 test was administered to each Marine after arriving from California. All Marines will be quarantined for 14 days and undergo an additional test before quarantine release. No Marines tested positive for COVID-19. The U.S. Marine Corps and Australian Defence Force service members are working together to ensure the safety of the local community. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Natalie Greenwood)

Incident COVID-19 Infections, Active and Reserve Components, 1 January 2020–31 August 2021

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Surveillance Snapshot: Donovanosis Among Active Component Service Members, U.S. Armed Forces, 2011–2020

Article
12/1/2021
This photomicrograph of a tissue sample extracted from a lesion in the inguinal region of the female granuloma inguinale, or Donovanosis patient, depicted in PHIL 6431, revealed a white blood cell (WBC) that contained the pathognomonic finding of Donovan bodies, which were encapsulated, Gram-negative rods, representing the responsible bacterium Klebsiella granulomatis, formerly known as Calymmatobacterium granulomatis. Photo credit: CDC/ Susan Lindsley

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Update: Osteoarthritis and Spondylosis, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2016–2020

Article
12/1/2021
Osteoarthritis (OA) knee . film x-ray AP ( anterior - posterior ) and lateral view of knee show narrow joint space, osteophyte ( spur ), subchondral sclerosis, knee joint inflammation. Photo by: iStockPhoto

Osteoarthritis (OA), the most com­mon adult joint disease, is primarily a degenerative disorder of the entire joint organ, including the subchondral bone, synovium, and periarticular structures (e.g., tendons, ligaments, bursae). Spondylosis, often referred to as OA of the spine, is characterized by degenerative changes in the vertebral discs, joints, and vertebral bodies.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Update: Plant Dermatitis Among Active Component Service Members, U.S. Armed Forces, 2010–2020

Article
11/1/2021
Poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans)

Plant dermatitis is an allergic inflammatory skin reaction in response to the oils of poisonous plants. In the U.S., the most common dermatitis-causing plant genus is the Toxicodendron (formerly Rhus). Approximately 50%–75% of the U.S. adult population are susceptible to skin reactions upon exposure to Toxicodendron oil or oleoresin, called urushiol.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Sepsis Hospitalizations Among Active Component Service Members, U.S. Armed Forces, 2011–2020

Article
11/1/2021
SAN DIEGO (Oct. 19, 2020) Hospital Corpsman 2nd Class Brittni Porter, a laboratory technician assigned to Naval Medical Center San Diego’s (NMCSD) microbiology laboratory, exams agar slides during a drug susceptibility tests Oct. 19. Drug susceptibility tests are conducted to see if a particular antibiotic will react with a patient’s sample on an agar slide. NMCSD’s mission is to prepare service members to deploy in support of operational forces, deliver high quality healthcare services and shape the future of military medicine through education, training and research. NMCSD employs more than 6,000 active duty military personnel, civilians, and contractors in Southern California to provide patients with world-class care anytime, anywhere. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Jake Greenberg)

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Brief Report: Prevalence of Hepatitis C Virus Infections in U.S. Air Force Basic Military Trainees Who Donated Blood, 2017–2020

Article
11/1/2021
U.S. Army Staff Sgt. Brandon Sousa, 424th Engineer Vertical Construction Company, donates blood to the 379th Expeditionary Medical Group’s Blood Support Center, Aug. 30, 2021, at Al Udeid Air Base, Qatar. The blood support center conducted a walking blood bank to collect blood from prescreened and cleared donors. The blood was sent downrange to support Afghanistan evacuation operations. The DoD is committed to supporting the U.S. State Department in the departure of U.S. and allied civilian personnel from Afghanistan, and to evacuate Afghan allies to safety. (U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Kylie Barrow)

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Brief Report: The Challenge of Interpreting Repeated Positive Tests for SARS-CoV-2 Among Military Service Members, Fort Jackson, SC, 2020–2021

Article
10/1/2021
Gloved hand holding an example of a negative rapid test for the SARS-CoV-2 virus (COVID-19).

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Surveillance Snapshot: History of COVID-19 Vaccination Among Air Force Recruits Arriving at Basic Training, March 2–June 15, 2021

Article
10/1/2021
COVID-19 vaccine bottle and syringes

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Update: Cold Weather Injuries, Active and Reserve Components, U.S. Armed Forces, July 2016–June 2020

Article
10/1/2021
A student in the army participates in a cold-water immersion training

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report
<< < 1 2 3 4 5  ... > >> 
Showing results 1 - 15 Page 1 of 15

DHA Address: 7700 Arlington Boulevard | Suite 5101 | Falls Church, VA | 22042-5101

Some documents are presented in Portable Document Format (PDF). A PDF reader is required for viewing. Download a PDF Reader or learn more about PDFs.