Department of the Army Historical Summary: FY 1978
Organization and Management
Improving management of the Army's limited personnel, dollar, and other resources remained the primary objective of all changes in the Army's organization. The programs referred to below were continuations of programs begun in previous years. Many concerned aspects of personnel management discussed in the last chapter.
One change was part of the Army plan to abolish the Women's Army Corp as a separate branch of the service. Three years ago Congress was requested to pass the necessary legislation, but it has so far failed to act. For all practical purposes, however, the Women's Army Corps no longer exists. Consequently, in April of this year the Chief of Staff eliminated the positions of the Director and Deputy Director of the Women's Army Corps and the Office, Director of the Women's Army Corps.
Legislation passed in 1912 restricted Army and Air Force officers below the grade of general to four-year assignments in secretariat, general, and special staff positions. No such restrictions existed for Navy or Marine Corps officers, enlisted personnel, or civilians. The Department of the Army asked Congress to eliminate these restrictions on the grounds that such matters should be left to the discretion of responsible managers. Thus far Congress has not acted.
The consolidation of personnel management and the consolidation of responsibility for Army training resulted from an intensive study of Army resource management. Base realignments studies and the restructuring of the Army's Materiel Development and Readiness Command, both begun in 1976, were completed this year, and additional base realignment studies were initiated.
The study begun last year on integrating Army headquarters management of command and control, computers, and communications (C4) was completed. In March the results were submitted to a C4 Action Planning Conference composed of representatives from the principal Army staff agencies. Vice Chief of Staff General Kerwin approved two of its recommendations: that automation and communications management be consolidated at Army headquarters; and that command and
control management stay separate from automation and communications management, remaining under the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans.
General Kerwin directed further study of another conference recommendation to create a new Assistant Chief of Staff for Automation and Communications. The solution approved by the Army staff's Select Committee, the Chief of Staff, and the Secretary of the Army was to establish the office of Assistant Chief of Staff for Automation and Communications and to abolish the DCSOPS Directorate of Telecommunications Command and Control and the Directorate of Army Automation in the chief of staff's office. These changes became effective on 1 October 1978.
Last year the Chief of Staff ordered a special resource management study group under Director of Management Maj. Gen. Thomas U. Greer to investigate ways of improving the management of the Army's limited resources. The results approved by the Vice Chief of Staff were: to consolidate manpower management responsibilities under the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel; to consolidate responsibility for military training under the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans; to make the Director of Program Analysis and Evaluation responsible for resource management review; to realign responsibility for managing base operations functions within the Army staff, including making the Chief of Engineers responsible for real property maintenance activities; and to make the Comptroller of the Army responsible for developing Army resource management policies. Manpower responsibilities were transferred and consolidated by 1 October 1978. The other changes were in the process of being carried out.
In 1976 the Secretary of the Army ordered special studies of eighteen United States installations to investigate the possibility of ending, reducing, consolidating, or relocating their operations. At the end of the fiscal year eleven studies had been completed and acted upon and seven were in progress.
On 26 April Secretary Alexander announced the initiation of seventeen additional base realignment studies aimed at eliminating over 3,200 civilian spaces and converting about 3,000 military positions to combat roles. Savings were projected at about $90 million. Some of the actions under consideration were: closing Fort Monroe and relocating TRADOC's headquarters; discontinuing the Applied Technology Laboratory at Fort Eustis; consolidating the U.S. Army Management Engineering Training Agency at Rock Island with the U.S. Army Logistics Manage-
ment Center at Fort Lee, Virginia; transferring the U.S. Army Military Personnel Center from Alexandria, Virginia, to Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana; transferring certain military traffic management administrative functions from the Oakland, California, and Bayonne, New Jersey, terminals and consolidating them with the Military Traffic Management Command Headquarters in Arlington, Virginia; moving the Army's Logistic Systems Support Agency from the Letterkenny Army Depot in Pennsylvania and consolidating it with the Automated Logistics Management System Activity in St. Louis; reducing activities to a minimum at Fort Sheridan, Illinois, and Fort Douglas in Salt Lake City; consolidating base operations and support activities at the Dugway Proving Ground with most of the Tooele Army Depot in Utah; reducing activities to a minimum at the Presidio of San Francisco and closing its subinstallation, Fort Baker at Sausalito; and reducing or relocating the Army Theater Communications Security Logistics Support Center, Pacific, at Fort Kamehameha, Hawaii.
Further base closings, reductions, or consolidations might ensue from two major Army reviews of the total Army training base and Army medical centers. The training centers at Fort Dix, New Jersey, Fort Jackson, South Carolina, and Fort Bliss, Texas, might be closed, and the Letterman Army Medical Center at the Presidio of San Francisco might be closed or reduced.
None of these changes are imminent. They entail many long and costly environmental impact statements and congressional investigations. Closing Fort Dix, for example, has been under consideration for more than fifteen years.
Nearly all the base realignment studies examined the possibility of contracting out certain functions to private industries, especially such support functions as laundries and mess halls.
The Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics had been coordinating the commercial- and industrial-type activities program, but during the year it was transferred to the Army Management Division of the Chief of Staff's office to allow direct access to decision makers.
There were 4,069 Army commercial- and industrial-type activities at the end of this year, compared with 3,883 in 1977 and 3,630 in 1976. Capital investment was $4 billion. It was $4.7 billion in 1977 and $4.3 billion in 1976.
Reorganization of the major commodity commands of the United States Army Materiel Development and Readiness Command (DARCOM) was completed this year, two years after it began. Below, the order of their formal organization, is a list of
these new commands, their official designations, and the location of their headquarters.
|Mobility Research and Development Command
|Ft. Belvoir, Va.||23 Jan 1976|
|Natick Research and Development Command
|Natick, Mass.||23 Jan 1976|
|Tank-Automotive Readiness Command
|Warren, Mich.||1 Jul 1976|
|Tank-Automotive Research and Development Command (TARADCOM)||Warren, Mich.||1 Jul 1976|
|Depot System Command
|Chambersburg, Pa.||1 Sep 1976|
|Missile Readiness Command
|Huntsville, Ala.||31 Jan 1977|
|Missile Research and Development Command
|Huntsville, Ala.||31 Jan 1977|
|Armaments Readiness Command
|Rock Island, III||31 Jan 1977|
|Armaments Research and Development Command (ARRADCOM)||Dover, N.J.||31 Jan 1977|
|Aviation Research and Development Command
|St. Louis, Mo.||1 Jul 1977|
|Troop Support and Aviation Materiel Readiness Command (TSARCOM)||St. Louis, Mo.||1 Jul 1977|
|Security Assistance Center (SAC)||Alexandria, Va.||1 Nov 1977|
|Electronics Research and Development Command (ERADCOM)||Adelphi, Md.||1 Jan 1978|
|Communications Research and Development Command (CORADCOM)||Ft. Monmouth, N.J.||1 Jan 1978|
|Communications-Electronics Materiel Readiness Command (CERCOM)||Ft. Monmouth, N.J.||1 Jan 1978|
DARCOM's remaining major field command, the Test and Evaluation Command (TECOM) at the Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, was not involved in the reorganization because it is not a commodity command.
The tripartite division of the Communications-Electronics Command at Fort Monmouth split a number of activities. Not all electronics research and development functions were transferred to Adelphi, Maryland. The Combat Surveillance and Target Acquisition Laboratory remained at Ft. Monmouth, except laser research which was transferred to the Night Vision and Electro Optics Laboratory at Ft. Belvoir. The Electronics Warfare and the Electronics Devices and Technology Laboratories also remained at Fort Monmouth, while INSCOM's signal warfare functions continued in the Washington area. Some minor atmospheric service activities were moved from Fort Monmouth to the Atmospheric Services Laboratory at the Army's White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico.
For the past several years the Army Hometown News Center at Kansas City, Missouri, a field operating agency of the Office of the Chief of Public Affairs, has promoted soldier morale and
community support by sending information on service members to their hometown newspapers. The Plan for the Management and Operation of Department of Defense Audiovisual Activities, prepared in March 1977 by the joint Service Planning Group, subsequent studies, and recommendations from the military services led the Deputy Secretary of Defense to consolidate the Army and Air Force Hometown News Centers and the television news clip production function at Kelly Air Force Base, Texas. The Navy would continue to operate its own center at Norfolk, Virginia. The consolidation was expected to be completed in the fall of 1979. It will eliminate duplication of effort in this area.
Word Processing and Micrographics
The volume of word processing proposals in the Army continued to rise, and the systems introduced were increasingly complex and sophisticated. The U.S. Army Adjutant General Center evaluated 342 proposals for new systems, with expected savings or cost avoidance of over $32 million in the next five years, including 778 manpower spaces.
Among the proposals surveyed were several from the Reserve Components Personnel and Administrative Center in St. Louis. There was a recommendation to install postal locators at Forts Campbell, Jackson, and Knox. Army staff proposals came from the Military Personnel Center and the Deputy Chief of Staff for Research, Development, and Acquisition. Among large installations, proposals for integrating many base support systems came from Forts Campbell, Sill, Devens, and the Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville. The 1st Division at Fort Riley requested twenty word processing units for its personnel and administrative centers, while the 82d Airborne Division at Fort Bragg requested twelve. Most of the proposals were initiated in prior years.
Word processing systems were designed to save personnel spaces. Micrographics systems were designed to save critical storage space by reducing thousands of pages to a few small strips of microfilm. During the year the Army installed 422 systems, with an estimated five-year savings of $7.5 million.
All the computer output micrographic systems improvements and conversions in Germany reported last year were operational except for V Corps; its system should be in place next year. Micrographics computer output systems for standard multicommand information systems were introduced at forty-two Army installations. By the close of the fiscal year twelve of the installations had fully operational systems and technical training
had been conducted at ten additional sites. The Military Police Management Information Systems network of thirty-six Army installations were converted to micrographics. New standard computer micrographics systems were installed at Army commissaries at Forts Sam Houston, Meade, Lee, and Lewis. A standard microfiche interlibrary loan system was put into operation at Forts Bragg, Sill, and Belvoir, and in USAREUR. The Corps of Engineers management information systems were expanded. Advanced microfiche systems were tested for use in training and for a completely automated microfiche storage and retrieval system.
Under the Army copier control program, strict controls have been established over the procurement of all copiers. In the fiscal year there were 8,631 pieces of copier equipment, producing over 1 billion copies a year at a cost of slightly over $30 million. Average costs amounted to approximately .024 cents per copy. The most stringent controls have been kept on color copiers because of their cost and potential for abuse. Only six such machines were approved last year and in fiscal year 1978 the total rose marginally to seven.
Two micrographics service centers were established this year: The Sacramento Army Depot will provide regional original source document and computer-output microfilm services to Army elements. The Fort Benning Central Microfilming Facility will provide original-source document services to post and tenant activities.
During the past year the Army awarded contracts to three firms, each of which will develop a prototype hand-held micrographic viewer for use in combat environments. Delivery of the prototypes for testing and evaluation is expected by the end of fiscal year 1979.
The Federal Property Management Regulation requires the Army and other federal agencies to maintain a computerized inventory, known as a data base, of all their micrographic copying equipment. The Adjutant General's Micrographics Management Division began designing such a system. When installed it will contain complete financial and placement data on all Army micrographic equipment.
The Army submitted a fiscal year 1978 budget request for $32,391.7 million to the Department of Defense on 30 September 1976. Following reviews by the Defense Department and the Office of Management and Budget, on 22 February 1977 the
TABLE 2 - CHRONOLOGY OF THE FISCAL YEAR 1978 BUDGET DIRECT BUDGET PLAN (TOA)
(in millions of dollars)
|Military personnel, Army||9,015.2||8,790.9||8,741.8||424.9||10.0||9,176.7|
|Reserve personnel, Army||593.2||553.6||555.6||-||-23.0||532.6|
|National Guard personnel, Army||834.7||783.6||782.5||-||-10.0||772.5|
|Operation & maintenance, Army||9,456.7||8,490.9||8,139.4||335.6||157.1||8,632.1|
|Operation & maintenance, Army Reserve||430.2||389.0||380.8||12.3||-1.6||391.5|
|Operation & maintenance, Army National Guard||807.6||759.5||745.7||26.8||-6.1||766.4|
|Army Stock Fund||100.0||100.0||100.0||-||-||100.0|
|National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice||.4||.4||.4||-||-||.4|
|Aircraft procurement, Army||715.1||665.3||657.1||-||1.0||656.1|
|Missile procurement, Army||768.9||451.6||536.9||-||17.3||554.2|
|Procurement of wpns & tracked combat vehicles, Army||1,778.8||1,651.7||1,421.2||-||-12.6||1,411.3|
|Procurement of ammunition, Army||1,604.2||1,348.9||1,236.8||-||20.0||1,258.1|
|Other procurement, Army||2,297.7||1,503.4||1,406.0||-||5.3||1,480.9|
|Research, development, test & evaluation, Army||2,911.6||2,522.1||2,427.9||-||-9.6||2,418.3|
|Subtotal, excluding construction||31,314.3||28,010.9||27,132.2||799.6||105.7||28,037.5|
|Military construction, Army||963.1||646.8||630.8||-||-||630.8|
|Military construction, Army Reserve||57.1||50.5||50.5||-||-||50.5|
|Military construction, Army National Guard||57.1||49.4||49.4||-||-||49.4|
|Subtotal, construction accounts||1,077.4||746.7||730.7||-||-||730.7|
|TOTAL DIRECT BUDGET PLAN (TOA)||32,391.7||28,757.6||27,862.9||799.6||349.8||28,768.2|
(May not add due to rounding.)
President submitted a revised request for $28,757.6 million. In October Congress passed a budget of $27,862.9 million (Public Law 95-111) and approved supplemental budget requests for $799.6 million.
During fiscal year 1978 there were many requests for reprogramming and transfer actions. Those approved totaled $105.7 million. By the end of the year $28,527 million, or 99.2 percent of the total $28,768.2 million authorized by Congress, had been obligated. Chart 1 shows how the Army's dollar was spent in fiscal year 1978.
CHART 1 - HOW THE ARMY DOLLAR WAS SPENT IN FISCAL YEAR 1978
The Defense Authorization Act of 1977 (PL 94-361) required the President to include in the fiscal year 1978 Defense Operation and Maintenance Program budget projected price increases caused by inflation or cost growth. The increases were computed with an annual increase of 6.1 percent, based on Bureau of Labor statistics, which was applied to prices in the summer of 1976 for an eighteen-month period. The result was a request for an extra $257 million in fiscal year 1978.
|Army Industrial Fund increases||$ 62,361,000|
|Stock Fund increase||52,111,000|
|Civilian pay decreases||12,067,000|
The long-planned relocation of the Comptroller's Directorate of Finance and Accounting from Washington to Indianapolis and its merger with the U.S. Army Finance and Accounting Center (USAFAC) was completed in August. The move was triggered by a manpower utilization and management survey and by a Headquarters, Department of the Army, personnel reduction ordered in July 1977. Seventy-four civilian and eleven military spaces were involved. Only six civilians and four military personnel physically transferred to Indianapolis; four civilians and three military personnel remained behind to staff a USAFAC Pentagon liaison office.
A primary advantage of the transfer was the merger of the directorate's policy and systems development responsibilities with USAFAC's systems operation and maintenance responsibilities. They were integrated into a cohesive organization under a Deputy Commander for Finance and Accounting Plans, Policies, and Systems.
In a parallel move, on 5 June responsibility for the Army Management Structure Code was shifted from Washington to USAFAC. A remote cathode-ray terminal was installed in USAFAC which was linked to a memory data storage facility in the U.S. Army Management Systems Support Agency at Fort Belvoir. Depending on the availability of funds, the Army could now provide the data required by the Army Management Structure Code to correlate programming, budgeting, accounting, and manpower controls.
The Army Productivity Improvement Program, effective in October 1976, was to be revised to increase productivity qualitatively as well as quantitatively by improving management. During the year, the Department of Defense set the goal for the Army of a 2 percent productivity increase.
The Value Engineering Program contributed substantial dollar savings. A formal program in five major Army commands, it was concerned with eliminating or changing anything that increased the cost of an item or process that was not necessary to its basic function. During the year sixty-six value engineers in five major commands managed the program. Savings were $188
million. Civilian contractors contributed $49 million of that amount through financial incentives incorporated in their contracts. The success of the Value Engineering Program led other Army commands to consider its adoption.
The Quick Return on Investment Program was started in 1974 to generate hard savings in operating costs, both dollars and personnel, through timely investments in capital tools and equipment. The objective was to take advantage of many quick return capital investment opportunities frequently lost in the long administrative delays of normal budget reviews and competition from higher priority requirements. The program was a method of obtaining investment funds for projects involving items ranging in cost from $1,000 to $100,000 that would pay for themselves within two years of installation. Savings were used to reduce other previously unfunded requirements at the installation level. Through this year the project funded $17.5 million worth of equipment, with cumulative savings of $55 million. This same $16.6 million will continue to accrue savings estimated at $64.8 million over the next five years.
Steps were taken in concert with the Department of Defense to develop a new and expanded productivity improvement capital investment program. It will identify and fund capital investment opportunities which would return the cost within five years regardless of procurement cost, and equipment amortizing in two years or less currently purchased through the Quick Return on Investment Program. The program gained congressional approval and integration into the budget process was begun.
The internal review program had been part of the comptroller's office both at HQDA and field levels. In May 1974, as part of the Army reorganization, the U.S. Army Audit Agency and the internal review functions were transferred from the comptroller to the Inspector General. In 1977, as a result of a General Accounting Office recommendation, the U.S. Army Audit Agency was transferred from the Inspector General of the Army to the Auditor General of the Army.
The Inspector General agreed that the transfer of the Audit Agency made direction of internal review policy incompatible with the other functions of his office. Therefore, on 13 March 1978, Army staff responsibility for internal review was transferred to the Comptroller of the Army. The Auditor General was assigned responsibility for audit standards and guides for use by internal review personnel throughout the Army. Total Army costing, a concept to provide life-cycle cost information on Army products and services, was being developed in the comp-
troller of the Army's office. A pilot test of the concept has demonstrated its technical feasibility for forty-three materiel systems, the resource requirements for which represent approximately 25 percent of the Army's budget authority.
About ten years ago the Army began to realize that it had insufficient control over the records it was required by law to maintain. In simple terms it did not know positively what records it had or where they were located. The problem dated from 1955, when the Army turned over its records centers to the General Services Administration (GSA). GSA never had sufficient resources in funds or properly trained personnel to perform the Army functions.
To remedy the situation, the Records Management Division of the Adjutant General Center began a massive survey of Army records held by two national and thirteen regional GSA records centers. When the survey was completed this year, the Adjutant General Center had control over approximately 270,000 linear feet of Army records. More than 150,000 linear feet of that total have been offered by the Army to the National Archives, including 77,000 this year.
After completing this survey, the Adjutant General Center instituted an Army-wide reference and retrieval service and an orderly system for offering retired permanent records to the National Archives.
The Adjutant General Center also continued its survey of Eighth Army records in Korea. At the beginning of the year the Eighth Army had an estimated 40,000 linear feet of records, of which 20,000 would have to be retained after the units concerned were withdrawn.
The heavy workload continued for Army records managers imposed by the Freedom of Information Act in 1972 as amended and the Privacy Act of 1974. President Carter's Executive Order 12065 of 28 June 1978 on national security information increased the declassification workload enormously without providing additional personnel.
The most drastic change reduced from thirty to twenty years the period for classified documents to be automatically declassified unless reviewed and specifically extended. Six years was set as the initial classification period for all documents not exempt from automatic declassification regardless of their initial security classification, whether top secret, secret, or confidential. Previ-
ously the periods for declassifying documents in these categories had been ten, eight, and six years, respectively.
On 30 June 1975 the Army inventoried approximately 45,000 linear feet of classified records in the GSA Federal Records Centers, plus an additional 25,000-30,000 feet in various Army libraries, schools, and museums, or a total of nearly 100,000 linear feet. Records Management Division officials estimated that 30 percent of these holdings would not be retained as permanent records, and that 2,500 linear feet would be retired to Federal Records Centers each year. To meet the twenty-year declassification rule, at least fourteen people must be added to the Army Declassification Operations Branch. The Army requested those additional spaces, so far without success.
The Privacy Act of 1974 required the President to submit to Congress annual summary reports on operations taken under the act. For 1977 the Army reported an 88 percent increase over calendar year 1976 of requests for access to or amendment of individual military records. The numbers rose from 82,210 to 158,659. Of the latter, 153,998 were granted totally, and 624 were granted in part; the remaining 47 were totally denied. Individuals filed fifty-six appeals under the two categories of denial and partial denial. Subsequently thirty-two of these appeals were granted totally or partially. Ten privacy related civil actions were filed in federal courts against the Army with one judgment for the government and nine pending in various district courts. During fiscal year 1978 there were twenty-two appeals, of which nineteen were denied, one granted, one withdrawn, and one- was pending negotiation.
To obtain personnel for its records management service, this year the Army established an Army-wide Records Manager Career Program. Some 300 people have been screened for a Department of the Army roster from which over fifty vacancies have been filled. During the next year another 150 are expected to register in the program.
In August the National Archives and Records Service submitted a formal inspection report on the Army's revised records management program. The report commended the Army functional files system, micrographic management, civilian career program, and other elements. It suggested that the Army examine its procedures for the control, creation, maintenance, use, and disposition of audiovisual records. It advised strengthening controls over the use of copying equipment, and making an inventory of the Army's machine readable records reported in the Army Inventory of Data Systems. Identifying all
machine readable systems was the first step toward developing disposition instructions and publishing regulations for preserving permanent records.
The Adjutant General's Publications Directorate improved the quality of administrative publications under an Army publications management program instituted in November 1977. In January 1978 an Editorial Control Division was established in the directorate to help Department of the Army writers draft administrative publications. The division was charged with making the publications easier to read, understand, and use.
Before the manuscript for any new or revised Army regulation is published, it must be edited and approved by the Editorial Control Division. Since January the division has edited approximately 135 publications. The objectives were to reduce the reading comprehension level of most administrative publications from the current seventeen-plus grade level to a level between the tenth and twelfth grades, and to reduce the number of pages by 10 percent. To date the division has averaged a 20 percent reduction in the number of pages.
The division was preparing a writing style guide, a graphics standard manual, model regulations incorporating the new writing guidelines and graphic standards, and a writing/graphics training package for Army writers for publication in late-1979.
A parallel program has been instituted to improve the quality and reduce the volume of Army regulations in the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations as directed by President Carter in March. The Army deleted thirty regulations, reducing the total by 40 percent. Six of the regulations published were rewritten, lowering the average reader comprehension level from the sixteenth grade level to between tenth and twelfth grade.
In summary, the Army continued making progress toward controlling the amount and costs of its paperwork. Records management, including making them available to the public in a reasonable time, was a slow process, for Congress did not appropriate sufficient funds.
Return to Table of Contents
Last updated 7 September 2004