Department of the Army Historical Summary: FY 1979


Organization and Management


Effective management of the Army’s limited resources of men, money, and materiel remains the primary objective in considering changes in the organization of the Army’s staff and major commands. Nearly all of the projects referred to below are continuations of developments initiated in previous years.

The Assistant Secretary of the Army for Installations, Logistics, and Financial Management (IL&FM) was designated on 13 November 1978 as the Army Safety and Occupational Health Official. Centralization of these previously separate functions resulted from several safety management studies conducted within and outside the Army over the past five years. Under the new organizational structure at the secretariat level, a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health was created to assist the Assistant Secretary of the Army for IL&FM in performing these duties. Responsibility for environmental programs and policies was transferred from the office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works to this new office.

At the same time, Army staff responsibility for the Army Safety Program was transferred from The Inspector General to the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel, and the U.S. Army Agency for Aviation Safety at Fort Rucker, Alabama, was redesignated as the U.S. Army Safety Center. The Surgeon General continued to be responsible for managing the Army Occupational Health Program and the Chief of Engineers retained responsibility for environmental quality throughout the Army under the new organizational structure.

On 9 April 1979, the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization was established within the Office of the Secretary of the Army. The core of the new office had previously been located under the Assistant Secretary of the Army for IL&FM. The director, who reports directly to the Secretary of the Army, is the principal advisor and assistant to the secretary for all matters pertaining to the implementation and administration of programs under the Small Business Act (as amended by the second session of the 95th Congress), the President’s Mi-


nority Entrepreneur Program, other small business programs, the Labor Surplus Area Program, and the Women-Owned Business Program.

To assure that the Army secretariat took a more dynamic role in the development and promulgation of civilian personnel policy, the secretary directed the establishment of a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Civilian Personnel Policy in the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Manpower and Reserve Affairs. Prior to this action, civilian personnel policy duties had been combined with equal opportunity duties in a single deputy position. By separating the duties, the secretary was recognizing the importance of both civilian personnel policy and equal opportunity. The new office was formally established on 31 July 1979.

The secretary also directed the establishment of a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Human Systems and Resources in the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Manpower and Reserve Affairs, which was filled on 22 April 1979. This Senior Executive Service position serves as the secretariat focal point for the oversight, integration and advocacy of diverse initiatives which affect human resources and quality of service in people’s lives.

A major reorganization of the Army staff reported last year was the creation of a new agency, the Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff for Automation and Communications, effective I October 1978. This involved disestablishment of the Directorate of Army Automation within the Chief of Staff’s office and the telecommunications functions of the Telecommunication and Command and Control Directorate in the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans. Two field operating agencies under the Director of Army Automation, the U.S. Army Computer Systems Selection and Acquisition Agency and the U.S. Army Computer Systems Command, were transferred to the new Army staff agency along with an Army staff support agency, the U.S. Army Management Systems Support Agency. The Joint Interface Test Force at Fort Monmouth, New Jersey, was also transferred from the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans to the Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff for Automation and Communications.

As reported last year, a special Resource Management Study Group under the Director of Management, Maj. Gen. Thomas U. Greer, investigated alternative means of realigning the Army staff’s resource management operations. The results of this study, approved and announced in August 1978, involved realigning resource management responsibilities throughout the Army staff. One of the most important was the consolidation of all manpower


(spaces) management under DCSPER, while DCSOPS retained responsibility for managing the Army’s force structure (units). Responsibility for individual training policy was also transferred to ODCSOPS from ODCSPER.

A second major realignment assigned responsibility for developing Army-wide resource management policies to the Comptroller of the Army. An additional Assistant Comptroller of the Army for Resource Policy and Financial Planning was created in December and consists of three elements: the existing Management Planning Office and two new offices, the Resource Policy and Planning Office and the Resource Review and Analysis Office. A Resource Management Policy Handbook is being prepared to guide all Resource Management Offices throughout the Army.

Another fallout of the study was the special emphasis given to the conduct of resource management reviews. The function was assigned to the Program Analysis and Evaluation Directorate, Office of the Chief of Staff, where the Resource Management Review Division was established to conduct the reviews and perform affordability analyses.

As a result of a special investigation of Army nuclear matters conducted by The Inspector General from April to December 1978, the Nuclear and Chemical Directorate was established within the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans, effective 2 January 1979. The new directorate serves as the Headquarters, Department of the Army, focal point for all Army nuclear and chemical matters, including all nuclear and chemical plans and policy and nuclear surety and management related functions.

Until recent years, the Army lagged behind the Navy and Air Force in modernizing its forces in terms of total weapons systems development which included training technicians to service new weapons and providing adequate supplies of spare parts. Beginning in the early 1970’s, the Army shifted its research, development, and materiel acquisition policies radically. There are now nearly 200 new materiel systems of all types in some phase of development to be fielded in the 1980’s, a period of very tight restrictions on various budget programs. Consequently, the balanced development of the new weapons systems will require tight, centralized direction and coordination. Realizing this, the Office of the Chief of Staff, U.S. Army (OCSA), Management Directorate was asked in 1978 to analyze the overall management procedures in terms of structure, function, and responsibility for Army force modernization. As a result of this study, the Army


Force Modernization Coordination Office (AFMCO) was established within the Office of the Chief of Staff on 27 February 1979 to coordinate the Army’s force modernization programs and to ensure the effective fielding of new and improved weapons and materiel systems. Maj. Gen. Richard D. Lawrence, who was serving as Chief of the Tank Forces Management Office, was appointed the first chief of AFMCO. The materiel systems he is monitoring and coordinating are discussed in Chapter 11.

A new major command, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), was established and activated on 16 June 1979, the Corps of Engineers birthday. The new organization comprises those elements of the Corps of Engineers engaged in military construction and civil works programs under the direct command of the Chief of Engineers, including engineer research and development laboratories. It does not include combat and construction engineer units, facility engineers, topographic units, or Army engineers assigned to other major commands; therefore, it is not under the direct command of the Chief of Engineers. The civil works function retains its separate identity for budgeting purposes, and the 33,000 personnel spaces assigned to civil works are not accountable in the Army’s end strength. In substance, the command organization, missions, functions, and responsibilities of the Corps of Engineers remain as they were in the past. The primary change is a recognition of major command status and the designation of USACE as the official title of the command organization. The Chief of Engineers continues his role of Army staff officer as well as commander of USACE.

Secretary Alexander, in April 1978, directed the Army to study the possible relocation of the Military Personnel Center (MILPERCEN) from Alexandria, Virginia, to Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana. The study concluded that such a move would not be cost effective and that anticipated losses of civilian employees who would not agree to move with the center would impair MILPERCEN’s ability to perform its mission. Consequently, on 27 March, Secretary Alexander decided MILPERCEN should remain in Alexandria.

Studies on base closures and realignments continued. Five studies commenced in 1976, two in 1977, fifteen in 1978, and one in 1979. Secretary Alexander announced in March that all 1976 and 1977 studies and twelve of the 1978 studies have been completed and that decisions have been made on twelve of them. The status of six facilities studied will not change for various reasons, including heavy political pressures. They are the Dugway Proving Ground in Utah; the Applied Technology Labora-


tory at Fort Eustis, Virginia; the Logistics Systems Support Agency at the Letterkenny Army Depot in Pennsylvania; the Military Personnel Center at Alexandria, Virginia; the Army Management Engineering Training Agency at Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois; and the Ordnance and Chemical Center and School at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland.

The activities to be realigned are: the Military Traffic Management Command’s finance and accounting activities at Bayonne, New Jersey; the Theater Communications Security Logistics Support Center at Fort Kamehameha, Hawaii; One Station Unit Training at Fort Bliss, Texas; and several air defense units in Florida and Alaska. Three installations will be closed: Fort Douglas, Utah; Fort McArthur, California; and Fort Wadsworth, New York. The Army expects these changes will eliminate 1,621 military and 448 civilian spaces at an annual savings of $33.9 million.

Six studies have been completed on which no final decisions have been made: Fort Indiantown Gap and the aircraft maintenance unit at the New Cumberland Army Depot in Pennsylvania; Forts Hamilton and Totten in New York; U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command units at Arlington Hall Station; and Vint Hill Farms and Fort Monroe, Virginia. Studies not yet completed involve closing Fort Sheridan, Illinois, and reducing operations at the Letterman Army Medical Center and the Presidio of San Francisco in California. In March, Secretary Alexander also announced that a new realignment study will investigate merging the Training and Doctrine Command’s Combined Army Test Activity with the Combat Development Experimentation Command at Fort Ord, California.

Financial Management

The Army submitted a fiscal year 1979 budget request for $33,844.4 million to the Department of Defense on 1 October 1977. As shown in the following table, Defense and the Office of Management and Budget reduced this by $2,500.4 million, and the President, on 23 January 1978, submitted a revised request to Congress for $31,343.9 million. Congress reduced this amount further by $1,052.0 million, and the Army’s fiscal year 1979 budget, as finally enacted on 13 October 1978, amounted to $30,291.9 million. Subsequent supplemental appropriations approved by Congress totaled $751.7 million, while transfers and reprogramming added $528.3 million.

During the fiscal year, the Army actually spent $28,800 million out of $45,500 million available. The latter amount includes $31,600 million in new appropriations, and an unexpended bal-


(in millions of dollars)


DA Submission to OSD

Amended President’s

Approved by Congress1

by Congress

Approved Reprogramming and Transfers


Military Personnel, Army







Reserve Personnel, Army







National Guard Personnel, Army







Operation & Maintenance, Army







Operation & Maintenance, Army Reserve







Operation & Maintenance, Army National Guard







Army Stock Fund







National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice







Aircraft Procurement, Army







Missile Procurement, Army







Procurement of Wpns & Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army







Procurement of Ammunition, Army







Other Procurement, Army







Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Army







Subtotal, Excluding Construction








Military Construction, Army







Military Construction, Army Reserve







Military Construction, Army National Guard







Subtotal, Construction Accounts







Total Direct Budget Plan (TOA)







1Public Law 95-457


ance of $13,900 million carried over from the previous year. Of the total outlay, $10,900 million was for military pay; $10,400 million for operations and maintenance; $2,400 million for research, development, test and evaluation; $4,500 million for procurement; and $700 million for military construction. (Totals do not add due to rounding.)

The rate of inflation rose much faster than projected during the year. As a result, many programs and projects had to be reduced to stay within budget limits. The areas most severely affected were fuel costs, foreign currency purchases, stock fund supply operations costs, utilities, transportation of household goods, purchased services, custodial contracts, KP, automatic data processing systems support, overseas station allowances, purchases from industrial funds, and depot maintenance contracts.

Defense submitted a request for an additional $2,700 million to correct these problems of which the Army’s portion was $479.9 million—$431 million to offset inflation and $48.9 million for additional recruiting costs.

The fiscal year 1979 Defense Appropriations Act established a new appropriation entitled Foreign Currency Fluctuations, Defense. Its purpose was to eliminate from the DOD budgetary process losses and gains to programs caused by unpredictable fluctuations of foreign currencies. These occur when exchange rates for foreign currency at the time of disbursement differ from exchange rates at the time the budget is developed. This year, the Army received from this special fund $57 million for transfer to its military personnel programs and $271 million for operations and maintenance.

Constrained manpower and dollar resources have placed a premium on discovering ways to increase productivity and reduce costs. This search has led to the development of the Quick Return on Investment Program (QRIP), the Productivity Enhancing Capital Investment Program (PECIP), and the OSD Labor Saving Capital Investment Program (LSCIP).

The QRIP provides funds for off-the-shelf capital tools and equipment which amortize in two years or less. Funds are readily available and the long delays experienced in the budget process are eliminated. No funds were appropriated for QRIP in fiscal year 1978, but during the four previous years, QRIP investments totaling $17.5 million saved $21 million annually. Additional investments of $4.9 million in fiscal year 1979 will save $6.5 million annually. Currently, projects funded in fiscal year 1980 have a dollar value of $1.8 million and potential savings of over $4 million.


PECIP minor and major projects are introduced into the programming and budgeting cycle; therefore, a longer period is required to obtain results. Submissions for the fiscal year 1982 cycle are well documented and positive results are anticipated. These projects have a dollar value of $1,000 or more and amortize in five years or less.

The LSCIP was instituted by the Office of the Secretary of Defense for fiscal years 1981-84. Each year, $105 million will be set aside to fund labor intensive projects. Each project must have a minimum cost of $1 million, amortize in four years or less, and result in a manpower or overtime savings of one-half the investment cost. The initial submission for fiscal year 1981 resulted in the approval of nine Army projects for $34.2 million with a savings of $58.5 throughout the four-year amortization period.

The Value Engineering (VE) program contributed substantial dollar savings in five major commands by eliminating unessential features to an item, process, or procedure. The VE program has two basic components, an internal effort performed by trained Army personnel and one for contractors designed to encourage changes that will reduce costs. Savings in fiscal year 1979 amounted to $216.5 million for the internal Army program and $43.8 million for the contractor program, representing a return on investment of about 19 to 1 and 14 to 1, respectively.

A major Department of Defense objective is to reduce the operating and support costs of weapons systems. The first step, taken by the Army in 1977 toward meeting this objective, was to obtain from Army managers the requirements for weapons systems operating and support costs. The results of that survey were used to design an automated management information system to identify, collect, and disseminate operating and support costs of selected major weapons systems. In September 1979, the GENASYS Corporation was awarded a contract for the second phase of a four-phase development program. The Army expects that the system will be fully operational by October 1984.

Efforts continued to isolate and predict long-term cost growth. Army materiel systems reported in the Selected Acquisition Report (SAR) have experienced approximately $18 billion in cost growth over their development estimates. About 80 percent of this was caused by understating the impact of escalation and about 8 percent was the result of cost estimating errors. The remaining 12 percent was due to disruption or turbulence in program requirements. These findings were further examined and clarified during the year by a Secretary of the Army Task Force, by Army participation in and contributions to the House


of Representatives, by Government Operations Committee Hearings on Cost Growth, and by Army contributions to the Summer of 1979 Defense Science Board Study on Cost Growth.

In early 1979, the Comptroller of the Army centralized the Audit/Inspection Response and Follow-up function and assigned it to the Army Finance and Accounting Center. Prior to that time, this function had been performed on a decentralized basis throughout the Office of the Comptroller of the Army. As a result, responses were developed by individual directorates and often were not coordinated. Follow-ups were left to the Department of the Army Inspector General, subject to his priorities and available resources. All audit/inspection reports received at the Office of the Comptroller of the Army are now sent to the Finance and Accounting Center for retention and dissemination to interested or affected organizations.

The Management Directorate within the Office of the Chief of Staff supervises the Army’s Commercial and Industrial Type Activities (CITA) program, which involves between 35,000 and 40,000 individual operations, largely base and installation support functions. Congress in the past urged conversion of these activities to outside contractors, where it was cost effective. During the past year, seventy-seven CITA cost studies were scheduled for completion but forty-two were deferred until fiscal year 1980. There were 751 civilian and 35 military spaces associated with the remaining 35 completed studies. So far, there have been fourteen decisions made: six to retain the functions concerned within the Army and eight to contract the functions out. The estimated annual dollar savings to the Army was $1.2 million. Decisions had not been made on the remaining twenty-one 1979 cost studies by the end of the year.

In fiscal year 1979, the Army led all federal agencies in contracting with minority small businesses under the preference provisions of Section 8(a) of the Small Business Act, with awards totaling $203.9 million. This was over $50 million above the next highest federal agency total and was an increase of $60 million over fiscal year 1978. The Army has now led all federal agencies in awards under Section 8(a) for the past ten of the eleven years of this program. Total awards and subcontracts with minority firms reached $351.4 million in fiscal year 1979, an increase of 40 percent over the prior year and more than double the fiscal year 1977 performance. In addition, the Army’s percentage of awards made by small business set-asides reached 10.8 percent, the highest percentage of such awards for the ten years that this data has been reported.


In April, the Army’s Finance and Accounting Center at Fort Benjamin Harrison began to convert approximately 1,300 programs on its UNIVAC 494 and CDC 3300 computers to a new UNIVAC 1100/82 computer which has greater capacity and speed and better reliability than the two older models. The programs being converted range from simple utility programs to complex computational programs like the Joint Uniform Military Pay System (JUMPS). Conversion of these programs, involving the use of remote terminals, is scheduled for completion in January 1980.

The Comptroller’s Directorate of Cost Analysis was reorganized to undertake the major task of developing concepts and tools to cost parametrically the entire Army. This program, known as Total Army Costing (TAC), consists of a family of computer programs designed to aggregate costs at several levels of detail in the multiple management languages of forces, appropriations, missions, functions, and programs.

Although still evolving, during fiscal year 1979 TAC produced 40 to 50 percent of the Army’s total obligational authority by appropriation, mission, and life cycle costs of systems for the Extended Planning Annex of the Program Objective Memorandum. This information provided management greater visibility of costs by mission area, and linked personnel and dollar resources to system and mission areas. TAC has uncovered “disconnected” situations which might have led to the fielding of new systems without the acquisition schedule crews to operate and maintain them and acquisition schedules with early year and later year buys that were not in harmony. It has thereby aided in developing perceptions geared toward the improvement of the planning, programming, and budgeting system.


The shortage of critical storage space for records and archives has led to the development of an Army-wide micrographics program to save thousands of square feet of storage by reducing thousands of documents to a few small strips of microfiche. This year, The Adjutant General’s Office (TAGO) began work on an automated micrographic storage system to fulfill large scale information storage, retrieval and dissemination requirements. The Advanced Microform Access Retrieval Storage (AMARS) system, when fully developed, is expected to provide a base for integrating and testing the many new advances in information technology and concepts expected to appear during the 1980’s.

The initial objective of this project is to unite an automated


modular micrographic storage and retrieval device with high-speed computer indexing and controlling functions capable of rapid access and transmission. The site selected for testing the new system is the Reserve Components Personnel and Administration Center at St. Louis, Missouri. So far, a detailed site requirements analysis and a system design have been completed, detailed specifications developed, and a procurement contract signed. Installation at the site is scheduled for October 1980.

As reported last year, the Army awarded contracts to three firms, each of which was to develop a prototype hand-held micrographic viewer in order that the benefits of microform (micropublishing) might be obtained in a combat environment. During the current year, two prototypes were delivered and a third is still being developed. All three incorporate new advanced projection and packaging concepts, but none fully meet field army requirements. After all three prototypes have been delivered and tested, a detailed set of specifications will be written combining the best features of all three models.

The Army’s publishing program is both mammoth and complex, and in order to introduce the new techniques of micrographics into this program, the Army Study for User Conversion to Micropublishing (known as IMPACT II) was initiated. A number of lengthy, repetitive standard publications have been used to test the system and its acceptability to users. These include DA Pamphlet 310-4, Index of Technical Manuals, Technical Bulletins, Supply Manuals, Supply Bulletins and Lubrication Orders; and DA Pamphlet 18-1-1, Army Inventory of Data Processing Systems. Organizations throughout the Army are being encouraged to propose additional suitable publications for micropublishing, particularly those used as standard references and those which are both voluminous and subject to frequent revision.

The Adjutant General approved a request from the U.S. Army Troop Support and Aviation Materiel Readiness Command (TSARCOM) to acquire a new advanced punch card retrieval system in conjunction with the projected move of TSARCOM headquarters to another location in the St. Louis area. The new system will be driven by an integrated master computer system and three computer subsystems. Remote terminals will be connected by fibre optic cables which are free of the static that interferes with standard cable operations. Development costs are expected to be $1.4 million under a contract awarded by TSARCOM to a California software company.

In 1975, the U.S. Army Finance and Accounting Center (USAFAC) at Fort Benjamin Harrison began converting eight


million original disbursement voucher documents annually in its transportation/government bill of lading series to microfiche. This year, The Adjutant General approved converting annually an additional 28.8 million original disbursement voucher documents received from 194 Finance and Accounting offices to about 107,000 source document microfiches. The ultimate result will reduce the mountain of records maintained in these offices, thus freeing a large number of filing cabinets and administrative space.

As reported previously, the Army’s Computer Output Microform Program (COM) was designed to save money and improve the efficiency of the Army’s Base Operations Information Systems (BASOPS) through the use of microforms. Standard computer output microfiche is being produced at twenty-nine of forty BASOPS installations. Five data processing installations in USAREUR began computer output operations, with V Corps the last to become operational. DARCOM began converting its depot automated SPEEDEX systems to microfiche this year.

Records Management

After a long delay, the Army Records Management Civilian Career Program is now in operation. The program is designed to improve professional training and assure merit promotion of personnel assigned to the Army’s Records Management Program. It applies to GS-11 through GS-15 personnel who perform records management duties 50 percent or more of the time regardless of the title or series in which they are classified. Incumbents of positions at the GS-9 level performing predominantly records management duties are afforded voluntary registration in the program for subsequent placement laterally or for promotion to the GS- 11 level.

In March, The Adjutant General initiated a project to establish an Army-wide program to manage and control forms and reports through an automated management information system. Other objectives of this program include preventing duplication and overlap, and reducing the cost of Army information programs.

The proposed system, which was under study as the fiscal year closed, will contain information on every form and report required by all Army staff agencies. The Army hopes to have the new system in operation by the end of fiscal year 1981. At that time, it will be evaluated and the economic soundness of extending it to the field considered.

The Army’s Machine Readable Records Program provides a systematic program for authorizing the retention, retirement,


and disposal of information in Army ADPS based on directions from the Archivist of the United States. Information submitted by Army staff agencies and field commands is evaluated by records management analysts to determine the archival value of the information contained in these ADPS.

This year, The Adjutant General’s Office became responsible for managing and retrieving the academic records of all DOD dependent overseas schools, including those of the Air Force and Navy. Currently, the Army answers over 100 requests for high school transcripts each month, and this will increase when the case loads from the Air Force and Navy have been transferred. Approximately 145 active and inactive secondary schools are included in this program. A TAG representative is visiting the five DOD dependent school regions (Atlantic, Germany North, Germany South, Mediterranean, and the Pacific) to locate records and assist in setting up an effective Records Management program.

The Adjutant General’s Access and Release Branch processed 1,027 requests for copies of records submitted under the Freedom of Information and Privacy Acts. Worldwide, the Army handled 18,000 requests. There was a noticeable change in the type as well as the number of requests received under the Freedom of Information Act. They were, for the most part, for larger numbers of records. They contained only broad, general, and often only vague descriptions of the records desired. The requests, therefore, were substantially more complex and difficult to satisfy.

The change in the type and number of requests received probably resulted from many factors. First, the public is becoming more concerned about its rights and privileges and expects more information from its government.

Second, all three branches of the government have made it clear that the government’s business must, and will, be conducted with openness and candor. The President, the cabinet, senior members of Congress, and senior members of the court system have made it clear in their public statements that the public has the right to know what the government is doing, or failing to do.

Third, the past few years have seen a noticeable increase in the number of organizations formed in the interest of public, or specific special interest groups. These organizations have learned that much of the information they need to conduct their business is available from the government just for the asking and are acting accordingly.


Last, those in private business, large and small, lawyers, authors, and researchers have learned the government is a vast storehouse of information. This information can promote their private commercial interests, and so, they too are taking advantage of the Freedom of Information Act.

In summary, during the past year the public has become much more aware of the benefits that can be derived from the act, and this has caused greater use of its provisions. The result has been more requests for more records and requests of greater complexity.

This past year, the Access and Release Branch has been deluged by court orders for masses of record cases involving the atomic bomb tests in the 1950’s, such as Stanley Jaffe v. Department of the Army. These required worldwide searches for nuclear test records to determine who was there. The Anthony Giles v. Clifford Alexander case over drug records was fought on a document by document basis. Currently, the Justice Department and the Army are involved in litigation along with the Dow Chemical Company on American use of Agent Orange (a herbicide) in South Vietnam. Records on this subject alone may involve the review and examination of as many as two thousand linear feet of files.

The Privacy Act of 1974 requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to submit an annual report to the President and Congress. OMB, in turn, requests Executive Branch agencies to submit extensive narrative and statistical data on the administration of this program. The OMB report for calendar year 1978 indicated that there were 215,255 requests from individuals for access or amendment to their Army records. This was an increase over the figure of 158,659 for calendar year 1977. Of the 1978 total, 214,598 requests were totally granted and 612 granted or denied in part. The remaining forty-five requests were totally denied, two less than in the previous year. The 657 requests either totally or partially denied led to forty-four appeals. Of these appeals, thirteen were either partially or totally granted. Seven Privacy Act related civil actions were filed against the Department of the Army during the year.

An Army correspondence course dealing with the Privacy Act and Freedom of Information Act programs was published. The five-hour credit course is available to Army military and civilian personnel. It provides instructions in the basic requirement of the acts and is primarily intended for those individuals actively involved in responding to requests.

The Editorial Control Division of The Adjutant General Center continued its efforts to improve the readability of Army reg-


ulations. During the report period, 265 different publications were edited. After editing, the reading grade level of the publications averaged eleventh grade, with some as low as ninth grade. The division again achieved an average 15 percent reduction in the number of pages in each edited publication. Through consolidation of related publications, forty-one publications were eliminated.

In 1977, The Adjutant General initiated a program to improve the Army publications system, including the development of a simpler initial distribution system. Under the current “Pull” concept systems, the user unit identifies its publications requirements, using a subscription system. Experience indicates that many users do not know their requirements, resulting in both overdistribution and failure to receive many required publications. The new or “Push” distribution concept was tested in the 2d Armored Division, Fort Hood, Texas, from August 1978 through February 1979. The six-month test clearly demonstrated the superiority of the Headquarters, Department of the Army, centralized control of publications initial distribution over the demand subscription system. By linking with property book records, the proponent, working with The Adjutant General Center, can accurately determine the actual initial distribution needs for equipment publications and administrative publications by specific identification of the target audience. Test results showed a decrease in both accounts and requirements for administrative publications, an increase in the number of copies of equipment publications required, and an overall decrease in distribution of both administrative and equipment publications for which there was no need.

Efforts are underway to test the “Push" concept for equipment publications in the European Community Command environment. Concurrently, automated systems are being developed to support extension of “Push” to TOE units.

During the current year, the U.S. Army Adjutant General’s Publication Center in Baltimore was assigned responsibility for determining standard account numbers and for setting up standard mailing addresses for all established and new accounts at both the St. Louis and Baltimore Centers. Savings of over one million dollars were also realized this year by using third class bulk rate mailing procedures in the initial distribution of publications.

Administrative Management

In 1978, The Adjutant General directed that an automated administrative support system be designed, developed, tested,


and operated within The Adjutant General’s Office (TAGO) to demonstrate that the technology exists to automate administrative support functions at all levels of administration within the Department of the Army in a totally integrated environment.

This year, the Chief of Staff approved further development of the concept of automating administrative support functions for the entire Army staff. Additionally, an automated administrative support system called The Adjutant General Automated Administrative Support System (TASS) is being developed within TAGO to serve as a model for other agencies.

During the current year, equipment was procured and installed at Fort Benning for a test of the prototype Installation Integrated Administrative Support System. This system, if successful, will tie together administrative functions at Fort Benning. Integrated functions would include expanded text processing, electronic mail and message forwarding, automated post locator, automated orders preparation, photocomposition, micrographics, automated transfer-point processing, document tracking, and suspense control. So far, the test has indicated an average monthly increase in word processing of 60 percent, with 1.5 million lines processed in the highest month. The photocomposition equipment installed has returned $7,000 over the cost of the equipment during its first six months of operation. Ultimately, the new system will be able to provide more effective administrative support functions with fewer resources.

In 1976, at the request of the Department of Defense, the Army’s Logistic Management Institute reviewed the military postal management and practices of the three military departments. The review concluded that, while the existing postal organizations were fulfilling their assigned responsibilities satisfactorily, some economies and improvements could be made through reorganization. Of the four alternatives proposed, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manpower, Reserve Affairs, and Logistics (MRA&L) selected the single manager concept as the most desirable. The Secretary of the Army has been tentatively designated as the single manager for the Military Postal Service, after negotiations were completed in September with the other services, JCS, and the OSD staff. If the proposal is approved by the Deputy Secretary of Defense, the Army will be required to consolidate postal headquarters elements of the Army and other services in the National Capital Region into a Postal Service Agency staffed by all services with a general officer heading it. This agency would be a separate field operating agency of The Adjutant General with operational control of consolidated mail


terminals on the east and west coasts and wholesale postal elements overseas. Minimal additional Army resources would be required since the agency will be formed from current assets of all services and jointly funded.

Postage meters were studied and evaluated this year at the urging of Congress and The Inspector General. The study found that postal meters were cost effective and should be gradually introduced Army-wide over several years. The estimated annual savings from the use of meters was $4.3 million.

In summary, after two decades of operating on a shoestring with completely inadequate financial and manpower resources, the Army’s Records Management Program has obtained some of the resources needed for effective operation. The most significant achievement was the adoption of a Records Management Civilian Career Program, assuring that professionally qualified personnel rather than mail and records clerks will eventually be assigned to perform records management functions. Unfortunately, the same could not be said of the National Archives and Records Services (NARS) which continued to operate on a shoestring with fewer and fewer people and completely inadequate storage and retrieval facilities. Some records have been lost in fires caused by inadequate and dangerous storage facilities in Suitland, Maryland, and at St. Louis, Missouri. These conditions have not been corrected and the Army has little direct control over the situation. Only the development of fireproof micrographics equipment and the transfer of existing records to this new media offer a satisfactory solution to the problem, given congressional reluctance to fund authorized programs to provide the NARS with adequate storage and retrieval facilities.



Go to:

Previous Chapter

Next Chapter

Return to Table of Contents

Search CMH Online
Last updated 17 September 2004