ccl nting Geneml lHeadqmTtelPs, W, S, .Arw Traio5ng Center, IIllI%llIIlllIllllllllllllllIIllIIII LM089318 InfatrLtry and Fort 0x4 Fort 0x3, California 93941 We hame mde a re;lriew of the civil&m pay and r&Lated matters s*t the w, 5, li,nr@" Traiting center, Infants and Fort OmJ., !&is xyT#-iew, cQ~%et;ea ia April 1971, ms m&de pursumt to the ,T3lxlg@% and Aceloulm"cing Act, 1921 (31 W,S,C!, 53), and the Accounting and AudZting Act of 1950 (32 W,S,C, 67)@ 0l.w revie%Yeonsistea of an nation of the policies, proee~ures and practices for the2aMnistration 0% civilian p rat Fort Urd and IE~limited test of transactions, specia emphstsis ms placed on thle followhg arem: (1) ll3-rterPld Control, (2) 1nterns.l Rdew, (3) Witlcth-grade Increases, (4) Salary Act of J-970, (5) Coordinated Federal Wage Systa, and (6) Severatnce Pay'. mile W@found "chat tile procedures, practices and internstr. controls wwe fitdsquate, we- noted a nmber of minor discrepancies which indicated that the inclependent rdew functions within t;he Civilim Persormel and the Ci.tiLian Faly-soll Offices were not affective in specific instances as illustrated below: 1, One former Fort Ord employee WXLSSundeqmid about $7$ bec&wm the CLViLfan l?ersonneL Office used the wrong salary rate to compute the seversnee pay funa, 2, Five former Fort Onndemployees received the fin&l swer- mce pfkpnent (raining balance) at the beginning rather than the end of the severance pay period, becwse the Civilian PaymlX tisinterpretated the remarks on the sepamklxkg personnel. mzU.on, Errors, invoPving both overpyments and undeqmyments, in the pay of four of the five mployees totaled about $253, because they were re-employed by the Federal goverment prior to ex- hausti~ their sevemme pay benefits. -2- ,,,,,. 111 “111, ., . .HIII
Civilian Pay, U.S. Army Training Center, Infantry and Fort Ord
Published by the Government Accountability Office on 1971-05-17.
Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)