Review of the Army National Guard Drill Pay System

Published by the Government Accountability Office on 1971-12-16.

Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)

                                                      WASHINGTON,   DC.   20

    DEFENSE    DIVlSlON              .,   1:

                                                                                        I.8                    36
                    B-125037                                                       lllllllllllllllllllllllllllll!lIllllllll

                     Dear Mr. Secretary:               ,'.
              I'           The General-Accounting Office ’ rwiewed the Army National Gusrd                     ', i 3
                     drill pay system for inactive duty training, to determine whether
                     &eTy$t&m Was*o@erating effectively,      efficiently, and economically.
                          Wevisited selected Arq area headquarters, offices of three
                    State adjutants general, and four w     finance and accounting of-
                    fices; observed the procedures followed by selected Guard units in
                    taking attendance at trarzling assemblies; and audited, on a sample
                    basis, payrolls for October 1970. Our review was completed in No-
                    vember 1971.
                          In general we found that the drill psy system was effective
                    and that guardsma were paid accurately. Webelieve, however, that
                    the efficiency and econoqqof the system could be improved and that
                    the Amqycould save an esttited    $105,000 annually by centralizing
                    and f’ully mechamaizingdrill pay processing.
                         National Guard drill-training payrolls currently are paid by
                    14 separate finance and accounting offices in the continental
c                   United States, one in Alaska, and one in Hawaii. Ih reply to our
                    query, these 14 finance and accounting offices estimated that an-
                    nual costs related to processing payrolls and paying guardsmenwere
                    about $846,000. Of these 14 offices, six use a mechanizedpayroll
                    system and eight use a manual system,
                           Currently about one third of alp National Guard men in the
                    continental United States are paid for drills by the finance and
                    accounting office at shdiantown Gap Military Reservation, Pennsyl-
                    vania, under a mechanizedpayroll system. Indiantown Gap's costs,
                    including those for automatic data processing and for related per-
                    sonnel, are estimated to be $258,000 annually. Indiantown Gap of-
                    ficials estimated that addition&L operating costs of $483,OGO
                    annually would be incurred if it were to process all drill-training

                          A.     -


                                                    50 TH ANNIVERSARY     1921-   197

payrolls for guerdsmenin the continental United States. Thus the
total estimated annual cost of processing such payrolls at Indian-
town Gap would be $741,000, or $105,000 less than the cost of pro-
cessing them at 14 separate locations.
     Indiantown Gap officis3.s stated that it would be feasible to
process all Guard drill-training   psyrolls at that location.  They
noted that somerenovation of existing facilities    would be required
to handle the Guard drill-training   payrolls, but they did not fur-
nish us with, and we did not include in our computation, an estimate
of the cost of such renovation.
       In our report to the Secretary of Defense entitled "Potential
for Improvement in the Army Reserve Drill Psy System" (B-125037,
Aug. 30, 197l), we recommendedthat the Secretary of the Army cen-
trelize the Army Reserve drill pay function at one location under
a fully mechanizedpey system. In response the A- informed us
that it would conduct a feasibility    study. The Army also noted that,
inasmuch as the drill pay procedures for the ApnDtNational Guard were
very similar to those of the Army Reserve, the study would also ad-
dress the feasibility   of centralizing the drill pay function for both
Reserve components. The study is expected to be completed early in
      In vie& of the action planned by the Army to include both Re-
serve componentsin its feasibility   study, we are meking no recom-
mendation concerning the Guard drill pay system at this time. Cur
previous recommendationconcerning centralization of the Army Re-
serve drill psy system should be considered, however, as being
equally applicable to the Army National Guard.
     Any statements you furnish to the specified committees under
the provisions of section 236 of the Legislative Reorganization Act
of 1970 with respect to that recommendationshould also address the
m    National Guard drill pay system.
    Copies of this report are being sent todey to the Chairmen,
House and Senate Committees on GovernmentOperations; the Chairmen, ,‘;i '-&"'
House end Senate Committees on Appropriations; the Chairmen, House L, : -7

ana Senate Committees on Armed Services; the Secretary of Defense;   ) 5="
and the Director, Office 0fManagementandBudget.
                                  Sincexely yours,

!rhe Ronorable
The Secretary of the Amy

                                      AVAllABLE                 - 3-