DOCUMENT RESUME 02764 - [A1993041] (Survey of the Military Command Structure in Europe and Its Relationship to the U.S. Readiness Posture]. LCD-77-431; iB-183257. Jujy 11, 1977. 2 p. + enclosure (11 pp.S. Report to Secretary, Department of Defense; by Fred J. Shafer, Directcr, Logistics and Communications Div. Issue Area: Military Preparedness lans: Military Forces Readiness (805). Contact: Logistics and Communications Div. Budget Function: National Defense: Department of Defense - Military (except procurement & contracts) (051). Congressional Relevance: House Committee on Armed Services; Senate Committee on Armed Services. Authority: DOD Directive 5100.73. A recent review of the U.S. Command Structure in Europe snowed that a number of management headquarters functions in Europe were not eing reported. Findings/Conclusions: Reasons that some of the functions were not reported included: (1) the Department of Defensc's (DOD's) current practice of identifying organizations (the organizational approach) rather than personnel performing management functions (the functional approach) to identify management headquarters activities does not give an accurate picture of the number of personnel actually performing management headquarters functions; (2) the size of management headquarters in Europe has lot been accurately reported under the existing organizational approach, primarily because of the omissions of certain support activities and some indirect hire civilian personnel; and 3) some activities which meet DOD's definition of management headquarters are not being counted. A GAO report in April 1976 concluded that accounting for management headquarters personnel under the organizational approach is inadequate and recommended that DOD gradually implement a system to account for headquarters personnel on the basis of type of work performed. DOD did not agree with this recommendation and stated that the current organizational approach is adequate. Recommendations: The Secretary of Defense should reconsider the DOD position and evaluate the potential for gradually implementing a system to account for headquarters personnel on the basis of type of work performed. (St) ex ,\'X'V~~"~ l UNITED STATES GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE ) WASHINGTON, D.C. 20548 ',OGISrICS AND COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION JUL 1 1977 Ox- B-183257 CJ CO The Honorable The Secretary of Defense Dear Mr. Secretary: In 1972 the Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives, expressed concern about getting more accurate and meaningful information on military headquarters activities. In response, in 1973 the Department of Defense (DOD) issued DOD Directive 5100.73 titled "Department of Defense Manage- ment Headquarters" to establish a system for the management and control of the number and size of headquarters activities. The directive was revised in 1975 to clarify the criteria for designating an activity as a management headquarters or a headquarters support activity. Data on the size and number of management headquarters are furnished to the Congress as part of DOD's budget sbmission. During ur recent review of the U.S. Command Structure in Europe we found a number of management headquarters func- tions in Europe that were not being reported because: -- DOD's current practice of identifying organizations (organizational approach) rather than personnel per- forming management functions (functional approach) to identify management headquarters activities does not give an accurate picture of the number of per- sonnel actually performing management headquarters functions. -- The size of management headquarters in Europe has not been accurately reported, under the existing organiza- tional approach, primarily because of the omissions of certain support activities and some indirect hire civilian personnel. -- Some activities which meet DOD's definition of manage- ment headquarters are not bing counted. These matters are discussed in more detail in the enclosure to this letter. LCD-77-431 B-183257 Our report to the Congress titled "Suggested Improvements in Staffing and Organization of Top Management Headquarters in the Department of Defense" (FPCD-76-35, April 20, 1976), con- cluded that accounting for management headquarters personnel under the organizational approach is inadequate. We recom- mended that DOD gradually implement a system to account for headquarters personnel on the basis of type of work performed. DOD did not agree with this recommendation and stated that the current organization approach is adequate. We realize that it is difficult to implement a system for functional accounting of personnel and that existing man- pnwer systems, except for that of the Air Force, are not ca.able of handling the requirement of functional accounting. We also recognize functional accounting at all organizational levels may not be necessary since virtually all of the func- tions of lower level organizations are es& .tially operational in nature. We continue to believe, however, that functional accounting nhances the identification and accounting of man- agement headquarters and support personnel. Accordingly, we recommend that you reconsider the DOD position and evaluate the potential for gradually implementing a system to account for headquarters personnel on the basis of type of work per- formed. We want to invite your attention to the fact that sec- tion 236 of the Legisl, ive Reorganization Act of 1970 requires the head of a Federal agency to submit a written statement on actions he has taken on our recommendations to the House Com- mittee on Government Operations and the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs not later than 60 days after the date of the report and to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations with the agency's first request for appropria- tions made more than 60 days after the date of this report. we would like to be advised of any actions resulting from this letter. We are sending copies to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations and Armed Services, the House Committee on Government Operations, and the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs. Sincerely yours, F. J. Shafer Director Enclosure 2 ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I AN ;NALYSIS OF MANAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS IN EUROPE DEFINITION OF A MNAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS In its report of September 11, 1972, on the Department of-Defense (DOD) Appropriation Bill for fiscal year 1973, the House Appropriations Committee instructed the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) to establish (1) a DOD-wide defi- nition of headquarters activities, (2) an OSD-approved list of DOD headquarters components, and (3) a common method of accounting for the manpower spaces authorized to perform an- agement headquarters functions. Later, in July 1974, the Committee directed its Surveys and Investigations Staff to inquire concerning the compliance by the military services with the then new DOD Direct-,e 5100.73, entitled "Depart- ment of Defense Management Headquarter-," the purpose of which was to establish a system for the management and con- trol of the number and size of headquarters activities. In March 1975 the Surveys and Investigations Staff is- sued its report and criticized the DOD on its progress toward complying with the Committee instructions. Data was presented on headquarters throughout DOD and visits were made to several Navy headquarters in the United States and Hawaii. The staff did not visit any European headquarters. On April 11, 1975, shortly after the investigation re- sults were released, OSD revised DOE Directive 5100.73 to clarify criteria for designating an activity as a manage- ment headquarters or a headquarters support activity. The DOD criteria required that organizations be desig- nated as management headquarters activities when, as their primary mission, they perform the following functions for lower echelon organizations. -- Policy development and guidance. -- Long-range planning, programing, and budgeting. -- Management and distribution of resources. -- Program performance review and evaluation. Organizations whose primary mission was to provide di- rect support to a designated management headquarters were to be designated as management headquarters support activi- ties. This included staff extensions, agencies, activities, 1 ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I centers, and other types of organizations which may have been organizationally separate from the management head- quarters, yet rovide it with support integral to its ef- fective operation. Generally, direct support may take the form of providing analysis for or assisting in the formula- ticn of policies and procedures, or in otherwise providing professional, technical, administrative, or logistical sup- port essential to the execution of the management head- quarters mission. LACK OF VISIBILITY OF ALL MANAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS PERSONNEL DOD's definition of a management headquarters is based on an organizational approach rather than a functional ap- proach. Under an organizational approach, an organization is designated and counted as a mnanagement headquarters activity if its primary mission is to perform management functions for lower levels. On the other hand, under a functional approach management functions are identified and defined; then depart- mental components and authorized personnel performing these functions are determined. These personnel are then reported on the basis of the type of work they perform, regardless of their organization and primary mission. As a result of using the organizational approach, many personnel performing management functions in organizations not classified as management headquarters are not being made visible to the Congress. For example, the 17 U.S. Air orce wing and group organizations in Europe are considered as op- erationl or support units, not classified as management head- cuarter;. However, our analysis of the manning document for a typical fighter wing--the 36th Tactical Fighter Wing-- disclosed that about 300 of the approximate 3,900 personnel of -he wing appeared to be involved in "headquarters" func- tions. The General Accounting Office, in a report dated April 20, 1976, entitled, "Suggested Improvements in Staffing and Organ- ization of Top Management Headquarters in the Department of Defense," concluded that accounting or management headquar- ters personnel under the organizational approach is inade- quate. So long as DOD follows this approach, the apparent size of DOD management headquarters activities will be dis- torted. Considering the special interest expressed by Congress and the recent push to cut back on the size of headquarters activities, we believe it is important that the number of per- sonnel performing management functions be reported as accu- rately as possible. 2 ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I SIZE OF HEADQUARTERS STAFFS LARGER THAN REPORTED In its fiscal year 1976 budget submission, that 11 U.S. management headquarters DOD reported staffs with 5,024 person- nel authorized were in Europe. We found, headquarters are actually authorized however, that these about 5,705 personnel, a difference of 681, or 14 percent over that reported. Further, we noted four other Army headquarters, personnel, which appear to meet the authorized about 3,000 criteria for management headquarters but were not classified or reported as su-h by DOD. A comparison of the staffing levels reported by DOD and the staffing levels found by GAO is shown below. STAFFING OF U.s. MANAGEMIENT HEADUARTERS Ea OP Headquarters Staffing level reported Staffing level reported found by by DOD by DOD GAO Difference U.S. European Command 660 743 83 Armv U.S. Army, Europe 1,438 Southern European 1,593 155 Task Force 236 5th Signal Command 236 - 182 555 373 Total Army 1,856 2,384 528 Navy and Marine Crps U.S. Naval Forces, Europe ' 143 Sixth Fleet 344 201 144 142 2) Total Navy and Marine Corps 287 486 199 Air Porce U.S. Air Forces in Europe 1,657 3rd Air Force 1,591 (66) 52 Si (1) 16th Air Force 48 17th Air Force 47 (1) 41 43 2 European Communications Area 23 360 (63) Total Air Force 2,221 2,092 (129) TOTAL 5,024 5,705 681 Headquarters not reported by DOD Arm V1i V Corps Corps U 825 625 21st Support Command 0 4th Transportation Brigade 662 662 0 487 48' TOTAL 0 ,163 3,163 TOTAL 5,024 8,868 3,844 Note: The DOD staffing level was bascd on estimated fiscal year 1975 authorized positions, and the staffing level used by GAO was based on actual 1975 authorized positions as much a possible. :3 ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I Reasons for differences between actual and rerorted staffing The differences between actual and reported staffing of the management headquarters in Europe were caused primarily by (1) omissions of certain support activities and some in- di:ect hire civilian employees in headquarters staffing and (2) simply understating the size of headquarters. The fol- lowing examples illustrate this. Headquarters, United States Eurpean Command In its fiscal year 1976 budget submission, DOD reported the size of Headquarters, United States European Command tUSEUCOM), as 660 authorized positions. We could not deter- mine DOD's basis for the 660 figure. We found, however, that the actual size of Headquarters, USEUCOM--including its di- rect support elements--is about 743 authorized positions, a difference of 83, or about 13 percent. For mianagement headquarters reporting purposes, Head- quarters, USEUCOM, considers its size to be 630 positions consistirg of 550 for the headquarters itself and 80 posi- tions authorized for the data services center. Based on an analysis of the missions of other USEUCOM staff elements, we believe the following should also be included because their missions are primarily in direct support of the head- quarters. -- SILK PURSE (55 positions). This unit's mission is to operate and maintain the United States Commander-in- Chief, Europe (USCINCEUR) airborne command post. The airborne command post flies out of Mildenhall, England, and provides USCINCEUR an alternate means of communi- cating with higher authority and certain subordinate units. It also provides an alternate command center from which USCINCEUR can accomplish certain of his operational responsibilities. -- USEUCOM Special Activities, Intelligence Security Support (34 positions). This unit provides special security communications for Headquarters, USEUCOM. -- Headquarters, Support Operations Task Force 24 posi- tions). This unit plans for the conduct of uncon- ventional and psychological warfare in military con- flict. According to the Deputy Director of the Headquarters, USEUCOM Operations Directorate, this unit is the unconventional warfare staff element 4 ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I for Headquarters, USEUCOM, in peacetime. In wartime, it be- comes a subordinate command reporting to Headquarters, USEUCOM. Headquarters, United States Army Europe In its fiscal year 1976 budget submission, DOD reported the size of Headquarters, U.S. Army, Europe (USAREUR), as 1,438 authorized positions. This reported staffing evel was understated by 155 positions primarily because--under Depart- ment of Army guidance--USAREUR did not include indirect hire civilians in its management headquarters reports. In Germany, where Headquarters, USAREUR, is located, foreign national em- ployees are classifed as indirect hire. The foreign national employees at Headquarters, Southern European Task Force, how- ever, are classified as direct hire and included in manage- ment headquarters reports. We believe that civilian employees performing headquarters functions should be included in the appropTiate manpower reports regardless of whether they are direct or indirect hials. The following table shows the ef- fect of excluding indirect hire civilians from the manage- ment headquarters reported staffing of Headquarters, USAREUR. HEADQUARTERS, USAREUR STAFFING LEVEL Direct Indirect Military hire hire Staff element personnel civilians civilians Total Reported by DOD Headquarters, USAREUR 681 393 0 1,074 Staff Support Activities 263 101 0 364 Total 944 494 0 1,438 Actual staffing Headquarters, USAREUR 605 380 80 1,065 Staff Support Activities 280 147 101 528 Total 885 527 181 1,593 5 ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I The 5th Signal Command In its fiscal year 1976 budget submission, DOD reported the size of the 5th Signal Command (then called Army Communi- cations Command-Europe) as 182 authorized positions. We found that there were in fact 555 authorized positions for the head- quarters and its direct support elements. These 555 positions were made up of 248 positions carried on the headquarters au- thorization documents and an additional 307 positions carried on a service company authorization. The 5th Signal Command could not explain the difference between the 182 reported posi- tions and the 248 positions we found. The service compan-- positions should have been classified as a part of the headquarters staffing since they are an inte- gral part of the headquarters organization and are in fact listed on the headquarters organization chart as such. For example, the Command Control Center Division, a part of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Plans and Operations, is carried on the service company, not the headquarters, authorization. The same is true of the Military Personnel Division of the Dep- uty Chief of Staff for Personnel and Administration and the Financial Resources Division of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Resources. Carrying these headquarters functions on the serv- ice company authorization--and not including the service com- pany as a part of the headquarters--understates the actual size of the headquarters. Headquarters, nited States Navy, urope In its fiscal year 1976 budget submission DOD reported the size of Headquarters, United States Navy, Europe (USNAVEUR), as 143 authorized positions. This should have included the staffing of the headquarters itself and a spport unit called the Fleet Operations Control Center. We found that the staff- ing of the headquarters and Fleet Operations Control Center was 344 a/ authorized positions comprised of 228 and 116 posi- tions, r-epectively. USNAVEUR believes that the difference between actual and reported staffing is due to a misunderstanding on DOD's part. DOn apparently did not include the staffing of the Fleet O0- erations Control enter in the reported size of Headquarters, USNAVEUR, even though the Navy reported the staffing of both a/USNAVEUR reported only 286 positions. This number was sub- sequently increased by 58 as a result of a change in the Navy's method of accounting for billets. 6 ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I organizations to be 143 positions each. DOD apparently mis- took this report to mean 143 combined positions. USNAVEUR officials also told us that as a result of the 1975 report by the Surveys and Investigation staff of the House Appropriations Committee, it initiated a "clean-up" of accounting for billets in dire.ct support of management head- quarters. They stated that as a result of this "clean-up," the manpower reports on the staffing of management headquarters are now accurate and in conformance with DOD criteria. SOME MANAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS NOT CLASSIFIED AS SUCH While we did not evaluate the functions of all the larger headquarters in Europe, we ;Aentified several headquarters which appear to be perform.y many management headquarters type functions, but were not reported as such by the DOD. This has apparently resulted from inconsistencies in applying the criteria established by DOD. The transfer of management functions to lower headquar- ters through reorganizations or eliminations of management headquarters has in effect created more organizations per- forming management type functions. Yet, personnel in those organizations are not being counted despite the fact that they are performing management functions. A major distinction between a management headquarters and a nonmanagement headquarters in Europe appears to be at the point where a headquarters assumes an operational or tactical mission. All three services classify their theater component command headquarters as management headquarters. However, there is inconsistency in how the components classify sub- ordinate commands. The Army, for example, classifies the Southern European Task Force as a management headquarters but does not so clas- sify its European corps headquarters or its major support organizations. The Air Force and the Navy classify their intermediate headquarters--the 3rd, 16th, and 17th Air Force and the Sixth Fleet--as management headquarters. USAREUR and USNAVEUR have appealed through service channels the clas- sification of the Southern European Task Force and the Sixth Fleet as management headquarters, principally because of their operational mission responsibilities. We were subse- quently informed that Sixth Fleet has been deleted from DOD's list of management headquarters as requested by the Navy. 7 ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I There appears to be considerable latitude in applying DOD criteria in determining exactly what a management head- quarters is. As will be shown by the following, the incon- sistent application of this criteria has resulted in some headquarters performing the functions of management head- quarters but not being classified as such. Army management headquarters In Europe In addition to the three Army management headquarters in Europe (USAREUR, Southern European Task Force, and 5th Signal Command) identified to the Congress by DOD, we noted four other headquarters which are performing management type functions. Through various reorganizations over the years, which have resulted in the elimination of some management headquarters in Europe, the Army has in effect created other management headquarters by delegating management functions to existing headquarters which prevously had not beer clas- sified as management headquarters. The four Army headquarters in Europe which we identi- fied as performing management heaaquarters functions are those of the two corps, the 21st Support Command, and the 4th Transportation Brigade. These headquarters are among the larger Army headquarters in Europe and perform the full range of management functions outlined in DOD Directive 5100.73. Not only have the respohsibilities of these four headquarters increased, but their size as well. These in- creases occurred without the level of scrutiny and disclo- sure required for organizations classified as management :eadquarters. For example, changes of 5 percent in the size of management headquarters have to be approved by the Department of Defense whereas the changes in the size of these headquarters had only to be approved by the Depart- ment of the Army. The size of these headquarters for fis- cal years 1974 and 1975 is shown below. Authorized Personnel Fiscal year Fiscal year Increase Headquarters 1974 1975 Increase Dercent V Corps 341 825 484 142 VII Corps 572 1,189 617 108 21st SuoDort Command 389 662 273 70 4tn Transporta- tion Brigade 293 487 194 66 Total 1,595 3,163 1,568 98 8 ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I Corps Headquarters The two corps headquarters perform on a day-to-day basis the functions listed in DOD Directive 5100.73 but are not classified as management headquarters. Many of the manage- ment functions currently performed by the corps headquarters were si`ted to them as a result of reorganizations within the Arm, in Europe- particularly Proje;t CHASE (Consolidation of Headquarters and Area Support Elements) during 1974. Exam- ples of the functions the corps are currently responsible for include (1) base logistics operations in the corps area, (2) management of community organizations in the corps area, (3) facilities engineering activities in the corps area, (4) per- sonnel administration and manpower management within the corps, and (5) logistic support for tactical units within the corps. The latter responsibility resulted primarily from te change in Army doctrine to make corps more self-sufficient unrder the new "logistics echelons above division" concept. Headquarters, 21st Support Command The 21st Support Command headquarters grew in size and responsibilities as a result of Project CHASE. It currently is responsible for the maintenance and storage of the Army's prepositioned equipment stored in Europe and for the manage- ment of combat service support and community organizations outside the two corps areas. This Command calls itself the largest brigade in the Army, has a budget of about $248 million, commands 14 major subordinate units with 16 battalion equivalents and nearly 16,000 people, and serves a population of about 145,000 mili- tary and civilian employees and their dependents. Plans are now underway to expand the responsibilities of the 21st Support Command. These plans lude to support the BENELUX (Belgium, Netherlands, and projects Luxembourg) line of communication program and the assumption of manage- ment of supply depots through a reorganization of the Army's logistics structure in Europe. The 21st Support Command headquarters functions as de- fined in DOD Directive 5100.73 for both itself and its sub- ordinate units. Headquarters, 4th Transportation Brigade The 4th Transportation Brigade headquarters is responsi- ble for managing and operating a theater-integrated 9 ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I transportation service in support of the U.S. Forces in Cen- tral Europe. As such, it provides for: (1) Operation of a military highway transportation serv- ice. (2) Operation of military and/or contractually supervised water terminals. (3) Operation of the theater railway service, less main- tenance (4) Reception, processing, movement, and onward transpor- tation of military units deploying to-and from Europe. (5) Movement control of personnel and material (less pipeline operations). (6) Operation of a theater transportation data collection system. (7) Traffic management for U.S. Forces in Central Europe. (8) Preparation and distribution of the USAREUR Wartime Movement Program. (9) An intra-theater airlift service utilizing U.S. Air Force aircraft and employing U.S. Army rotary-wing aircraft. (10) Highway regulation services for U.S. Forces in Cen- tral Europe. The 4th Transportation Brigade headquarters in perform- ing the above duties also performs for itself and its sub- ordinate units the functions meeting the criteria of DOD Directive 5100.73. Many of the current duties of the Brigade were consolidated into the headquarters by the absorption of several subordinate units through various reorganizations, in- cluding Project CHASE. With its special responsibilities and quasi-independent status as a theater-integrated trans- portation manager serving not just the Army but all three services, the 4th Transportation Brigade headquarters is per- forming many management headquarters functions. Other headguarters in Europe performing management functions Although we did not verify the full scope of management functions in all the headquarters in Europe, we noted other 10 ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I headquarters which also may perform management headquarters functions. Some of these headquarters supervise the activi- ties of relatively large subordinate command structures in many ways may be responsible for the functions listed and DOD Directive 5100.73. in Some of the Army headquarters which may meet this criteria are listed below along with their fis- cal year 1975 staffing levels. ARMY HEADQUARTERS IN EUROPE WHICH MAY BE PERFORMING AS MANAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS Headquarters Personnel U.S. Army Medical Command, Europe 295 32nd Army Air Defense Command 391 59th Ordnance Group 388 U.S. Army Commander, Berlin 117 Similarly, the Air Force has a Military Airlift Command headquarters in Europe, the 435th Tactical Airlift Wing, which supervises the airlift operations in Europe. The responsibili- ties of the 435th Tactical Airlift Wing may qualify it as a management headquarters. The Navy has a shore-based headquarters in Italy--Fleet Air Mediterranean--which has comm.adNaples, and area coordination over some 38 shore installations and activities in the Mediterranean and Morocco, as well as the shore-based fleet of Navy patrol aircraft. The scope of its responsibili- ties may qualify the Fleet Air Mediterranean headquarters a management headquarters. as 11
Survey of the Military Command Structure in Europe and Its Relationship to the U.S. Readiness Posture
Published by the Government Accountability Office on 1977-07-11.
Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)