oversight

Army Budget: Potential Reductions to the Operations and Maintenance Budget

Published by the Government Accountability Office on 1990-09-10.

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

       -l--__“l--l-lll-.l-l..
                                ..I----                   .I   ..I..   --I.._   .   ..-..   -_--...-.-..---.-_.   ._-_---_.-     .._..
                                                                                                                                         ._..__   l-“ll-^“l   ___-___.___
                                                                                                                                                                            --
        StyI (wll)t’l’              1!WO
                                                                                                                               ARMY BUDGET
                                                                                                                               Potential Reductions to .
                                                                                                                               the Operations and
                                                                                                                               Maintenance Budget




                                                                                                                                                                            142236




-.--                                      -~-l.~._-.-~-




(;AO/‘NSIAl)-!~O-27~lII1:
                                      United States
GAO                                   General Accounting Office
                                      Washington, D.C. 20648

                                      National Security and
                                      International Affairs Division

                                      B-240676

                                      September 10,lQQO

                                      The Honorable Daniel K. Inouye
                                      Chairman, Subcommittee on Defense
                                      Committee on Appropriations
                                      United States Senate

                                      The Honorable John P. Murtha
                                      Chairman, Subcommittee on Defense
                                      Committee on Appropriations
                                      House of Representatives

                                      The Honorable Earl Hutto
                                      Chairman, Subcommittee on Readiness
                                      Committee on Armed Services
                                      House of Representatives

                                      As requested, we reviewed the Army’s justification for its fiscal year
                                      1991 operation and maintenance (O&M) budget. Our objectives were to
                                      determine whether the defense programs should be funded in the
                                      amounts requested. Our review focused primarily on selected accounts
                                      in the Army’s O&M request for two of its major commands-US. Army,
                                      Europe (USAREUR) and U.S. Army Forces Command (FORSCOM).We pro-
                                      vided you with preliminary results of our analyses between March and
                                      July 1990.

                                      We identified potential reductions of about $734 million -$326 million
                                      at USAREURand $407.8 million at FORscoh+-as shown in table 1.

Table 1: Proposed Reductions to the
Fiscal Year 1991 O&M Requests for     Dollars in millions
FORSCOM and USAREUR                   Account                                                                      FORSCOM            USAREUR
                                      General purpose forces mission                                                    $194.8              $26.4a
                                      Real DroDertv maintenance                                                           176.6             214.0
                                      Base operations                                                                      30.5                 .O
                                      Other programs                                                                        5.9                 .O
                                      Civilian   personnelb                                                                   .O             84.5
                                      Joint exercises                                                                         .O                   1.1
                                      Total                                                                             $407.8             $326.0

                                      “The general purpose forces mission proposed reductions include $4 million for air operating tempo
                                      (OPTEMPO) and $22.4 million for ground OPTEMPO.

                                      ‘Civilian personnel funding is not identified as a separate account in the budget. Instead, It is included
                                      in each of the O&M accounts.




                                      Page 1                                                             GAO/NSIAD-90-276BRArmy Budget
B-240675                                                                 i




The reasons for proposed reductions are that (1) figures included in the
budget submission to the Congress exceeded figures in budget planning
guidance provided to USAREUR and FORSCOMby the Department of the
Army, (2) the costs to repair and maintain facilities at installations to be
closed had been included in the budget request, (3) the planned attrition
of civilian personnel as a result of the hiring freeze had not been taken
into account, (4) documentation was lacking to completely justify
planned ground and air OPTEMPOamounts, and (5) training exercises had
been canceled.

The Army expects that its O&M budget request will be reduced between 5
and 10 percent as a result of the congressional authorization and appro-
priation process. As such, the Army has instructed its major commands
to begin planning to accept such a reduction. In turn, the major com-
mands have instructed their activities to develop budget execution plans
in accordance with a reduced amount. For example, FORSCOM,in April
1990, instructed its field activities to begin planning for budget reduc-
tions. FORSCOMtold its activities that the amount of O&M funds included
in the President’s budget for them was “unrealistically high” and did not
take into consideration the changing events in the world such as base
closures and force structure changes. The results of our review are dis-
cussed in more detail in appendixes I and II.


As requested, we did not obtain written agency comments on this report.
However, we discussed the report with responsible program officials
during the course of our review and have included their comments
where appropriate. Our objectives, scope, and methodology are
described in appendix III.

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretaries of Defense and
the Army; the Director, Office of Management and Budget; and inter-
ested congressional committees. Copies will be made available to others
upon request.




Page 2                                         GAO/NSIAD-90.275BRArmyBudget
5240675




Please call me on (202) 276-4141 if you or your staff have any questions
concerning this briefing report. Major contributors to this report are
listed in appendix IV.




Richard Davis
Director, Army Issues




Page 2                                       GAO/NSIAIMO-271BRArmy Budget
Contents


Letter                                                                                        1

Appendix I                                                                                    6
Potential Reductions    Real Property Maintenance Activities
                        Civilian Personnel
                                                                                              6
                                                                                              9
to the US. Army,        Flying Hour Program                                                   9
Europe Fiscal Year      Ground OPTEMPO                                                       11
                        Joint Training Exercises                                             12
1991 Operation and
Maintenance Budget
Appendix II                                                                                  13
Potential Reductions    Background
                        Results of Analysis
                                                                                             13
                                                                                             13
to the U.S. Army
Forces Command
Fiscal Year 1991
Operation and
Maintenance Budget
Appendix III                                                                                 15
Objectives, Scope,and
Methodology
Appendix IV                                                                                  16
Major Contributors to
This Report
Tables                  Table 1: Proposed Reductions to the Fiscal Year 1991                  1
                            O&M Requests for FORSCOM and USAREUR
                        Table I. 1: Proposed Reductions to USAREUR’s Fiscal Year              6
                             1991 O&M Budget
                        Table 1.2: USAREUR’s RPMA Funding for Fiscal Years                    7
                             1989 and 1990 and the Amount Requested for Fiscal
                            Year 1991
                        Table 1.3: Reasons for USAREUR’s Fiscal Year 1991                     7
                            Overstated RPMA Request



                        Page 4                                     GAO/NSIAD-90-276BRArmy Budget
Contents




Table 1.4: USAREUR’s Flying Hours for Fiscal Years 1988                10
    to 1990
Table II. 1: Proposed Reductions to FORSCOM’s Fiscal                   13
    Year 1991 O&M Budget
Table 11.2:Comparison of Amounts in the January 1990                   14
    Budget to FORSCOM’s Estimated Amounts




Abbreviations

I;ORSCOM   U.S. Army Forces Command
NA'lU      North Atlantic Treaty Organization
O&M        operation and maintenance
OPTEMPO    operating tempo
RPMA       Real Property Maintenance Activities
USAREUR    U.S. Army, Europe


Page6                                         GAO/NSIAD-90-275BRArmyBudget
                                                                                                                                     I



Appendix I

PotentialsReductionsto the U.S.Army, Europe
F’iscalYear 1991 Operation and
MaintenanceBudget
                                    We identified potential budget reductions of $326 million to USAREUR'S
                                    fiscal year 1991 budget request for O&M funding. Table I.1 shows the
                                    proposed reductions by O&M account.

Table 1.1: Proposed Reductions to
USAREUR’s Fiscal Year 1991 O&M      Dollars in millions
Budget                              Account                                                                            Proposed reduction
                                    Real property maintenance                                                                            $214.0
                                    Civilian personnela                                                                                     04.5
                                    General purpose forces missionb                                                                         26.4
                                    Joint exercises                                                                                          1.1
                                    Total                                                                                                $326.0
                                    %ivilian personnel funding is not identified as a separate account in the budget. Instead, it is a part of
                                    the other O&M accounts.
                                    bThe proposed reductions to the general purpose forces mission account consist of $4 million for air
                                    OPTEMPO (flying hours) and $22.4 million for ground OPTEMPO.




Real Property
Maintenance
Activities

Background                          Real Property Maintenance Activities (RPMA) funding is used to pay the
                                    day-to-day costs of operating, maintaining, and repairing military facili-
                                    ties. For fiscal years 1989 and 1990, approximately 20 percent of
                                    USAREUR'S RPMA funding was for variable expenses such as maintenance,
                                    repair, and minor construction of the facilities, and 80 percent was for
                                    fixed costs such as utilities and engineers’ salaries. Table I.2 shows the
                                    funding received for USAREUR'S RPMA in fiscal years 1989 and 1990 and
                                    the amount requested for fiscal year 1991.




                                    Page 6                                                             GAO/NSIAD-!30-276BR Army Budget
   .
                                          Appendix I
                                          Potential Reductions to the U.S. Army,
                                          Europe Flrcsl Year 1991 Operation aud
                                          Maimmance Budget




Table 1.2: USAREUR’s RPMA Fundlng for Flrcal Years 1989 and 1990 and the Amount Requested for Fiscal Year 1991
Dollars in millions .-~_..-_-.-
                                                                                   Fiscal year
                                                      1989                           1990                                   1991
cost                                       Funded               Percent     Funded           Percent         Requested             Percent
Variable.         _-.---.--                    $194                  19         $191                  18             $433               31
Fixed     .--                 _.____.           824                  81          892                  82              975               69
Total    ‘-                                 $1,018                  100      $1,083                  100          $1,408               100
                                          Source: Data provided by the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, Engineer, USAREUR



Results of Analysis                       USAREURofficials in the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, Engineer,
                                          estimate that, in fiscal year 1991, $975 million will be needed to cover
                                          fixed costs and $433 million will be available for maintenance, repair,
                                          and minor construction. The amount available for maintenance, repair,
                                          and minor construction in fiscal year 1991 represents a 127-percent
                                          increase over the $191 million funded in fiscal year 1990. The official
                                          also said that a fiscal year 1991 funding level equal to the fiscal year
                                          1990 funding level, adjusted for inflation ($46 million), should be suffi-
                                          cient to cover the fixed costs and the maintenance, repair, and minor
                                          construction costs for those projects that cannot be delayed for a year.

                                          The official further stated that, in addition to the adjustment for infla-
                                          tion, another $66 million would be needed to comply with environmental
                                          requirements. Based on the above, an RPMA funding level of $1.194 bil-
                                          lion would be required for fiscal year 1991, as compared to USAREUR'S
                                          request for $1.408 billion. This would represent a $214 million decrease
                                          from the amount included in the President’s fiscal year 1991 budget.
                                          Table I.3 shows the reasons we identified for the overstated request.

Table 1.3: Reasons for USAAEUR’s Flscal
Year 1991 Overstated RPMA Request         Dollars in millions
                                          Reason                                                                                   Amount
                                          Army’s funding guidance to USAREUR was less than amount in the
                                          President’s budget                                                                           $46
                                          USAREUR annually reallocates this amount of RPMA funds to other O&M
                                          accounts                                                                                      35
                                          Costs for maintenance, repair, and minor construction funds for installations
                                          due to close were included                                                                    42
                                          Funds were included for nonsoecified ourooses                                                 91
                                          Total                                                                                      $214




                                          Page 7                                                        GAO/NSIAD-BO-275BR Army Budget
                                 Appendix I
                                 Potential Reductions to the U.S. Army,
                                 Europe Fiscal Year 1991 Operation aud
                                 Maintenauce Budget




Funding Guidance Is Less Than    The Army’s current budget planning guidance to USAREUR for RPMA in
Amount Budgeted                  fiscal year 1991 is $46 million less than what was included in the Presi-
                                 dent’s budget request. In other words, USAREURexpects to receive $1.362
                                 billion, not the $1.408 billion reflected in the President’s budget.

USAREUR Does Not Spend All       From fiscal years 1987 to 1989, USAREURreallocated a total of $105 mil-
Its RPMA Funds for RPMA          lion (an annual average of $35 million) from the RPMA account to
PllI-pOSeS                       another O&M account, base operations. USAREURofficials in the Office of
                                 the Deputy Chief of Staff for Resource Management told us that the
                                 funds were reallocated from RPMA to base operations because the Con-
                                 gress has been more willing to authorize increases in RPMA funding than
                                 increases in less popular programs such as base operations.

                                 Officials also told us that RPM.4 funds are reallocated to other O&M
                                 accounts by USAREUR'S community commanders after the RPMA funds are
                                 allocated to them. They said that this happens because community com-
                                 manders view project funds as discretionary money to be used as the
                                 “billpayer” for other unfunded needs. The officials, however, did not
                                 have data on the amounts of RPMA funds that the community com-
                                 manders moved from their allocation of RPMA to other O&M accounts.

Maintenance, Repair, and Minor   In August 1988, USAREUR'SOffice of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Opera-
Construction Funds for           tions began planning for the eventual drawdown of USAREUR'S forces.
Installations to Be Closed       The planning efforts have focused on reducing UEAREUR'S forces and
                                 closing installations to reach the Army’s portion of the 195,000troop
                                 ceiling currently being negotiated as part of the Conventional Forces,
                                 Europe, negotiations.

                                 Review of the list of installations USAREURhas identified for closing
                                 showed that 91 maintenance, repair, and minor construction projects,
                                 valued at $42 million, had been included in the fiscal year 1991 budget
                                 but will not now be performed.

Nonspecified Purposes            The difference between what USAREURbelieves is needed to meet its
                                 fiscal year 1991 RPhfA requirements ($1.194 billion) and the budget
                                 request adjusted to reflect funds not needed because of the reasons pre-
                                 viously stated ($1.285 billion) represents $91 million of RPMA funds in
                                 the budget for other requirements not yet identified. As such, funds for
                                 these nonspecified purposes could be reduced from the budget request.




                                 Page 8                                       GAO/NSIAD=90-275BR Anny Budget
                      Appendix I
                      Potential Reductione tu the U.S. Army,
                      Europe Fiscal Year 1991 Operation and
                      Maintenance Budget




Civilian Personnel

Background            USAREUR’S fiscal year 1991 budget request for civilian personnel was
                      based on 63,907 civilian employees (61,460 staff years)’ being paid from
                      O&M funds. At the budgeted rate of $28,000 per staff year, this would
                      amount to $1.721 billion.


Results of Analysis   In January 1990, DOD imposed a hiring freeze on civilian employees. As
                      a result of the freeze, USAREUR’Scivilian employment has decreased from
                      66,193 as of January 31,1990, to 63,690 as of May 31,1990-a        total
                      decrease of 1,603 employees during the 4-month period-or an average
                      of 376 positions a month. Assuming that the same attrition rate con-
                      tinues during the remainder of the fiscal year, we estimate that as of the
                      beginning of fiscal year 1991, USAREURwill have approximately 62,187
                      civilian employees on its rolls of which 60,769 will be paid out of O&M
                      funds.’

                      Converting the number of employees to staff years (using the 96.17 per-
                      cent factor) results in a staff year total of 58,442 at the beginning of
                      fiscal year 1991. The difference between this total and the 61,460 staff
                      years included in the budget is 3,018 staff years. At an average rate of
                      $28,000 per staff year, this equates to $84.5 million that is in the budget
                      that may not be needed.


Flying Hour Program

Background            IJSAREUR'S flying hour program consists of the cost of fuel and repair
                      parts for the approximately 1,000 rotary- and fixed-wing aircraft sta-
                      tioned in Europe. USAREUR’S fiscal year 1991 flying hour program con-
                      sists of 210,000 hours at a cost of $44.2 million.



                      ’ For fiscal year 1991 budgetingpurposes,the Army useda factor of 96.17percentto convert the
                      numberof personnelto staff years.
                      ‘Approximately 9’7.72percentof the USAREURcivilian employeesare paid out of O&Mfunds.
                      Therefore,we applied the samepercentageto the estimatednumberof civilians on the rolls at the
                      beginningof fiscal year 1991to arrive at the numberof employeespaid with O&M funds.



                      Page 9                                                     GAO/NSIAD-90-276BR Army Budget
                                       Appendix I
                                       PotentiaI Reductions to the U.S.Army,
                                       Europe Fiscal Year 1991Operation and
                                       Maintenance Budget




Results of Analysis                    The flying hours budgeted for USAREURin fiscal year 1991 is comparable
                                       to USAREUR’Slevel of effort for the last 3 fiscal years, as shown in table
                                       1.4.

Table 1.4:USAREUR’s Flying Hours for
Fiscal Years 1998 to 1990                                                                Bud eted
                                       Fiscal year                                    flying 8,ours    Percent used
                                       1988                                                219,000                100
                                       1989                                                219,000                 92
                                       1990                                                213,000    100 (estimated)


                                       According to a USAREUR aviation official, USAREUR’S fiscal year 1989
                                       flying hour program was overfunded by about $4 million. The official
                                       stated that the $4 million, plus an additional $2.5 million, was reallo-
                                       cated from the flying hour program to other O&M accounts to meet other
                                       needs. The official also stated that at the beginning of fiscal year 1990,
                                       $6 million in flying hour program funds were moved to fund other
                                       requirements. The official further stated that USAREUR’Sfiscal year 1990
                                       flying hour program could absorb $4 million of the reduction without
                                       affecting USAREUR'S ability to meet its training requirements.

                                       A USAREURofficial in the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Opera-
                                       tions told us that the Army plans to deploy three battalions of Apache
                                       helicopters to Europe by March 1991 and that this will increase
                                       USAREUR'S flying hour requirements for fiscal year 1991. Therefore,
                                       funds will not be available to reallocate to other O&M accounts as in prior
                                       years.

                                       While the Army does plan to deploy three Apache battalions to Europe
                                       by March 1991, these battalions will replace existing Cobra battalions.
                                       Furthermore, there are fewer aircraft in an Apache battalion than in a
                                       Cobra battalion. This factor, plus the probability of troop reductions and
                                       reduced tensions in Europe, leads us to believe that the fiscal year 1991
                                       flying hour program can be reduced by at least $4 million-the     same
                                       amount as in prior years.




                                       Page 10                                        GAO/NSIAD-90-276BRArmy Budget
                      Appendix I
                      Potential Reductions to the U.S. Army,
                      Europe Fiscal Year 1991 Operation and
                      Maintenance Budget




Ground OPTEMPO

Background            Ground OFTEMPOrepresents the fuel and spare parts costs associated
                      with operating tactical vehicles and other military equipment at a speci-
                      fied rate of usage to achieve a certain level of readiness. The costs for
                      operating tactical vehicles and other military equipment are calculated
                      by the Department of the Army using its Training Resource Model,
                      which multiplies the cost per unit of usage by the number of authorized
                      pieces of equipment and the related number of miles or hours and then
                      sums the products. For example, if the fuel and spare parts cost $1.50
                      per mile and USAREURhas 1,000 vehicles that it plans to operate 500
                      miles during the year, the estimated ground OPTEMPOfor the vehicle is
                      $750,000.


Results of Analysis   Our calculation of USAREUR'SOPTEMPOrequirements, using the same
                      methodology as the Training Resource Model, showed an OFTEMPO
                      requirement of $223 million as compared to the $245.4 million that was
                      included in the President’s budget for fiscal year 1991.

                      A USAREURofficial in the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Opera-
                      tions told us that he could not explain the $22.4 million difference
                      between the two amounts ($223 million and $245.4 million). The official
                      said that one possible explanation might be that the Training Resources
                      Model does not calculate OPTEMPOfor small equipment items such as
                      radios and protective masks. Subsequent to our discussion, the official
                      provided us with a computer printout that showed the OFTEMPOwas
                      $22.4 million for the equipment not included in the Training Resources
                      Model.

                      In discussion with Headquarters, Department of the Army officials, we
                      determined that the OFTEMPOfor equipment not included in the model is
                      based on a percentage of the OPTEMPOcosts for equipment that is
                      included in the model. For example, OPTEMPOfor equipment in a combat
                      unit that is not included in the model is 5 percent of the OPTEMPOcost for
                      equipment that is included in the model; 10 percent in a combat support
                      unit, and 15 percent in a headquarters unit. The officials were not able
                      to explain the rationale for the specific percentages or how the esti-
                      mated amounts compare to the actual amounts.




                      Page 11                                       GAO/NSIALbBO-276BR Army Budget
                      Appendix I
                      Potential Reductions to the U.S. Army,
                      Europe Fiscal Year 1991 Operation and
                      Maintenance  Budget




                      In view of the uncertainties concerning the rationale or validity of the
                      OITEMPO amounts associated for nonmodeled equipment, we believe the
                      $22.4 million could be reduced from the USAREURrequest.



Joint Training
Exercises

Background            The incremental costs associated with USAREUR'S participation in Corps,
                      Echelons-Above-Corps, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
                      (NATO) training exercises are paid from USAREURJoint Chiefs of Staff
                      training exercise funds. Incremental costs would include the cost of
                      installing telephones and communication systems between USAREUR and
                      NAID command units participating in the exercises. For fiscal year 1991,
                      USAREURrequested $23.9 million to fund these exercise-related costs.



Results of Analysis   One exercise scheduled for fiscal year 1991 (WINTEX~CIMEX) in which
                      USAREURwas a planned participant has been canceled due to the changed
                      political environment in Europe. USAREURhad included $1.1 million in its
                      budget for this exercise. As a result, these funds could be reduced from
                      USAREUR'Sbudget request.




                      Page 12                                       GAO/NSIAD-BO-275BR Army Budget
        I




Annendix II

p’otentialReductionsto the U.S.Army Forces
CommandFiscal Year 1991 Operation and
MarlntenanceBudget
                                    We identified potential budget reductions of about $408 million to the
                                    Army’s fiscal year 1991 budget request for O&M funding for FORSCOM.
                                    The proposed reductions stem from the Army’s budget guidance to
                                    FORSCOMand the other major commands, in which it advised the com-
                                    mands to plan on receiving significantly less than what was included in
                                    the President’s January 1990 budget submission to the Congress. Table
                                    11.1shows the proposed reductions by O&M account.

Table 11.1:Proposed Reductions to
FORSCOM’s Fiscal Year 1991 O&M      Dollars in millions
Budget                              Account                                                  Prooosed reduction
                                    General purpose forces mission                                       $194.8
                                    Real property maintenance                                              176.6
                                    Base operations                                                         30.5
                                    Other rxoarams                                                           5.9
                                    Total                                                                $407.8




                                    FORSCOM,the largest U.S. Army major command, is responsible for pro-
Background                          viding combat ready, properly equipped and trained forces to other
                                    major commands and theater commanders located throughout the
                                    world. FORSCOMoperates 18 major Army installations located in the
                                    United States.


                                    The Army’s fiscal year 1991 O&M budget request included $2.534 billion
Results of Analysis                 for IWBCOM, an increase of $215 million over the approved fiscal year
                                     1990 funding level of $2.319 billion as of July 1990. In March 1990,
                                    FORSCOMnotified its installations that funding levels identified for
                                    FORSCOMin the Army’s January 1990 budget submission to the Congress
                                    were “unrealistically high” and that the approved fiscal year 1991 O&M
                                    budget would probably reflect a 6- to lo-percent reduction as compared
                                    to the fiscal year 1990 amount.

                                    According to FORSCOM,the changing world environment and lack of firm
                                    fiscal year 1991 funding levels for such things as base closures or force
                                    reductions make planning difficult. In an attempt to give recognition to
                                    these uncertainties, FORSCOMdeveloped an estimate of what it could
                                    expect to receive after the congressional authorization and appropria-
                                    tion process was completed. FORSCOM'Sestimate was $2.126 billion-
                                    about $408 million less than what was included in the President’s
                                    budget to the Congress, The reduction represents a 16-percent reduction



                                    Page 13                                       GAO/NSIAD90-276BR Army Budget
                                          Appendix II
                                          Potential ReductIona to the U.S. Army Forces
                                          Command Fhal Year 1991 Operation aud
                                          Maintenance Budget




                                          from what was requested for fiscal year 1991, but only a 3-percent
                                          reduction from the July 1990 authorized funding level for fiscal year
                                          1990.

                                          Table II.2 shows the difference between what was included in the Presi-
                                          dent’s January 1990 budget and FORSCOM'Sestimate for the base opera-
                                          tions, mission, real property maintenance, and other minor accounts.
Table 11.2:Comparison of Amounts in the
January 1990 Budget to FORSCOM’s          Dollars in millions
Estimated Amounts (as of April 1990)                                               January 1990       FORSCOM’s best
                                          Account                                        budget             estimate      Difference
                                          General purpose forces mission                  $1,190.3              $995.5        $194.8
                                          Real property maintenance                          673.4                496.8         176.6
                                          Base operations                                    614.0                583.5          30.5
                                          Other programs                                      56.7                 50.8           5.9
                                          Total                                          $2,534.4             $2,128.8        $407.8


                                          As an indication that FORSCOMis planning for the reduction, its March
                                          1990 notification to FORSCOMinstallations instructed the installations to
                                          submit a budget execution plan showing how they would allocate the
                                          reduced funding levels for fiscal year 1991 in accordance with the pri-
                                          orities spelled out by FORSCOM.These priorities centered on maintaining
                                          training at specified levels, maintaining equipment to prescribed stan-
                                          dards, and maintaining a decent quality of life for soldiers, their depen-
                                          dents, and civilian employees.

                                          In many cases, the installation commanders expressed concerns about
                                          being able to carry out their commitments at the reduced funding levels.
                                          However, the commanders have responded to the FURSCOMrequest. In
                                          most instances, the budget execution plans showed that the commanders
                                          planned to fully fund their training requirements and significantly
                                          reduce base operations and real property maintenance to achieve the
                                          WRSCOM-proposedfunding levels.




                                          Page 14                                                    GAO/NSIAD-90-275BR Army Budget
Appbndix III

Objectives,Scope,and Methodology


               This review is one of a series that examines defense budget issues. Our
               objectives were to assess the adequacy of the justifications for the
               Army’s fiscal year 1991 O&M budget request to determine whether the
               programs should be funded in the amounts requested.

               Our review was performed at the two major Army commands for which
               the largest amounts of O&M funds were requested in fiscal year lQQl-
               USAREUR and FORSCOM.At the two commands, our review focused prima-
               rily on the general purpose forces O&M accounts, which comprised the
               vast majority of the budget request. These accounts included general
               purpose forces mission, real property maintenance activities, base oper-
               ations, and joint training exercises. At USAREUR, our review also included
               subaccounts within the major accounts. For example, we reviewed
               civilian personnel and ground and air OPTEMPO.

               In performing our review, we interviewed budget and program officials
               and reviewed pertinent program documents and budget support data
               obtained from the Department of the Army, Washington, D.C., and
               USAREUR and FORSCOM,Atlanta, Georgia.

               Our review was performed from January to July 1990 in accordance
               with generally accepted government auditing standards.




               Page 15                                       GAO/NSIAD-90-275BR Army Budget
                                                                                            c
Annendix IV

Major Contributors to This Report


                            Henry L. Hinton, Associate Director
National Security and       Robert J, Lane, Assistant Director
International Affairs       Frank A. Papineau, Evaluator-in-Charge
Division,     Washington,   Marjorie L. Adams, Evaluator

D.C.

                            Wilbur H. Crawford, Site Senior
Atlanta Regional            Fred Jimenez, Evaluator
Office
                            Donald R. Hunts, Site Senior
European Office             Robert E. Martin, Evaluator
                            Ann Calvaresi-Barr, Evaluator
                            Patrick E. Gallagher, Evaluator




                            Page 16                                  GAO/NE&ID-90-275BRArmy Budget
    Ordering   Information

    l’hch first. five copies of each GAO report are free. Additional copies
    are $2 t!acBh.Orders should be sent to the following address, accom-
    panitxl by a check or money order made out to the Superintendent
    of Documents, when necessary. Orders for 100 or more copies to be
    mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.

    ITS Gthntval Accounting Office
    P.O. Box 60 15
    (&ithersburg,  MD 20877

I
    Orders may also be placed by calling   (202) 275-6241.
 (                                                                                                                                              $
i,j
                                                                                                                                                1
4-    _......“._...   - .._.“. .,.__   .-...I   . ..__...... I._I   . I,.._”.._..- _.._.“. “”,,_ _ ..- __,_..-__-.~~        -.-..---.,-         <

                                                                                                                         First,-(hss     Mail
                                                                                                                       Post,agt~ XL Fws Paid
                                                                                                                                   <;A()
I                                                                                                                        I’tbrtttit No. G 100
/     4)t’l’ic~i;tl Pfrtsirtcw4



      ._-.._-__--           ..__