United States General Accounting Office

GAO Briefing Report to Congressional

Requesters

January 1997 ARMY NATIONAL

GUARD

Planned Conversions

Are a Positive Step, but

Unvalidated Combat

Forces Remain

GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR

GAO United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

National Security and

International Affairs Division

B-275525 

January 29, 1997

The Honorable John R. Kasich

Chairman, Committee on the Budget

House of Representatives

The Honorable Steve Buyer

Chairman, Subcommittee on Military Personnel

Committee on National Security

House of Representatives

The Honorable Owen Pickett

House of Representatives

Previous GAO reports1

 and the Department of Defense (DOD) report of the

Commission on Roles and Missions of the Armed Forces2

 discussed the

need to make better use of reserve forces. We reviewed the Army National

Guard Division Redesign Study to determine how the study addressed this

need. We recently briefed your staff on these issues. The information we

provided at those briefings is detailed in the sections following this letter.

Background By the end of fiscal year 1999, the Army National Guard plans to have

367,000 personnel in 54 separate state and territorial military commands in

the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands,

and Guam. This number includes about 187,000 personnel organized into 

8 combat divisions that include 3 brigades each, 15 enhanced brigades, and 

3 separate combat units, consisting of 2 separate brigades and a scout

group. In addition to the combat units, the Guard has elements that

support combat units, such as engineers, military police, military

intelligence, and transportation. The Guard is to be organized and

resourced for federal wartime missions but is also available to fulfill state

missions.

As we mentioned in our March 1996 report, war planners and DOD and

Army studies noted that many Guard combat units are not needed to meet

the national security strategy of fighting and winning two nearly

1

Army Force Structure: Future Reserve Roles Shaped by New Strategy, Base Force Mandates, and Gulf

War (GAO/NSIAD-93-80, Dec. 15, 1992); Force Structure: Army National Guard Divisions Could

Augment Wartime Support Capability (GAO/NSIAD-95-80, Mar. 2, 1995); and Army National Guard:

Validate Requirements for Combat Forces and Size Those Forces Accordingly (GAO/NSIAD-96-63,

Mar. 14, 1996).

2

Report of the Commission on Roles and Missions of the Armed Forces, DOD (Arlington, Va.: 1995).

Page 1 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
B-275525 

simultaneous major regional conflicts. According to DOD documents and

Army officials, these excess forces are assigned to secondary missions

such as providing wartime rotational forces, serving as a deterrent hedge

to future adversarial regimes, and supporting civil authorities at home.

Both the Commission’s report and our March 1996 report recommended

that DOD determine the number of Guard combat spaces that are needed;

use unneeded spaces to fill needed, but unresourced, support

requirements; and eliminate the excess. In response to our

recommendations, DOD stated that the Army National Guard Division

Redesign Study and other studies being conducted by the Office of the

Secretary of Defense, Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation and the

Joint Chiefs of Staff would address these issues.

Results in Brief The Army National Guard Division Redesign Study developed an option

that provides for the conversion of some Guard combat and supporting

forces to fill needed, but unresourced, support requirements. This planned

conversion is a step in the right direction. However, neither this study nor

the studies from the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Office of Program Analysis

and Evaluation deal with the critical issues of validating the need for the

remaining Guard combat structure and eliminating any excess forces. As a

result, the studies leave substantial Guard structure in place that has no

valid war-fighting mission. According to DOD and Joint Staff officials,

however, the Quadrennial Defense Review may consider them.3

The Army National Guard Division Redesign Study working group

(chartered by the Army’s Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans)

and a parallel study group (the Guard’s Division Project Action

Committee) considered several options to redesign the Guard combat

divisions to fill support requirements. Three of these options were

evaluated to determine initial costs and feasibility.

A General Officers Working Group then selected the option to convert 2 of

the Guard’s combat divisions and 6 combat brigades—about 

42,700 spaces—into required support spaces. This option also allows the

Guard to keep the other six combat divisions, minus three combat

brigades, and create two new divisions with each division containing three

enhanced brigades and an active duty administrative headquarters. The

study’s preliminary estimates are that it would take about $2.8 billion to

3

This review, established in the Fiscal Year 1997 Defense Authorization Act, is to be a comprehensive

examination of the defense program and policies.

Page 2 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
B-275525 

convert these combat spaces and could take from 10 to 29 years,

depending upon annual funding, to complete the conversion. However, the

Army does not plan to begin this conversion until it has purchased all the

equipment needed to convert another 66,000 active and reserve support

spaces, identified through another Army analysis, into required support

spaces. The total cost for this first conversion effort is an estimated

$2.6 billion. The final costs and implementation time frame for the Division

Redesign Study and the feasibility of the new divisions are still being

evaluated and will not be addressed in this report. According to Army

officials, preliminary results from the cost evaluation indicate that costs

could be less than originally estimated.

Recommendation We recommend that the Secretary of Defense, as he guides the

Quadrennial Defense Review, direct that the review process validate

requirements for Guard combat structure. We further recommend that,

once this validation is complete, the Secretary of Defense, in concert with

the Secretary of the Army, eliminate any structure beyond that which is

needed to carry out the national security strategy.

Scope and

Methodology

To assess DOD’s and the Army’s efforts to redesign the Guard combat

divisions, we interviewed cognizant officials and obtained and analyzed

the Army National Guard Division Redesign Study and other relevant

documents from DOD; the Army; the Army National Guard; the Joint Chiefs

of Staff; Calibre Systems, Inc.; and DOD’s Commission on Roles and

Missions.

We requested written comments from DOD, but none were provided. We

discussed the information in this report with cognizant officials and have

made changes where appropriate.

We conducted this review from August to November 1996 in accordance

with generally accepted government auditing standards.

We are providing copies of this report to appropriate House and Senate

committees; the Secretaries of Defense and the Army; the Director of the

Army National Guard; and the Director, Office of Management and Budget.

We will also provide copies to other interested parties upon request.

Page 3 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
B-275525 

Please contact me at (202) 512-3504 if you or your staff have any questions

concerning this report. The major contributors to this report were Robert

Pelletier, Ann Borseth, and Lisa Quinn.

Richard Davis

Director, National Security

 Analysis

Page 4 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Page 5 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Contents

Letter 1

Briefing Section I 

Background

8

Previous Studies Call for Changes to Guard Combat Divisions 8

Briefing Section II 

The Army National

Guard Division

Redesign Study

10

Army Vice Chief of Staff Chartered Redesign Working Group 10

Two Groups Conduct Study by Using a Three-Phased Approach 12

Phase One: Options Developed for Alternative Force Structure 14

Phase One: Three Options 16

Phase Two: Detailed Cost Analysis 18

Decisions Reached Prior to Phase Three 20

Phase Three: Feasibility Analysis 22

Comparison of Options 24

Briefing Section III 

The Decision

26

Working Group Selects Option One 26

Illustrative Time Frames for Implementation 28

Briefing Section IV 

Response to Prior

Recommendations

30

Studies Did Not Address All of Previous Recommendations 30

Abbreviations

DOD Department of Defense

DIVPAC Division Project Action Committee

DCSOPS Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans

JCS Joint Chiefs of Staff

PA&E Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation

Page 6 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Page 7 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section I 

Background

GAO Previous Studies Call for Changes to 

Guard Combat Divisions

RAND study: large percentage of Guard 

not needed for state requirements

1996 GAO report and Commission 

study:

No wartime mission for eight Guard 

combat divisions

Eight divisions too large for secondary 

missions

By the end of fiscal year 1999, the Army National Guard plans to have

367,000 personnel in 54 separate state and territorial military commands in

the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands,

and Guam. This number includes about 187,000 personnel organized into 

8 combat divisions that include 3 brigades each; 15 enhanced brigades; and 

3 separate combat units, consisting of 2 separate brigades and a scout

group. In addition to the combat units, the Guard has elements that

Page 8 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section I 

Background

support combat units, such as engineers, military police, military

intelligence, and transportation.

According to Guard policy, the Guard is to be organized and resourced for

federal wartime missions but is also available to fulfill state missions.

According to a recent study by RAND’s National Defense Research

Institute,4

 the Guard over the last decade has used only a small percentage

of its total personnel to meet state requirements. RAND also reported that,

nationally, state demands on the Guard are not significant. RAND

concluded that, even in a peak use year, state missions would not require a

large portion of the Guard.

As we reported in our March 1996 report,5

 war planners and Department

of Defense (DOD) studies stated that the eight combat divisions are not

needed to meet the national security strategy of fighting and winning two

nearly simultaneous major regional conflicts. According to DOD’s 1993

Report on the Bottom-Up Review, these forces are assigned to fill

secondary missions such as providing wartime rotational forces, serving as

a deterrent hedge to future adversarial regimes, and supporting civil

authorities at home.

However, the Commission on Roles and Missions of the Armed Forces

reported that eight Guard combat divisions are too large a force for these

secondary missions and concluded that reserve component forces with

lower priority tasks should be eliminated or reorganized to fill shortfalls in

higher priority areas. It also concluded that even after filling the shortfalls,

the total Army would still have more combat spaces than required and

recommended that these should be eliminated from the active or reserve

components.

In response to the recommendations in our March 1996 report, DOD stated

that the Army National Guard Division Redesign Study and other studies

being conducted by the Office of the Secretary of Defense’s Office of

Program Analysis and Evaluation and the Joint Chiefs of Staff would

address these issues.

4

Assessing the State and Federal Missions of the National Guard, RAND, (Santa Monica, Calif.: 1995).

5

Army National Guard: Validate Requirements for Combat Forces and Size Those Forces Accordingly

(GAO/NSIAD-96-63, Mar. 14, 1996).

Page 9 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section II 

The Army National Guard Division Redesign

Study

GAO Army Vice Chief of Staff Chartered 

Redesign Working Group 

In part, the Group was to 

develop options for changing Guard structure to 

meet future Army requirements

prioritize options for senior Army leadership

In part, the Group was not to

change the number of Guard headquarters

change force structure and end strength 

allowance 

eliminate ability to respond to state missions

Page 10 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section II 

The Army National Guard Division Redesign

Study

The Vice Chief of Staff of the Army signed a charter on May 16, 1995, that

established the Army National Guard Division Redesign General Officer

Working Group. According to the Group’s charter, the Group was formed

because the Army is in critically short supply of support forces but

continues to maintain Guard combat units that are excess to war-fighting

requirements.

The purpose of the Working Group was to (1) review the Army’s future

unresourced support requirements, (2) review the structure and missions

of the Guard combat elements and develop options for changing Guard

structure to meet future Army requirements, (3) conduct a resource

feasibility assessment of the options, and, (4) refine and prioritize the

options for presentation to the senior Army leadership. The guiding

principles of the Group, in part, were to (1) not cause a reduction in the

number of Guard division headquarters, (2) operate within existing Guard

force structure and end strength, and (3) consider the Guard’s need to

respond to state missions.

Members of the Working Group included the Deputy Chief of Staff for

Operations and Plans (DCSOPS); the Assistant Secretary of the Army for

Manpower and Reserve Affairs; the Director, Army National Guard; the

Chief, Army Reserve; the Chief of Staff, Training and Doctrine Command;

the Director of Operations, Forces Command; and representatives from

the Office of the Inspector General, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics,

and the Office of the Director, Program Analysis and Evaluation. The Ohio

Adjutant General, whose role was to act as spokesman for the 

54 Adjutants General, was added after approval of the charter and study

plan. According to Guard officials, this was the first time that the Guard

had been invited to sit on a general officer working group to discuss issues

affecting the Guard.

Page 11 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section II 

The Army National Guard Division Redesign

Study

GAO Two Groups Conduct Study by Using a 

Three-Phased Approach

Two groups

Army Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and 

Plans 

Army National Guard Division Project Action 

Committee 

Three-phased approach established by the Working 

Group

develop options 

analyze one-time and recurring costs 

analyze feasibility

Page 12 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section II 

The Army National Guard Division Redesign

Study

Two groups worked on options to redesign the Guard combat divisions.

One group, under the direction of the Army’s DCSOPS, was composed of a

working council of colonels and members of the Working Group. The

second group, the Army National Guard Division Project Action

Committee (DIVPAC), was composed of the 54 Adjutants General,

representing each state and territory, and the commanders of the 8 Guard

combat divisions.

The Working Group established a three-phased study protocol by which

the two groups would conduct their studies. During the first phase, the

two groups were to develop several options for alternative force structures

that would reduce the unresourced support shortfall and add relevance to

the remaining Guard force structure without violating the guiding

principles of the charter.6

 Once the options had been developed, they

would be narrowed to those options that would be presented to the

Working Group. The Group would then recommend which options would

proceed to phase two of the study. In phase two, the one-time and

recurring costs associated with implementing the options were to be

developed and analyzed. In phase three, the results from the other phases,

along with other relevant criteria to determine the feasibility of

implementing the recommended options, would be analyzed. From this

phase, a final option would be chosen and briefed to senior Army

leadership for a decision and implementation.

6

As defined in the study’s final report, “relevance” means to “enhance warfighting capabilities of

America’s Army.” This includes the missions of supporting the two major regional contingency

scenario, providing a deterrent hedge, and enhancing mobilization.

Page 13 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section II 

The Army National Guard Division Redesign

Study

GAO Phase One: Options Developed for 

Alternative Force Structure

DCSOPS developed 11 options

2 of the 11 options proceeded to phase two

DIVPAC developed 9 options

1 option proceeded to phase two

Page 14 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section II 

The Army National Guard Division Redesign

Study

Using a baseline force of 8 Guard divisions, 3 separate combat units, and

15 enhanced brigades, the first phase of the study focused on developing a

broad range of options for consideration by the Working Group. Both

study groups used certain design considerations that were developed early

on. Specifically, the groups were to focus on enhancing the war-fighting

capability of America’s Army, reduce the unresourced support shortfall,

provide a force that could respond to operations other than war, address

war-fight requirements of the Commanders in Chief of the Unified

Commands, and meet state-unique requirements where possible. Building

a force to respond to operations other than war was later removed as a

design consideration.

Using these design considerations, the DCSOPS study team developed 

11 options and the DIVPAC developed 9. The DCSOPS study team presented

their 11 options to the Working Group, which then chose 2 of the 11 for

further consideration. The DIVPAC analyzed their 9 options by measuring

them against a weighted criteria, ultimately choosing one option to be

presented to the Working Group for further consideration and evaluation.

Finally, three options—one DIVPAC option and two DCSOPS options—were

approved by the Working Group for further cost analysis in phase two of

the study. All three options provided structure to reduce the unresourced

support shortfall and assigned missions that could add to the relevance of

the remaining Guard structure, as defined by the study’s final report.

Page 15 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section II 

The Army National Guard Division Redesign

Study

GAO Phase One: Three Options 

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAA AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

As-Is

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

CA

OPFOR RSOI

xx xx

xx xx

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

As-Is AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

xxAAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

OPFOR

xx

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

RSOI

xx

xx

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

OOTW

xx

CA

xx xx xx xx

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

As-Is

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

As- Is

w/1 EB

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

CA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AC/NG

w/3 EB

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

EB

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AC w/

integrated

EB

CA

x x xx

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAAAAAAAA

AAAAAAAAAAAAAA

AAAAAA

6,600 support 

migrates from 

AC to NG

Option

one

(DIVPAC)

Option 

two

(DCSOPS)

Option 

three

(DCSOPS)

Legend: xx - division; x - brigade; EB - enhanced brigade; CA - combined arms; AC - active

component; NG - National Guard; OPFOR - opposing force; RSOI - reception, staging, onward

movement, and integration; OOTW - operations other than war.

Page 16 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section II 

The Army National Guard Division Redesign

Study

The three options selected by the Working Group were as follows:

Option one, developed by the DIVPAC, contains the following: three Guard

divisions that remain in their current configuration and could be used as a

deterrent hedge; three Guard divisions that replace one division maneuver

brigade with an enhanced brigade; two Guard divisions that would be

converted from combat divisions into combined arms divisions with one

combat maneuver brigade and various support units; two new active

component/Guard divisions, each containing an active component

headquarters and three Guard enhanced brigades as maneuver brigades;

two enhanced brigades that remain in their current configuration; four

active component divisions, each having an integrated enhanced brigade;

and six Guard combined arms brigades converted from the three separate

combat units and the three divisional maneuver brigades. Additionally, this

option provided that the missions of 6,600 active component support

spaces would migrate to the Guard.

Option two, developed by the DCSOPS group, contains the following: three

Guard divisions in their current configuration; three Guard combined arms

divisions; one Guard reception, staging, onward movement, and

integration division;7

 and one Guard opposing force division, which would

help train the enhanced brigades during mobilization. The 15 enhanced

brigades and 2 of the 3 separate combat units remain stand-alone entities

and are not shown in the previous chart. The third separate unit is used as

a maneuver brigade in a combined arms division.

Option three, also developed by the DCSOPS group, contains the following:

four Guard divisions in their current configuration; one Guard combined

arms division; one Guard reception, staging, onward movement, and

integration division; one Guard opposing force division; and one Guard

division to respond to operations other than war. As in option two, the 

15 enhanced brigades and 2 of the 3 separate combat units remain

stand-alone entities and are not shown in the previous chart. The third

separate unit is again used as a maneuver brigade in a combined arms

division.

7

A reception, staging, onward movement, and integration division assists in the deployment process.

The structure is similar to the combined arms division, but without the maneuver brigade.

Page 17 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section II 

The Army National Guard Division Redesign

Study

GAO Phase Two: Detailed Cost Analysis 

The Working Group stated that the lowest cost option would not 

necessarily be the best alternative

FY96 dollars in millions

Option one Option two Option three

Total one-time costs $2,506 - $2,842 $2,651 -$2,876 $1,725 - $1,979

Recurring costs ($64) ($65) $6.8

a

b

aOne-time costs were calculated two different ways: (1) with equipment substitutions and

(2) without equipment substitutions.

bThese reductions in recurring costs will not be realized until implementation is complete.

Page 18 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section II 

The Army National Guard Division Redesign

Study

The cost analysis conducted on the three options considered one-time

costs (such as procurement, retraining, facilities, and second destination

transportation costs) and recurring costs (such as annual operating costs).

According to Army and Guard officials, the analysis was done by the

Army’s contractor, Calibre Systems, Inc., to provide a consistent analysis

for both options.

The contractor calculated the one-time procurement costs in two ways.

First, it allowed for the use of equipment on hand that matched the

requirement of the new unit, with no substitutions, and computed the

purchase cost of new equipment to fill the remaining requirements.

Second, it allowed for the use of equipment on hand that matched or could

be substituted for the new unit’s equipment requirements and computed

the purchase cost of new equipment to fill the remaining requirements.

The second calculation produced the lower estimate. Both cost estimates

were presented in the final assessment.

The contractor did not consider those offsets that could be achieved by

(1) using equipment that was excess to the new unit’s requirements to fill

other Army requirements, (2) selling the excess equipment through foreign

military sales, and (3) using equipment passed to the Guard from

inactivated units or programmed for units through the modernization

process.

The first two options were both less expensive to operate annually,8

 but

their one-time costs were greater. The third option was the most expensive

option to operate annually but would have incurred lower one-time costs.

However, the Working Group had decided that cost would be treated as an

independent variable and that the lowest cost option would not

necessarily be the best alternative.

8

Prior to the analysis, the Working Group directed the contractor to exclude the cost impact of the

migration of missions for 6,600 support spaces that were included as part of option one.

Page 19 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section II 

The Army National Guard Division Redesign

Study

GAO Decisions Reached Prior to Phase 

Three

Option three was eliminated from consideration

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

As-Is AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA xx

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

OPFOR

xx

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

RSOI

xx

xx

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

OOTW

xx

CA

Option one was modified. The four integrated enhanced 

brigades were deleted from the active component divisions and 

retained as stand-alone brigades

Option one

(DIVPAC)

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

6,600 support 

migrates from 

AC to NG

Option three

(DCSOPS)

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAAAAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAA AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

As-Is

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAA AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

As- Is

w/1 EB

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA

AAA AAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

 CA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAA AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AC/NG

w/3 EB

AC w/

integrated

EB

x

xx xx xx xx

xx

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

CA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAA AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAA AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

x AA

EB

Page 20 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section II 

The Army National Guard Division Redesign

Study

Options one and two were selected by the Working Group to proceed to

phase three of the study. Option three was dropped from further

consideration because it reduced the support shortfall by the least amount

and contained a division created to respond to operations other than war.

The Working Group determined that this was a mission that could be

satisfied by a division remaining in its current configuration.

In addition, the DIVPAC modified their option by deleting the integration of

four enhanced brigades into four active component divisions. The four

enhanced brigades were to remain stand-alone brigades, thus retaining six

enhanced brigades in that status.

Page 21 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section II 

The Army National Guard Division Redesign

Study

GAO

Working Group uses nine weighted criteria to 

evaluate options

Option two receives better score, but difference 

between the options is negligible

Cost is considered as independent variable

Phase Three: Feasibility Analysis 

Option one (DIVPAC)

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAAAAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

As-Is

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAAAAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAAAAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

As- Is

w/1 EB

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAAAAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

CA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AC/NG

w/3 EB

x

xx xx xx xx

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

CA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAAAAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

x

EB

Option two (DCSOPS)

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAAAAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAAA

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAAAAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

As-Is

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

CA

OPFOR RSOI

xx xx

xx xx

Page 22 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section II 

The Army National Guard Division Redesign

Study

Once the two options were selected for further study, the Working Group

then addressed the feasibility of implementing each option. This phase of

the study was done by developing and defining the criteria to be used to

show the strengths and weaknesses of each option, subjectively assessing

the advantages and disadvantages of each criterion, and factoring in the

costs determined in phase two as an independent variable.

The Group approved nine criteria to be used. These were relevance to the

war-fight, reduction of unresourced support shortfall, impact on the active

force, amount of Guard maneuver/combat troops integrated into the

war-fight mission, turbulence on Guard units, readiness impact on lower

tiered units, impact on full-time support ratios, impact on professional

development, and impact on force mix. Each of the criteria was assigned a

weight by using a standard Army computer program. Throughout this

process, advantages and disadvantages of each option were subjectively

evaluated.

According to the study, the lowest score is the preferred option when

based on the weighted criteria. When the scores were summed, option two

received the lowest score. Option two converts more combat into support

spaces, impacts the active component the least, and would have the least

amount of turbulence to the Guard units. Option one scored better than

option two in two criteria: It provides more professional development

opportunities, and it would not generate as many full-time personnel

support requirements. However, the study’s final report stated that the

differences between the two options were slight.

During this phase, the estimated costs originally developed in phase two

were revisited as an independent variable. As stated previously, 

option two yields the most expensive one-time costs and the least amount

of savings in recurring costs. The difference between option one and two

could be greater than reflected in phase two because, among other things,

the one-time and recurring cost estimates associated with option one do

not include the costs related to the two new active component/Guard

divisions.

Page 23 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section II 

The Army National Guard Division Redesign

Study

GAO Comparison of Options

xx

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

As-Is

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

As- Is

w/1 EB

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

CA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AC/NG

w/3 EB

x

xx xx xx

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

CA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

x

EB

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

As-Is

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

CA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

RSOI

xx xx

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

OPFOR

xx

xx

Option one

(DIVPAC)

Option two

(DCSOPS)

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

6,600 support 

migrates from 

AC to NG

42,700 support

spaces

44,100 support

spaces

Differences:

- EBs

- 6,600

 migration

- OPFOR

Page 24 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section II 

The Army National Guard Division Redesign

Study

The structural similarities of each option are presented in the shaded areas

on the previous page. For example, each option maintains three Guard

combat divisions as currently configured. Each option also converts some

Guard combat brigades and/or divisions into combined arms units to

satisfy an almost identical amount of unresourced support requirements

that have similar missions.9

 Specifically, option one would convert about

42,700 combat spaces to support spaces; option two would convert about

44,100.

The principal differences between the options are presented in the lighter

areas on the previous page and focus on three areas: use of the enhanced

brigades, the migration of spaces, and the opposing force division.

• Option one moves three of the enhanced brigades into three Guard

divisions to free up divisional brigades for conversion to support spaces.

The option also uses the separate combat units for conversion to support

spaces. Option two leaves the enhanced brigades as they are currently

configured, uses one separate unit as a maneuver brigade for a combined

arms division, and gets all of the unresourced support requirements from

the converted divisions.

• Option one includes the migration of the missions of 6,600 existing

support spaces from the active component to the Guard. Option two does

not include this migration.

• Option two includes an opposing force division. Option one does not, but

instead has divisions that could be task organized to handle this mission.

In addition to the difference in the amount of support spaces the options

create, there are also differences in the number and type of the support

units themselves. For example, option one creates 108 quartermaster units

with 15,825 spaces, while option two creates 159 quartermaster units with

21,436 spaces. Also, option one creates 15 signal corps units with 

4,029 spaces, while option two creates 3 signal corps units with 

624 spaces.

9

As previously stated, a reception, staging, onward movement, and integration division is a variation of

the combined arms division without the maneuver brigade.

Page 25 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section III 

The Decision

GAO Working Group Selects Option One

Option one (DIVPAC)

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

As-Is

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

As- Is

w/1 EB

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

CA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AC/NG

w/3 EB

x

xx xx xx

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

CA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

x

EB

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAAAAAAAA

AAAAAAAAAAAAAA

AAAAAA

6,600 support 

migrates from 

AC to NG

xx

Page 26 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section III 

The Decision

On the basis of its evaluation of the feasibility analysis, the Working Group

selected option one to present to the senior Army leadership. According to

the study’s final report, this decision was based on the similarities of the

support units, the negligible difference in the support spaces created, and

the slight difference in the costs of the two options.

However, the Working Group required two modifications before

proceeding with this option: (1) the missions of the 6,600 spaces that were

to migrate from the active component would not migrate now but could

migrate into the Guard once the Army’s current initiative to redesign the

force for the future is completed and (2) the proposal for the two new

active component/Guard divisions would be revisited after the next update

of the national security strategy. This proposal is currently being tested by

the Army’s Training and Doctrine Command to determine the viability of

the concept.

The Secretary of the Army approved the Working Group’s modified

recommendation on May 14, 1996, and sent a letter to the Secretary of

Defense informing him of the Army’s decision. According to Army

officials, the Secretary of Defense was briefed on August 26, 1996, and

concurred with the Secretary of the Army’s decision.

Page 27 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section III 

The Decision

GAO Illustrative Time Frames for 

Implementation

Time-phased resourcing based on $400 M per fiscal year

Time-phased resourcing based on $200 M per fiscal year

Time-phased resourcing based on $100 M per fiscal year

FY 98 FY 08

FY 98 FY 16

FY 98 FY 27

29 years

18 years

10 years

Page 28 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section III 

The Decision

The previous page depicts illustrative time frames for implementing option

one based on different resourcing alternatives and using the highest

estimated one-time costs. For example, if $400 million is provided each

fiscal year beginning in 1998, the study’s final report estimated it would

take 8 years, or until 2006, to procure new equipment and an additional 

2 years, or until 2008, to complete implementation. As shown on the

previous page, the less funding that is made available each fiscal year

lengthens the time it takes to complete the conversion.

However, it is unlikely that funding for the Guard Division Redesign will

be available as early as fiscal year 1998. According to Army force structure

officials, the support shortfall at the end of the Total Army Analysis

process for the planning period ending in fiscal year 2003 would be almost

125,000 spaces.10 Over 66,000 spaces of this shortfall are to be filled

through the conversion of existing support units in both the active and

reserve components. The procurement phase of this conversion is to be

fully funded before any of the redesign effort will be undertaken. The

entire conversion, including procurement and implementation, of the

66,000 spaces is estimated to cost about $2.6 billion. However, according

to Army officials, funding for this conversion has not been established and,

therefore, it is not known when the conversion will be completed.

It appears, therefore, that the redesign will not begin for several years and

that, regardless of which funding alternative on the previous page is

chosen, implementation will take a prolonged period of time—10 to 29

years. However, the contractor is currently refining the final costs and

implementation time frames for the chosen option. According to Army

officials, preliminary results from this effort indicate that costs could be

less than originally estimated.

10The Total Army Analysis is the process by which the Army determines the nondivisional support

requirements, based on war-fighting scenarios developed by DOD.

Page 29 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section IV 

Response to Prior Recommendations

GAO Studies Did Not Address All of 

Previous Recommendations

Recommendations

Validate the number of combat troops needed to carry out 

the national security strategy

Use some of the support and combat forces of the Guard to 

fill needed, but unresourced, support requirements

Consider eliminating any forces that exceed validated 

requirements

Redesign study did not fully validate combat troops needed or 

discuss elimination of any excess troops

Other studies conducted by JCS and PA&E did not address 

recommendations

Opportunity for the Quadrennial Defense Review to revisit 

these issues

According to DOD, our recommendations and those of the Commission on

Roles and Missions were to be addressed by this study and other studies

conducted by the Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation (PA&E) and

the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS). However, while the Army National Guard

Division Redesign Study and the resulting decision provides for some

Guard support and combat forces to fill needed, but unresourced, support

requirements, none of the studies were chartered to validate the combat

needs or eliminate any excess forces. This leaves substantial Guard

Page 30 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Briefing Section IV 

Response to Prior Recommendations

structure in place that has no valid war-fight mission. We still believe these

are critical steps that should be taken.

According to the study’s final report, three of the Guard divisions

remaining in their current configuration were assigned a mission of

deterrent hedge, one of the missions that would add relevance to the

Guard structure. The report states that this mission was based on

requirements stated in concept plans developed by the Commanders in

Chief of the Unified Commands. However, on the basis of our review of

war planning documents and discussions with Army war planning

officials, this requirement does not exist in either Commanders’ concept

plans, the current Defense Planning Guidance, or any other war planning

documents. Furthermore, the three divisions, which include an enhanced

brigade in each, were assigned the mission of enhancing mobilization, also

to add relevance. Both these missions met the definition of relevance

approved by the Working Group. However, according to Army war

planning officials, there is a formal analysis process to validate combat

and support missions and requirements needed to carry out the national

security strategy that goes beyond assigning missions to structure. The

study did not follow this process to determine that the missions assigned

to the structure were valid.

In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 

(P.L. 104-201), the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Chairman

of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is to conduct a Quadrennial Defense Review as

recommended by the Commission. This review would be a comprehensive

examination of the defense strategy, force structure, force modernization

plans, budget plans, infrastructure, and other elements of the defense

program and policies with a view toward determining and expressing the

defense strategy of the United States, and establishing a revised defense

program through the year 2005. According to both Joint Chiefs of Staff and

Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation officials, this review is another

opportunity for DOD to revisit the Commission’s and our recommendations

to validate combat forces and eliminate excess Guard structure.

We concur with these officials and recommend that the Secretary of

Defense, as he guides the review, direct that the review process validate

requirements for Guard combat structure. We further recommend that,

once this validation is complete, the Secretary of Defense, in concert with

the Secretary of the Army, eliminate any structure beyond that which is

needed to carry out the national security strategy.

(701099) Page 31 GAO/NSIAD-97-55BR Army National Guard
Ordering Information

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.

Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the

following address, accompanied by a check or money order

made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when

necessary. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address

are discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 6015

Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015

or visit:

Room 1100

700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

U.S. General Accounting Office

Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000 

or by using fax number (301) 258-4066, or TDD (301) 413-0006.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and

testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any

list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a

touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on

how to obtain these lists.

For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET,

send an e-mail message with "info" in the body to:

info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web Home Page at:

http://www.gao.gov

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested

Bulk Rate

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. G100