Army National Guard: Validate Requirements for Combat Forces and Size Those Forces Accordingly
NSIAD-96-63
Published: Mar 14, 1996. Publicly Released: Mar 14, 1996.
Skip to Highlights
Highlights
Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the: (1) roles and missions of the Army National Guard's combat units; and (2) efforts by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Army to redesign the Guard's combat divisions.
Recommendations
Recommendations for Executive Action
| Agency Affected | Recommendation | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Department of Defense | The Secretary of Defense should, in conjunction with the Secretary of the Army and the Director, Army National Guard, validate the size and structure of all of the Guard's combat forces. |
Closed – Implemented
The recently completed DOD Quadrennial Defense Review made an effort to assign missions to some National Guard combat forces. Another Army effort recommended redesigning some of the combat forces into support forces.
|
| Department of the Army | The Secretary of Defense should, in conjunction with the Secretary of the Army and the Director, Army National Guard, validate the size and structure of all of the Guard's combat forces. |
Closed – Implemented
The QDR made an effort to assign missions to some Guard combat forces. Another Army effort recommended redesigning some of the combat forces into support forces.
|
| National Guard Bureau | The Secretary of Defense should, in conjunction with the Secretary of the Army and the Director, Army National Guard, validate the size and structure of all of the Guard's combat forces. |
Closed – Implemented
The QDR made an effort to assign missions to some Guard combat forces. Another Army effort recommended redesigning some of the combat forces into support forces.
|
| Department of the Army | The Secretary of the Army should prepare and execute a plan to bring the size and structure of the Army National Guard's combat forces in line with validated requirements. |
Closed – Implemented
The Quadrennial Defense Review determined that 45,000 total spaces could be cut from the National Guard and Army Reserve. As a result of further negotiations between the Reserve component and the Army, the Guard and Reserve agreed to cut 20,000 personnel--17,000 Guard and 3,000 Reserve. The cuts are to occur for the Guard as follows: 5,000 in 1998, 5,000 in 1999, and 7,000 in 2000. The cut for the Reserve will occur in 2000. It is unclear when and where the additional 25,000 personnel cuts will occur.
|
| Department of the Army | If the Army study suggests that some Army National Guard combat forces should be converted to support roles, the Secretary of the Army should follow through with the conversion because it would satisfy shortages in its support forces and further provide the types of forces that state governors have traditionally needed. |
Closed – Implemented
The Army and National Guard recently completed a study recommending the redesign of 12 National Guard combat brigades into support units. The Guard has begun this redesign. However, the effort will take considerable funding, most of which has not yet been provided, thus delaying the completion.
|
| Department of Defense | To the extent that there are Army National Guard forces that exceed validated requirements, the Secretary of Defense should consider eliminating them. |
Closed – Implemented
The Quadrennial Defense Review determined that 45,000 total spaces could be cut from the National Guard and Army Reserve. As a result of further negotiations between the Reserve component and the Army, the Guard and Reserve agreed to cut 20,000 personnel--17,000 Guard and 3,000 Reserve. The cuts are to occur for the Guard as follows: 5,000 in 1998, 5,000 in 1999, and 7,000 in 2000. The cuts for the Reserve will occur in 2000. It is unclear when and where the additional 25,000 personnel cuts will occur.
|
Full Report
Office of Public Affairs
Topics
Armed forces reservesArmy reservistsCombat readinessDefense contingency planningDefense cost controlDisaster relief aidFederal agency reorganizationstate relationsStaff utilizationMilitary downsizing