Involuntary reductions can occur anywhere along this personnel pipeline due to misconduct. We determined (1) what progress DOD has made toward meeting reduction targets, (2) how downsizing actions are affecting new recruiting or accessions, (3) what range of voluntary and involuntary reduction actions are being taken to meet downsizing objectives, (4) how downsizing is being accomplished across various groupings of officer and enlisted personnel by years of service and how this is affecting force profiles, and (5) what issues might be important to future reduction decisions. DOD’s action also reflects budgetary decisions to increase the ratio of entry level to more senior personnel in the career force to reduce the cost of the force. Various Tools Used to Downsize the Force Across Career Groups, but Some Less Than Voluntary Reductions Are Required

The services have used a number of authorities or “tools” to reduce and shape its force by various year groupings of officer and enlisted personnel. Table 4.8 shows changes in average enlisted pay grades for fiscal years 1980, 1987, and 1992. These issues include continuing changes in overall force profiles, pace of future reductions, correlating such reductions to changes in force structure, and determining what accession levels should be, factoring in multiple trade-offs. Conclusions

DOD has accomplished a majority of its previously planned active duty force reductions; however, senior DOD officials have indicated that further reductions are planned as the result of a recently completed review of future DOD needs. DOD and the services have reduced accession levels over previous years, but are still recruiting large numbers of personnel each year as part of their efforts to preserve and sustain a balanced force for the future.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the Department of Defense's (DOD) compliance with congressional guidance and authorizations in military downsizing, focusing on: (1) DOD progress towards meeting reduction targets; (2) the effects of downsizing on new recruiting or accessions; (3) voluntary and involuntary reduction actions to meet downsizing objectives; (4) the accomplishment of downsizing across various groups of officers and enlisted personnel by years of service and its effect on force profiles; and (5) issues important to future reduction decisions.

What GAO Found

GAO found that: (1) DOD has accomplished the majority of its planned active duty force reductions, and its fiscal year (FY) 1993 personnel level will be about 21 percent below its FY 1987 personnel level; (2) as a result of the DOD bottom-up review, further reductions below planned FY 1995 levels are probable; (3) DOD and the services have reduced planned personnel accession levels by 34 percent, but they are continuing to recruit large numbers of personnel in order to sustain a balanced force across various pay grades and skill areas and preserve future career opportunities and military capabilities; (4) personnel turnover rates are higher than force reduction rates due to uncertainties, career anxiety, and force-shaping decisions; (5) DOD has given priority to voluntary separations through early release, retirement, and financial incentives, but the pool of likely candidates for voluntary separation is declining; (6) involuntary reduction actions involve higher retention standards, mandatory retirement of selected personnel, and reduction-in-force for nonretirement-eligible personnel; (7) the ratio of officers to enlisted personnel and average pay grades have increased slightly during downsizing; and (8) issues that could impact future force reduction decisions include future force profiles, how quickly the force can be reduced, what accession levels should be, and what cost trade-offs are most desirable between a younger or a more experienced force.