Reserve Components: Alternatives for Equipping the Army's Reserve Components
Abstract
This responds to the House Armed Services Committee report on the Defense Authorization Act, 1986 which directed the General Accounting Office to examine alternatives to the current Department of Defense method of determining the priority for allocating equipment to the reserve components. As your office agreed, we limited our examination to the Army's reserve components--the U.S. Army Reserve and the Army National Guard. We focused primarily on determining if there was a way to achieve a higher rate of readiness through the distribution of new equipment. We developed and examined two alternatives which incorporated readiness and cost factors as a means to establish the order in which units should be equipped. The readiness alternative would modify the Army's equipment distribution system to reflect the readiness condition of units reported by the Unit Status Report rating system. This rating system provides one indicator of Army readiness and is a measure of the peacetime availability and status of a unit's resources. The readiness-cost alternative would modify distribution priorities based on both readiness and the cost required to obtain an improvement in readiness. Our findings are summarized below and are discussed in detail, along with our objective, scope, and methodology, in appendix I.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Dec 01, 1985
- Accession Number
- AD1182467
Entities
People
- Frank C. Conahan
Organizations
- United States Government Accountability Office