Army Reserve may face troop cuts

The head of the Army Reserve on Thursday said that his force, currently 205,000 strong, would be cut.

The cuts were recommended in a recent program decision memorandum -- the formal means by which the Defense Department informs the services of decisions regarding future budget submissions.

Because the memorandum is classified, Lt. Gen. James R. Helmly, chief of the Army Reserve, declined to say how many troops may be cut or how cuts in the Army's force structure might affect the Army National Guard or the regular Army.

Troop reductions are being discussed as Pentagon officials finalize plans to release the Quadrennial Defense Review next month, which many observers anticipate will recommend far-reaching changes to the way the services are organized and equipped.

"I don't know whether it's an accurate statement to tie it to the QDR--I'm not being evasive; I honestly don't know," Helmly said in an interview with reporters and editors at Government Executive and its sister publications. "I'll just say that [the PDM] proposes to bring us down to a level which I'm comfortable with."

The size of the Army Reserve by itself is not a meaningful measure, he said. When Helmly became chief in May 2002, the Army Reserve's congressionally authorized end strength was 205,000 troops, yet the force was structured in such a way that it required 219,000 soldiers to actually fill all the units on the books.

Taking into account that at any given time some soldiers will be in training or fulfilling mandatory educational requirement-and therefore not available to serve in units-the actual number of troops needed to meet the Army Reserve mission was even higher.

The problem was compounded by inaccurate bookkeeping. Newly recruited troops were added to the rolls as they signed an enlistment contract, even if they weren't planning to enter the force and begin training for a year or more. Soldiers who left the force were kept on the rolls for as long as 273 days after they actually left service, Helmly said.

"The first year I came into this job, we had 212,000 [according to official records]," he said. "Yet we couldn't put 180,000 soldiers on the ground with weapons and equipment in hand."

Of the 143,000 Army Reservists mobilized since Sept. 11, 2001, more than 50 percent have been shifted from one unit to another to field full units.

Besides initiating better accounting methods to more accurately measure the size of the force, Helmly said he offered the Army leadership proposals to cut the force.

"It is my judgment that we need to live within our means," he said. "Looking at the environment that we're in today, the challenge of recruiting and retention and subsequently the premium on readiness and responsiveness, we have willingly internally undertaken these initiatives."

Helmly conceded that it is possible to cut the force too far, but "we're a long way from doing that."

By supporting some cuts, Helmly separated himself from his colleagues in state National Guard units, who are mounting strong opposition to Pentagon attempts to slash their rosters.

The Defense Department is facing the same budget constraints as other federal departments and agencies as part of a wide effort to reduce spending and trim the federal deficit. Defense leaders are expected to cut projected military spending by $32 billion over the next five years.

The Army, which spends more on manpower than any other military service, plans to pay for the budget cuts largely out of its personnel accounts as an attempt to safeguard its technology transformation programs from reduction.

While Helmly did not place numbers on expected cuts, a senior defense official said the Army wants to cut 5,000 reservists between fiscal 2007 and fiscal 2011, reducing the Army Reserve's authorized end strength to around 200,000 troops. The service, meanwhile, plans to trim the Army National Guard by 17,000 soldiers in fiscal 2007, with more cuts expected down the road.

Megan Scully of CongressDaily contributed to this report.