Aviation Continuation Pay

Some Bonuses Are Inappropriate Because of Prior Service Obligations Gao ID: NSIAD-95-30 October 14, 1994

In 1989, the House Armed Services Committee expressed concern about the large number of pilots who had testified at hearings that they had accepted aviation retention bonuses--known as aviation continuation pay--because the obligation they incurred ran concurrently with existing service commitments. Despite congressional directives that such payments should be avoided, the Department of Defense (DOD) continues to pay bonuses for time that service members already have commitments. In fiscal years 1992, and 1993, 58 percent and 69 percent, respectively, of the new aviation continuation pay contractors went to aviators with preexisting commitments. Overlapping commitments average 15 months and cost DOD about $15 million in fiscal year 1992 and $11 million in fiscal year 1993. Payment of such bonuses is not only inconsistent with congressional direction but is not a prudent use of taxpayer dollars.

GAO found that: (1) the services have paid ACP bonuses to service members with preexisting commitments despite prohibitions from the House Armed Services Committee; (2) 58 percent of the 2,278 ACP contracts in fiscal year (FY) 1992 and 69 percent of the 1,104 ACP contracts in FY 1993 went to aviators with preexisting commitments; (3) the overlapping commitments in FY 1992 and 1993 resulted from commitments incurred in connection with receipt of additional flight training or permanent change of station moves; (4) the aviators' overlapping commitments averaged 15 months and cost the services approximately $15 million in FY 1992 and $11 million in FY 1993; and (5) paying bonuses to entice aviators to commit to service periods for which they are already committed is inconsistent with the House Armed Services Committee directive and an imprudent use of taxpayer funds.

Recommendations

Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.

Director: Team: Phone:


The Justia Government Accountability Office site republishes public reports retrieved from the U.S. GAO These reports should not be considered official, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Justia.