Community Correspondence - Letter from Edward M. Niemiec Page: 1 of 14
This letter is part of the collection entitled: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission and was provided to UNT Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Vt.
DCN 5567
Edward M. Niemiec
141 Boyd Drive
Richmond Hill, Georgia 31324
June 2, 2005
2005 Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission
2521 S. Clark St. Ste 600
Arlington, VA 22202
Re: Defense Finance and Accounting Service Locations
Honorable members,
I am writing in reference to the proposed closure of Defense Finance and Accounting
Service (DFAS) Locations for example Rome, New York.
As a customer of one of the locations (Rome, New York) and a former DFAS employee,
I disagree with the conclusions. I do agree there are too many DFAS locations and
several need to close for efficiency purposes. However, the concept of 3 mega center at
Indianapolis, Indiana, Columbus, Ohio, and Denver, Colorado under the concept of
bigger is better is not true. This means a great loss of customer service which is not
measured in the Department of Defense (DOD) concept of "Military Value".
First, I note the terrorist threat for three mega centers is rated low (on 2 centers) to
moderate on the other (Indianapolis). I think the concentration of these centers makes it
a greater threat which is one drawback to this plan. What better way to attack the U.S.
military than its financial operations (soft targets) which are now to be concentrated.
Second, on the DOD analysis customer service is not measured. The best locations for
customer service are located away from large metropolitan areas. This has always been
true even prior to the current consolidation from over 300 finance and accounting offices
(1991-1998) to the current 26 sites fiance and accounting offices. The poorest
performing locations were always located near big cities - too much turnover. The
principle Army location will be DFAS Indianapolis (DFAS-IN). DFAS-IN does not have
a good reputation for customer service (neither does DFAS Columbus). Typically, when
you call DFAS-IN you get someone's answering machine and hopefully you will not
have to keep calling. In contrast, when you call DFAS Rome, New York someone
answers the phone or promptly returns your call. DFAS-IN is the worst at following its
own accounting policies even through they promulgate them.
Third, I think having no DFAS site located in any southern state when so many military
bases are located in southern states is not justified and ignores the historical southern
contribution to this nation's defense. Again, this plan ignores customer service.06072005
7Nl;-- n i i l
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This letter can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Letter.
Community Correspondence - Letter from Edward M. Niemiec, letter, July 28, 2005; (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc18849/m1/1/: accessed April 24, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.