Her daughter, 4, is as established as a preschooler can be. After six years, her husband has enough seniority with the phone company to avoid the graveyard shift .

At 26, Donna Elliott is doing well herself - secretary to the deputy director for three years, and a candidate for management training. The Elliotts have a home in Alexandria, two cars, 20 years of roots in Northern Virginia .

"There's just no way I want to give it all up," Elliott said. "We're doing fairly well. I'm so used to this area. Indiana? It's scary." And she makes a scared face .

On April 26, the Army announced that it is studying the possibility of moving its Military Personnel Center from Alexandria to Fort Benjamin Harrison, Ind.

Nearly 3,000 jobs hang in the balance, almost 2,000 of them held by civilians. The affected employes all work in the Hoffman Building, a twin-tower high-rise office at Telegraph Road and the Beltway.

If they all moved to Indiana, it would be the largest shift of federal employes in one agency away from the Washington area since World War II.

The move is one of 107 moves and consolidations being considered by the Defense Department. If all 107 are approved, total savings would be $337 million. More than 23,000 jobs would be eliminated in the process, 8,600 of them held by civilians.

The personnel center, known as MILPERCEN in Army lingo, is responsible for administering the Army careers of 740,000 persons, including all enlisted personnel and most officers.

MILPERCEN keeps records, assures that personnel are being trained to meet needs for specific skills, processes enlistments and reenlistments and tracks the careers of individual soldiers to be sure that the soldiers are progressing. "It's sort of cradle to grave," said Maj. Gen. Charles K. Heiden, MILPERCEN's commander.

But now the agency is becoming embroiled in the greatest controversy in its five-year history.

When the possibility of a move of Indiana was announced, it was immediately assailed by a Northern Virginia congressman, by the union that represents MILPERCEN's civilian employes and by the great majority of employes themselves.

Rep. Herbert R. Harris II (D-Va.) called the proposed shift "moving bodies for the sake of moving bodies." Harris aide Jim Kenney called the move "a lousy idea. Hopefully, when the Army studies it, they'll think it's a lousy idea, too."

Local 2 of the American Federation of Government Employes filed a verbal complaint with the Department of the Army. Pat Strong, Local 2's business agent, acknowledged that the union has no legal or contractual power to block such a move, but she said "active" steps are being considered anyway.

Meanwhile, in the 15 floors of offices MILPERCEN occupies at the Hoffman Building, civilian employes, by their own descriptions, are "apprehensive," "concerned" and "worried."

If they do not follow their jobs to Indiana - and no more than 15 percent would be expected to - they would not be assured of another job with the Army or the Department of Defense. Nor is there any certainty that they would be given preferential rehiring status elsewhere in the government.

Losing 85 percent of a civilian work force would not normally cause the Army great concern, for most of those people are clerks and typists and have skills that could be replaced at an agency's new home relatively easily. Such would certainly seem at first glance to be the case with MILPERCEN. Fort Harrison is just outside Indianapolis, a city of half a million people with unemployment levels close to 9 percent.

But MILPERCEN has "a devoted and highly specialized work force," Heiden said. "I'd have to be concerned with the loss of an experienced work force (if the agency moves)."

No move would come before mid-1979 at the earliest. The Army's deputy chief of staff will study the pros and cons for the eight months that began April 26. After that, according to Maj. Dale Keller, a Pentagon spokesman, the Department of the Army will conduct a complete review, followed by a 30-day public comment period.

The eight-month study will be a "formal and extensive analysis," Keller said. Its criteria will be "all the operational, budgetary, socioeconomic, environmental and community aspects" of the proposed move. Heiden said MILPERCEN's civilian employes will be kept "carefully" informed at every step.

Neither Heiden nor Keller would speculate on which way they think the decision will go. "I can't make a call right now," Heiden said. Nor were several senior civilian employes sure which way the wind is blowing. One 29-year veteran said the Army seems more serious about his proposed move than any of the three rumored ones earlier in his career. But he noted that "this is still far from a certainty."

The Army would have two main reasons for moving MILPERCEN to Indiana: the declared policy of the Pentagon to reduce civilian employment and overhead, and the ease with which MILPERCEN could mesh with the Army's finance center, which moved from Washington to Fort Harrison in 1953.

But logistical advantages run head-on into two facts: more than 70 percent of MILPERCEN's civilian work force is female, and more than 85 percent has at least five years of roots (including mortgages) in the Washington area.

Kitty Schafe's situation appears typical. A clerk in MILPERCEN's monetary incentives branch, she lives in Alexandria with her husband and two of her four children.

"I couldn't possibly go (to Indiana)," she said."I was born in D.C. and raised here. We have our home established here. My husband could never make the move. . . . All I can do is hope it doesn't happen."

Francis Smoak of Northeast Washington, a 29-year veteran of government service, noted that a move to Indiana might mean more buying power for his GS-12 salary, since the Midwest's cost of living is lower than Washington's. His wife's "first inclination was to say 'Let's go' for the reason," said Smoak, 48. But after reflection, "It would still be quite expensive. Besides, all my family ties are here," Smoak said.

Dominic Ciccnelli, of Alexandria, was one of the few civilian employes to see advantages in the proposed move, although he said he would not move to Indiana himself.

"It can be done. It can work real well. I cannot argue against such a move (if) . . . it's in the best interests of the Army," said Ciccotelli, 57, a legislative inspection audit contact officer.

"But I would vote against it. You have access here, access to Army headquarters." If the move is made. MILPERCEN "would be hurting for two years," Ciccotelli predicted.

MILPERCEN is far from the only military agency being considered for changes early next year. The agency was one of 107 military facilities in 30 states and the District of Columbia targeted for possible moves, transfers or closings.

In Virginia, the list also includes:

The closing of most of Fort Monroe in Hampton. Approximately [WORD ILLEGIBLE] civilian and 1,271 military jobs would be moved to nearly Langley Air Force Base or to Fort Knox, Ky.

Elimination of 286 civilian and 18 military jobs at the Army's Applied Technology Laboratory in Newport News.

Transfer of 38 civilian and nine military jobs in the Navy Audit Service from Falls Church to Philadelphia.

Transfer of the Navy Recruiting Command (182 civilians, 167 military) from Arlington to Great Lakes, Ill.

Closing the Quantico Navy Hospital, and eliminating 39 civilian and 135 military jobs.

Two hundred twenty-eight civilian jobs would be gained by Northern Virginia. Those employes now work for the Military Traffic Management Command in Bayonne, N.J., and Oakland, Calif. They would be transferred to Arlington.

In the District, a total of 560 civilian and 77 military jobs are being studied for possible transfer out of the area. All the Navy jobs. Most would go to Philadelphia; the rest to the Great Lakes Naval Training Station in Illinois.

In Maryland, 42 civilian and 127 military jobs are under study. One hundred sixteen would disappear if the Navy closes its hospital in Annapolis. The remainder would go if the Force closes its radar site at Fort Meade.