United States General Accounting Office

GAO Report to Congressional Requesters

February 1996 RESERVE OFFICERS’

TRAINING CORPS

Questions Related to

Organizational

Restructuring

GAO/NSIAD-96-56

GAO United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

National Security and

International Affairs Division

B-270485 

February 6, 1996

The Honorable Mitch McConnell

United States Senate

The Honorable Ron Lewis

House of Representatives

This report responds to your June 22, 1995, request that we review the

status of and basis for an Army Cadet Command proposal to close the

Second Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) regional headquarters at

Fort Knox, Kentucky, while maintaining regional headquarters at Fort

Lewis, Washington, and Fort Bragg, North Carolina. This proposal also

included discontinuing the ROTC summer camp at Fort Knox and dividing it

between Forts Lewis and Bragg.

Results in Brief Because of questions relating to readiness, housing, and costs, the

proposal to close the ROTC regional headquarters at Fort Knox has not

been approved by the Army. As a result, the regional headquarters remains

open at Fort Knox and the summer camp operated at Fort Knox is

expected to remain in place through fiscal year 1996 and possibly 1997.

Still unresolved are questions about the (1) impact of the ROTC program on

training and readiness of combat units stationed at certain bases that

house and support ROTC summer camp programs; (2) adequacy and

condition of housing at bases being considered for consolidation of the

ROTC program, both on a short- and longer term basis; and (3) costs to

address the housing problem.

Background ROTC was established to supplement the military academies in preparing

students for commissioned military service and to provide officers for the

reserve forces. The Army’s ROTC program currently produces about

70 percent of its second lieutenants.

The Army’s ROTC program operates under the auspices of the U.S. Army

Cadet Command, a component of the Army’s Training and Doctrine

Command (TRADOC), both headquartered at Fort Monroe, Virginia. Cadet

Command currently has three regions—the 1st, 2nd, and 4th located at

Forts Bragg, Knox, and Lewis, respectively. These regions oversee ROTC

programs located at over 300 U.S. colleges and universities. To help

prepare ROTC cadets to complete their commissioning requirements, the

Page 1 GAO/NSIAD-96-56 Reserve Officers’ Training Corps
B-270485 

Cadet Command, through its regions, also operates one basic and two

advanced summer camp programs from June to August each year. The

basic camp, located at Fort Knox, provides training and introduction to

military life to college students prior to their junior year, when they have

not previously been a part of the ROTC program on campus.1

 It also

encourages the participants to continue in the ROTC program on campus

and to attend an advanced camp the next year. Advanced camps are held

at Forts Lewis and Bragg.2

 Their missions are to train cadets to Army

standards, develop leadership, and evaluate officer potential.

Because the Army is downsizing, the need for new ROTC-produced

lieutenants is decreasing from 8,200 in 1989 to 4,500 in 1995. This is

expected to be further reduced to about 3,800 in 1998. There has also been

a reduction in resources available to the ROTC program—dollars and

manpower. The ROTC funding level is expected to decrease from

$159.1 million in fiscal year 1992 to an estimated $128.8 million

(inflation-adjusted 1992 dollars) in fiscal year 2001. Further, its officer

strength level is expected to decline from 1,375 in September 1992 to 1,163

in December 1995; additional personnel reductions are expected.

As a result of downsizing, the Cadet Command concluded that it must

restructure its command and control framework, camp operations, and

reduce the number of schools sponsoring ROTC programs. An internal

study by Cadet Command, completed April 10, 1995, resulted in a proposal

to close the ROTC regional headquarters at Fort Knox, and split its

responsibilities for overseeing ROTC college programs among the two

remaining regions. It also proposed to split responsibilities for basic camp

between the two remaining regions and have them operate both basic and

advanced ROTC camps. However, Cadet Command was also facing pressure

from other Army officials to subsequently move its camp operations away

from Fort Bragg, with Fort Benning, Georgia, being a potential location.

Cadet Command wanted to begin making these changes effective in fiscal

year 1996.

1

Approximately 2,100 cadets attended the basic camp in 1995.

2

Approximately 5,500 cadets attended advanced camp in 1995; of those who attend advanced camp,

approximately 75 percent can be expected to complete the ROTC program and be commissioned as an

officer in the Army.

Page 2 GAO/NSIAD-96-56 Reserve Officers’ Training Corps
B-270485 

Decision Regarding

Future of ROTC at

Fort Knox and

Restructuring ROTC

on Hold for Now

Final approval of the Cadet Command proposal is contingent upon

completion and approval of formal documentation of decision-making

required by Army Regulation (AR) 5-10 involving stationing decisions.3

 The

Department of the Army has not approved Cadet Command’s draft AR 5-10.

We reviewed various data that were used to draft the AR 5-10 Cadet

Command’s proposal, but did not review the draft document. Various

Army officials indicated it had not been approved because it was

considered incomplete. Unresolved issues include cadet housing and

impact on operational units at remaining and potential receiver locations.

These issues are not likely to be resolved quickly enough to allow a

program restructuring, such as that proposed by Cadet Command, to be

implemented in fiscal year 1996 and possibly 1997.

Questions Raised

Regarding ROTC’s

Impact on Readiness

of Combat Forces at

Some Installations,

Particularly Fort

Bragg

While Cadet Command is a component of TRADOC and its 2nd region is

headquartered at a TRADOC installation, its 1st and 4th regions are

headquartered on installations housing combat forces controlled by the

Army’s Forces Command (FORSCOM). Questions regarding the impact of

ROTC programs on FORSCOM units’ training and readiness, and where best to

locate restructured ROTC programs remain unresolved.

The ROTC basic camp program at Fort Knox is able to satisfy critical

aspects of its camp training requirements through use of drill sergeants

and instructors involved in basic training programs conducted at Fort

Knox. Those personnel are augmented by Army Reserve training

personnel, as well as ROTC personnel brought in from various locations.

ROTC’s advanced camps at Forts Lewis and Bragg operate under a different

program of instruction than does the basic camp, and rely more on

personnel available from the FORSCOM combat and combat support units at

Forts Bragg and Lewis. Officials at these installations as well as FORSCOM

headquarters told us they had concerns about adverse impacts on their

units’ readiness from supporting ROTC camps—support that takes the form

of considerable time, personnel, and training areas.

3

The AR 5-10 process is followed when a stationing or realignment action (military and civilian) results

in the involuntary separation or transfer, outside the commuting area, of 50 or more direct-hire,

permanent U.S. citizen employees. This process is followed also when a stationing or realignment

action impacts units or activities with 200 or more military authorizations. Additionally, the AR 5-10

process ensures that feasible stationing alternatives have been thoroughly assessed and operational

requirements and environment and resource impacts have been properly balanced.

Page 3 GAO/NSIAD-96-56 Reserve Officers’ Training Corps
B-270485 

Fort Bragg, for example, headquarters for the Army’s XVIIIth Airborne

Corps and houses its 82nd Airborne Division. The 82nd is a rapid

deployment force and must be ready to deploy on short notice. Because of

their mission and the steady growth in requirements that must be satisfied

at Bragg, FORSCOM and Fort Bragg officials have expressed concerns about

the impact of the ROTC program on training and operational readiness. Fort

Bragg officials state that while they consider ROTC’s impact on troop

readiness to be a significant issue today, it would be further exacerbated if

Fort Bragg had to support both an advanced and basic camp operation, as

envisioned in the Cadet Command proposal.

Fort Bragg officials indicated they are also experiencing increased usage

of their facilities for training by the National Guard and Reserves. For

example, the National Guard’s 30th Infantry Brigade, which is designated

as an enhanced brigade,4

 is scheduled to train and mobilize at Fort Bragg.

This training is normally done in the summer months, which could conflict

with the ROTC advanced camp schedule. Fort Bragg officials also were

concerned about housing the advanced camp there in 1996 because of a

large training exercise also scheduled to take place; however, at the time

we concluded our review, Army officials told us that the advanced camp

would be held at Fort Bragg in 1996.

Questions Raised

Regarding the

Adequacy of Cadet

Housing

Basic camp cadets at Fort Knox are housed in relatively more modern

cinderblock structures, compared with cadets in advanced camps at Forts

Bragg and Lewis who live in World War II (WWII) era wooden barracks.

Because of their age and condition, these WWII barracks have been targeted

for demolition within the next few years.

The Cadet Command proposal to increase its ROTC program at Fort Bragg

would require using a larger number of the WWII era wooden barracks that

in our view appear to be in much poorer condition than the ones currently

being used. For example, the buildings in this category that we toured

frequently had large holes in the interior walls, bathroom plumbing not in

working condition, and stairways that appeared somewhat unstable. These

additional barracks were scheduled to be demolished within the next year

or so. However, even with these additional barracks, the Army would be

faced with insufficient cadet housing at Fort Bragg. According to one

4

The Army has 15 National Guard combat brigades that are responsible for reinforcing and augmenting

active Army units if the active units are unable to handle two nearly simultaneous regional conflicts, as

set forth in the Secretary of Defense’s Bottom-Up Review.

Page 4 GAO/NSIAD-96-56 Reserve Officers’ Training Corps
B-270485 

Army estimate, almost $70 million would be needed to construct new

buildings at Fort Bragg to house approximately 5,000 camp personnel.5

We were told that a similar housing problem exists at Fort Benning, where

ROTC program cadets would have to use WWII era barracks that are in need

of repair. Army officials told us that to make them usable, the barracks at

Fort Benning would have to be repaired at an estimated cost of over

$10 million.6

More Broad-Based

Study Needed

Cadet Command’s study that led to the proposal to close the ROTC region at

Fort Knox focused on a short-term rather than a long-term solution to its

restructuring needs. It did not fully address the impact on FORSCOM

installations or the issue of cadet housing and costs. These issues suggest

the need for a broader based study to examine how best to accommodate

the long-term needs of ROTC within the context of the Army’s total base

structure. These issues are likely to require tradeoffs and decisions that

extend beyond the purview of Cadet Command and TRADOC, its higher

headquarters. They may require an Army-wide focus on issues affecting

stationing and support of ROTC, particularly ROTC’s summer camp

programs. We believe that an Army-wide focus is desirable to minimize the

need for new military construction. Should new military construction be

required, an Army-wide focus would be important to determining where

best to make such an investment considering that ROTC would only use the

facilities for a portion of the year. Likewise, given the program of

instruction currently employed for ROTC advanced camps, tradeoffs may be

required in terms of potentially housing those camps on FORSCOM

installations where personnel needed to support camp operations are

more readily available than on TRADOC installations where extensive

temporary duty travel and costs could be required. If one or more FORSCOM

installations are to be used and readiness issues are to be minimized, then

tradeoffs may be required in selecting installations to avoid adversely

impacting combat units having early deployment missions.

5

This number is a rough approximation of housing that would have been required for a basic and

advanced camp at Fort Bragg; likewise, the cost cited represents only a preliminary estimate, not a

formal proposal.

6

Army officials also identified significant other start-up and operational costs of approximately

$18 million to move the regional headquarters to Fort Benning and have it operational for fiscal years

1996 and 1997.

Page 5 GAO/NSIAD-96-56 Reserve Officers’ Training Corps
B-270485 

Recommendation to

the Secretary of the

Army

We recommend that the Secretary of the Army direct that a broad-based

assessment be made of ROTC restructuring to include readiness, housing,

and cost issues to accommodate the long-term needs of ROTC within the

context of the Army’s total base structure.

Agency Comments

and Our Evaluation

While the Army did not provide written comments, the Army did provide

official oral comments concurring with our recommendation. However,

the Army did not indicate when it expected to initiate or complete the

recommended study.

Our scope and methodology are discussed in appendix I. Unless you

announce its contents earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report

until 15 days after its issue date. At that time, we will send copies to the

Chairmen, Senate Committee on Armed Services, and Subcommittee on

Defense, Senate Committee on Appropriations; the Chairmen, House

Committee on National Security, and Subcommittee on National Security,

House Committee on Appropriations; the Director of the Office of

Management and Budget; and the Secretaries of Defense and the Army.

Please contact me at (202) 512-8412 if you or your staff have any questions

concerning this report. Major contributors to this report were 

Barry W. Holman, Assistant Director; Stephen G. DeSart,

Evaluator-in-Charge; and Jacqueline E. Snead, Evaluator.

David R. Warren

Director, Defense Management Issues

Page 6 GAO/NSIAD-96-56 Reserve Officers’ Training Corps
Page 7 GAO/NSIAD-96-56 Reserve Officers’ Training Corps
Appendix I 

Scope and Methodology

We held discussions with officials at the Department of the Army Forces

Command and Cadet Command, including its headquarters and regions.

We also had discussions with installation officials at Forts Bragg, Knox,

and Lewis, and toured facilities at each of these locations. We did not tour

base facilities at Fort Benning. We collected and performed limited

analysis of data related to advanced and basic camps. The scope of our

review did not extend to examining Cadet Command’s Program of

Instruction for its camps. We obtained briefings on and made a limited

examination of available documentation associated with Cadet

Command’s study leading to the proposed closure of the Reserve Officers’

Training Corps region at Fort Knox. We reviewed various data that were

used in drafting the Cadet Command’s Army Regulation 5-10 proposal, but

we did not review the actual draft document.

We conducted our work between August 1995 and December 1995 in

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

(709161) Page 8 GAO/NSIAD-96-56 Reserve Officers’ Training Corps
Ordering Information

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.

Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the

following address, accompanied by a check or money order

made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when

necessary. Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a

single address are discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 6015

Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015

or visit:

Room 1100

700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

U.S. General Accounting Office

Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000 

or by using fax number (301) 258-4066, or TDD (301) 413-0006.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and

testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any

list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a

touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on

how to obtain these lists.

For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET,

send an e-mail message with "info" in the body to:

info@www.gao.gov

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested

Bulk Rate

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. G100