Military Training: DOD Met Annual Reporting Requirements in Its 2017 Sustainable Ranges Report
Published: 2017-09-06T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: DOD relies on its training ranges within the United States and overseas to help prepare its forces for combat and complex missions around the globe.
Section 366 of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 required DOD to submit a comprehensive plan on its efforts to address training constraints caused by limitations on the use of military lands, airspace, and marine areas in the United States and overseas for training. The act, as amended, further required DOD to provide annual progress reports on its efforts through 2018. The act also included a provision for GAO to submit annual evaluations of DOD's reports. This report assesses the extent to which DOD's 2017 Sustainable Ranges Report met statutory reporting requirements.
To conduct this work, GAO reviewed DOD's 2017 report and compared it with the statutory reporting requirements. GAO also interviewed cognizant DOD and military service officials regarding preparations made to complete the 2017 report.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: The Department of Defense's (DOD) 2017 sustainable ranges report met the annual statutory reporting requirements to describe DOD's progress in implementing its plan to sustain training ranges and any additional actions taken or planned for addressing training constraints caused by limitations on the use of military lands, marine areas, and airspace. DOD's 2017 report provides updates to the plan required by the act, specifically (1) proposals to enhance training range capabilities and address any shortfalls; (2) goals and milestones to describe DOD's progress in implementing its comprehensive training range sustainment plan; and (3) projected funding requirements for each of the military services to implement their planned actions. In the report, DOD used goals and milestones to address the statutory requirement to describe its progress in implementing its comprehensive training range sustainment plan. Using these goals as a common framework, each military service developed its own milestones and needed actions for reaching those milestones. The report also identifies evolving activities and emerging issues related to training range sustainability, and it includes actions taken to mitigate them.
section_title: What GAO Recommends
paragraphs: GAO is not making recommendations in this report. DOD agreed with GAO's findings without further comment.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: The Department of Defense (DOD) relies on access to military lands,  marine areas, and airspace to provide its forces with a realistic training  environment. Its training ranges within the United States and overseas  help prepare forces to face combat and complex missions around the  globe. As DOD seeks to provide training on its ranges to sustain military  readiness, challenges related to range capabilities and encroachment  continue to grow, new challenges emerge, and dynamic conditions and  events exacerbate existing challenges. According to DOD’s 2017 Report  to Congress on Sustainable Ranges (hereinafter referred to as DOD’s  2017 Sustainable Ranges Report), range capability challenges include  insufficient resources as well as outdated equipment and systems that  require updates in order to complete current training requirements. In  addition, the military services continue to face encroachment challenges  that include endangered species and critical habitat; incompatible  development and land use adjacent to DOD training areas, to include  foreign investment located in proximity to military training areas; effects  related to the reallocation of electromagnetic spectrum as a result of the  National Broadband Plan; and effects related to climate change. Further,  DOD’s 2017 Sustainable Ranges Report states that the implementation of  the Budget Control Act of 2011 continues to affect DOD and the military  services through changes in force structure and significant reductions in  funding for operations and maintenance, military construction, and  research and development investments, as well as acquisition programs.  To work within these limits and increase the long-term sustainability of its  military range resources, DOD has launched a number of efforts aimed at  both preserving its training ranges and addressing the effects of its  training activities on the environment and on local communities through  the issuance of policy, the establishment of programs, and proactive  partnering at the federal, state, and local levels.
Section 366 of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for  Fiscal Year 2003 required DOD to submit to Congress, at the same time  as the President submitted his budget for fiscal year 2004, a  comprehensive plan for using existing authorities available to the  department to address training constraints caused by limitations on the  use of military lands, marine areas, and airspace in the United States and  overseas. Further, section 366, as amended, requires the Secretary of  Defense to submit an annual progress report to Congress through fiscal  year 2018 at the same time as the President’s budget. Since 2004, DOD  has submitted an annual Sustainable Ranges Report to address these  requirements. Additionally, the act includes a provision for us to submit  annual evaluations of DOD’s reports to Congress within 90 days of  receiving these reports from DOD. This report assesses the extent to  which DOD met the statutory reporting requirements for its 2017  Sustainable Ranges Report. This is our fourteenth annual review of  DOD’s Sustainable Ranges Report.
To determine whether DOD’s 2017 Sustainable Ranges Report met the  statutory reporting requirements specified in section 366 of the Bob  Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (as  amended) we reviewed the report and compared it with the statutory  requirements contained in section 366, as amended. Specifically, two  independent analysts reviewed the 2017 report to determine whether the  report included information that met the reporting requirements. We  considered a requirement to be “met” if the 2017 Sustainable Ranges  Report provided evidence concerning all requirements of the sub-section.  We considered the requirement to be “partially met” if the report provided  evidence concerning some of the requirements and “not met” if the report  did not provide any evidence concerning the requirements. We also  compared the 2015 and 2016 reports to determine what changes, if any,  DOD had made since its most recent Sustainable Ranges Report. We  also reviewed the memorandum that the Office of the Secretary of  Defense sent to the military services to request data for the 2016 and  2017 Sustainable Ranges Reports to determine what differences, if any,  there were in the types of information requested from each of the military  services. Finally, we obtained responses from officials of the Office of the  Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Force Education and Training  and from the military services on changes, if any, to the services’  submissions of information on training ranges to DOD for the 2017 report,  and any challenges DOD faced in preparing the report. The intent of our  review was not to comprehensively evaluate the data presented in DOD’s  2017 Sustainable Ranges Report, but rather to determine the extent to  which the report met mandated statutory requirements and whether DOD  faced challenges in preparing its report.
We conducted this performance audit from May to September 2017 in  accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain  sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our  findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that  the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and  conclusions based on our audit objectives.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: DOD has reported to Congress since fiscal year 2004 on several items  related to its training ranges in response to section 366 of the Bob Stump  National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003. The act as  subsequently amended required annual progress reports to be submitted  at the same time as the President submitted the administration’s annual  budget for fiscal years 2005 through 2018. The provision that we evaluate  the plans submitted pursuant to section 366 within 90 days of receiving  the report from DOD has also been extended through fiscal year 2018.
In our prior reviews of DOD’s Sustainable Ranges Reports, we found that  DOD did not address certain required elements when it initially submitted  its comprehensive plan in 2004. Further, we noted that it took DOD some  time to develop a plan consistent with the basic requirements of section  366. Over time, we found that as DOD reported annually on its progress  in implementing its comprehensive plan, it continued to improve its  Sustainable Ranges Reports, and it has reported on the actions it has  taken in response to prior GAO recommendations. Specifically, in 2013  we reported that DOD had implemented all 13 of the recommendations  we had made since 2004 for expanding and improving DOD’s reporting  on sustainable ranges. Further, DOD has progressed from using four  common goals and milestones to using seven shared goals for which the  services have developed their own actions and milestones that are  tailored to their missions. We have reported that these new goals and  milestones are more quantifiable and now are associated with identified  time frames.
section_title: DOD’s 2017 Sustainable Ranges Report Met the Annual Reporting Requirements
paragraphs: DOD’s 2017 Sustainable Ranges Report met the annual statutory  reporting requirements to describe DOD’s progress in implementing its  sustainable ranges plan and any actions taken or to be taken in  addressing constraints caused by limitations on the use of military lands,  marine areas, and airspace. In its 2017 report, DOD provided updates to  the plan that were required by the act. These updates included: (1)  proposals to enhance training range capabilities and address any  shortfalls in current resources; (2) goals and milestones for tracking  planned actions and measuring progress in the implementation of its  training range sustainment plan; and (3) projected funding requirements  for implementing its planned actions.
subsections: section_title: DOD Reported Proposals to Enhance Range Capabilities and Address Shortfalls
paragraphs: In our review of DOD’s 2017 Sustainable Ranges Report, we found that,  as required by statute, DOD reported on its proposals to enhance training  range capabilities and address any shortfalls in resources. DOD  developed these proposals by evaluating current and future training range  requirements and the ability of current DOD resources to meet these  requirements. In its 2017 report, DOD revalidated its 2015 individual  range capability and encroachment assessments and the current and  future military service training range requirements. To do so, DOD  updated the report sections pertaining to each military service’s issues  related to range capability, encroachment, and special interests to the  military service. For instance, regarding the Marine Corps, the report  noted, among other things, that the Marine Corps has identified the need  for an aviation training range on the East Coast of the United States  capable of supporting precision-guided munitions training. The report  states that the Marine Corps selected the expansion of Townsend  Bombing Range in Georgia as the best alternative for securing this East  Coast capability after a thorough assessment of area capabilities. The  report notes that a record of decision to expand Townsend was signed in  January 2014, and that a formal airspace proposal supporting the land  expansion has been submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration.  The report further stated that full operational capability is now planned for  December 2019.
In its 2017 report, DOD also reported on seven evolving activities and  emerging issues, all of which were reported in its 2016 report. These  seven activities and issues were as follows: (1) new sustainable range  initiative-related influences and actions; (2) budget reductions impacting  range capability; (3) foreign investment and national security; (4)  threatened and endangered and candidate species; (5) demand for  electromagnetic spectrum; (6) continued growth in domestic use of  unmanned aircraft systems; and (7) offshore energy. DOD’s 2017 report  outlined some actions being taken to mitigate the challenges these issues  may present for DOD test and training ranges. For example, in response  to new sustainable range initiative-related influences, DOD responded to  a recommendation in Senate Armed Services Committee Report 114-49  to include a review of the general capabilities, critical issues, and future  capabilities necessary to support Special Operations Forces (SOF) range  requirements. The 2017 Sustainable Ranges Report is the first to  incorporate SOF-specific range issues.
Foreign investment and its effects on national security continue to be an  evolving issue faced by DOD. In an April 2016 report, we evaluated the  extent to which DOD made progress in its efforts to assess the national  security risks and effects of foreign encroachment. In that review, we  found that DOD had made limited progress in addressing foreign  encroachment on federally managed land since we had last reported on  the subject in December 2014. We also found that DOD has begun to  take some steps toward assessing the national security risks and effects  of foreign encroachment, but had not yet fully implemented the  recommendations from our December 2014 report, which were as  follows: (1) that DOD should develop and implement guidance for  conducting a risk assessment on foreign encroachment and (2) that DOD  should collaborate with other federal agencies to obtain additional  information on transactions near ranges. DOD concurred with both  recommendations. According to the 2017 report, DOD is pursuing  opportunities to obtain information related to foreign investment and  transactions in proximity to DOD mission-essential locations from  agencies with land management authority as well as conducting a risk  assessment related to those locations. In addition, DOD reported that it is  considering seeking legislative relief to enhance data-collection and data- sharing practices regarding foreign investment in the proximity of DOD  mission-essential locations as an avenue to mitigate national security- related encroachment, and it has engaged the various federal land  managers to expound on potential issues related to DOD concerns.
section_title: DOD Used Goals and Milestones to Describe Its Progress in Implementing Its Comprehensive Training Range Sustainment Plan
paragraphs: In its 2017 Sustainable Ranges Report, DOD used goals and milestones  to address the statutory requirement to describe its progress in  implementing its comprehensive training range sustainment plan. DOD  has seven goals, as follows, in support of this plan: (1) mitigate  encroachment pressures on training activities from competing operating  space; (2) mitigate electromagnetic spectrum competition; (3) meet  military airspace challenges; (4) manage increasing military demand for  range space; (5) address affects resulting from new energy infrastructure  and renewable energy; (6) anticipate climate change effects; and (7)  sustain excellence in environmental stewardship.
Using these goals as a common framework, each military service  developed its own milestones and needed actions for reaching those  milestones. In DOD’s 2017 Sustainable Ranges Report, each service  provided updates to its milestones and actions based on annual  assessment data. The report included the following examples:
The Army has ongoing actions to mitigate electromagnetic spectrum  competition on ranges. For example, the Army reported that  installation of fiber optic cabling has been completed at approximately  20 installations to support wireless networks and targeting control  systems in order to mitigate electromagnetic spectrum interference on  ranges.
The Navy has ongoing interactions with Bureau of Ocean Energy  Management state renewable energy task forces to support  assessments of proposed wind energy developments to minimize  effects on Navy and DOD offshore readiness.
The Marine Corps has ongoing actions to engage in regulatory and  legislative processes at the local, state, and national levels on issues  that may affect range sustainability or readiness. The Marine Corps is  also exploring partnerships to meet natural resource regulatory  responsibilities.
The Air Force is engaged in ongoing development of the Center  Scheduling Enterprise flight scheduling system for use at Air Force  Ranges. In addition, the Air Force is developing an interface between  its flight scheduling system and the Army/Marine Corps Range Facility  Management Support System, to facilitate scheduling across military  services.
section_title: DOD Reported Its Projected Funding Requirements for Implementing Planned Actions
paragraphs: In the 2017 Sustainable Ranges Report, DOD met the statutory  requirement to track its progress in implementing the comprehensive plan  by identifying the funding requirements needed to accomplish its goals.  DOD delineated the following four funding categories to be used by the  services to project their range sustainment efforts: (1) modernization and  investment; (2) operations and maintenance; (3) environmental; and (4)  encroachment. The funding requirements section of the 2017 report  includes descriptions and specific examples for each funding category, as  well as actual funding levels for fiscal year 2016 and requested funding  levels for fiscal years 2017 through 2021. For example, the encroachment  category is described as funding dedicated to actions optimizing  accessibility to ranges by minimizing restrictions that do or could limit  range activities, including outreach and buffer projects. Specific examples  of encroachment funding include Army Compatible Use Buffer program  administration and support and encroachment planning efforts. The report  also provides an explanation of any fluctuations occurring over the 5-year  funding period covered in the report. For example, the Air Force’s  requested funding for the modernization and investment category  fluctuated from $48.3 million in fiscal year 2017 to $236.8 million in fiscal  year 2020 to $185.6 million in fiscal year 2021. The Air Force attributes  this planned fluctuation to a decision to infuse funding in range  infrastructure to research, develop, procure, and sustain advanced threat  emitters, range communications/networks, and datalink systems, among  other things.
section_title: Agency Comments
paragraphs: We are not making recommendations in this report. In oral comments on  a draft of this report, DOD agreed with our findings and did not have any  further comments.
We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional  committees; the Secretary of Defense; the Secretaries of the Army, Navy,  and Air Force, and Commandant of the Marine Corps; and the Deputy  Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness. In addition, the report is  available at no charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov.
If you or your staff have any questions concerning this report, please  contact me at (202) 512-4523 or leporeb@gao.gov. Contact points for our  Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on  the last page of this report. Key contributors to this report are listed in  appendix.
section_title: Appendix: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contact
section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the contact named above, Maria Storts (Assistant Director),  Kerstin Hudon, Liza Bartlett, Michael Silver, Alexandra Gonzalez, and  John Wren made key contributions to this report.
section_title: Related GAO Products
paragraphs: Military Training: DOD Met Annual Reporting Requirements in Its 2016  Sustainable Ranges Report. GAO-16-627 Washington, D.C.: June 15,  2016.
Defense Infrastructure: DOD Has Made Limited Progress in Assessing  Foreign Encroachment Risks on Federally Managed Land.  GAO-16-381R. Washington, D.C.: April 13, 2016.
Military Training: DOD’s Annual Sustainable Ranges Report Addressed  Statutory Reporting Requirements. GAO-15-537. Washington, D.C.: June  17, 2015.
Defense Infrastructure: Risk Assessment Needed to Identify If Foreign  Encroachment Threatens Test and Training Ranges. GAO-15-149.  Washington, D.C.: December 16, 2014.
Climate Change Adaptation: DOD Can Improve Infrastructure Planning  and Processes to Better Account for Potential Impacts. GAO-14-446.  Washington D.C.: May 30, 2014.
Military Training: DOD Met Annual Reporting Requirements for Its 2014  Sustainable Ranges Report. GAO-14-517. Washington, D.C.: May 9,  2014.
Military Training: DOD Met Annual Reporting Requirements and  Continued to Improve Its Sustainable Ranges Report. GAO-13-648.  Washington, D.C.: July 9, 2013.
Military Training: DOD Met Annual Reporting Requirements and Improved  Its Sustainable Ranges Report. GAO-12-879R. Washington, D.C.:  September 12, 2012.
Military Training: DOD’s Report on the Sustainability of Training Ranges  Meets Annual Reporting Requirements but Could Be Improved.  GAO-12-13R. Washington, D.C.: October 19, 2011.
Military Training: DOD Continues to Improve Its Report on the  Sustainability of Training Ranges. GAO-10-977R. Washington, D.C.:  September 14, 2010.
Military Training: DOD’s Report on the Sustainability of Training Ranges  Addresses Most of the Congressional Reporting Requirements and  Continues to Improve with Each Annual Update. GAO-10-103R.  Washington, D.C.: October 27, 2009.
Improvement Continues in DOD’s Reporting on Sustainable Ranges, but  Opportunities Exist to Improve Its Range Assessments and  Comprehensive Plan. GAO-09-128R. Washington, D.C.: December 15,  2008.
Military Training: Compliance with Environmental Laws Affects Some  Training Activities, but DOD Has Not Made a Sound Business Case for  Additional Environmental Exemptions. GAO-08-407. Washington, D.C.:  March 7, 2008.
Improvement Continues in DOD’s Reporting on Sustainable Ranges, but  Opportunities Exist to Improve Its Range Assessments and  Comprehensive Plan. GAO-08-10R. Washington, D.C.: October 11, 2007.
Improvement Continues in DOD’s Reporting on Sustainable Ranges but  Additional Time Is Needed to Fully Implement Key Initiatives.  GAO-06-725R. Washington, D.C.: June 20, 2006.
Military Training: Funding Requests for Joint Urban Operations Training  and Facilities Should Be Based on Sound Strategy and Requirements.  GAO-06-193. Washington, D.C.: December 8, 2005.
Some Improvements Have Been Made in DOD’s Annual Training Range  Reporting but It Still Fails to Fully Address Congressional Requirements.  GAO-06-29R. Washington, D.C.: October 25, 2005.
Military Training: Actions Needed to Enhance DOD’s Program to  Transform Joint Training. GAO-05-548. Washington, D.C.: June 21, 2005.
Military Training: Better Planning and Funding Priority Needed to Improve  Conditions of Military Training Ranges. GAO-05-534. Washington, D.C.:  June 10, 2005.
Military Training: DOD Report on Training Ranges Does Not Fully  Address Congressional Reporting Requirements. GAO-04-608.  Washington, D.C.: June 4, 2004.
Military Training: Implementation Strategy Needed to Increase  Interagency Management for Endangered Species Affecting Training  Ranges. GAO-03-976. Washington, D.C.: September 29, 2003.
Military Training: DOD Approach to Managing Encroachment on Training  Ranges Still Evolving. GAO-03-621T. Washington, D.C.: April 2, 2003.
Military Training: DOD Lacks a Comprehensive Plan to Manage  Encroachment on Training Ranges. GAO-02-614. Washington, D.C.:  June 11, 2002.
Military Training: DOD Needs a Comprehensive Plan to Manage  Encroachment on Training Ranges. GAO-02-727T. Washington, D.C.:  May 16, 2002.
Military Training: Limitations Exist Overseas but Are Not Reflected in  Readiness Reporting. GAO-02-525. Washington, D.C.: April 30, 2002.