Military Training: DOD's Annual Sustainable Ranges Report Addressed Statutory Reporting Requirements
Published: 2015-06-17T00:00:00

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 or complex missions around the globe.
Section 366 of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (as amended) (“the Act”) 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 available in the United States and overseas for training, and requires DOD to provide annual reports on its efforts to implement the plan and address training constraints. The Act also includes a provision for GAO to submit evaluations of DOD's reports to Congress within 90 days of receiving them from DOD.
This is GAO's12th report evaluating DOD's annual report. GAO assessed the extent to which DOD's 2015 Sustainable Ranges Report met the statutory reporting requirements in that it described its progress in implementing its sustainable ranges plan and described any actions taken or to be taken in addressing training constraints caused by limitations on the use of military lands, marine areas, or airspace. To conduct this work, GAO compared DOD's 2015 report to statutory reporting requirements and interviewed cognizant DOD officials.
GAO is not making recommendations in this report. DOD agreed with GAO's report.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: The Department of Defense's (DOD) 2015 Sustainable Ranges Report met the statutory reporting requirements in that it described its progress in implementing its sustainable ranges plan and described any actions taken or to be taken in addressing training constraints caused by limitations on the use of military lands, marine areas, or airspace. DOD's 2015 report provides updates to several elements of the plan required by the Act, including: (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 DOD's training range sustainment plan; and (3) projected funding requirements for implementing its planned actions.
First, DOD's report included proposals to enhance training range capabilities and to address shortfalls in current resources. DOD developed these proposals by evaluating current and future training range requirements and the ability of current DOD resources to meet these requirements. For example, in the report, the Marine Corps identified several training shortfalls that it is working to remedy, such as the capability to fully exercise a large Marine Air-Ground Task Force in a realistic training scenario. The area currently being used is not large enough to accommodate a full-scale, live-fire Marine Expeditionary Brigade exercise. To address this shortfall, DOD was authorized to expand this training area by approximately 103,000 acres exclusively for military use and an additional 50,000 acres for joint military and recreational use. Efforts are under way to acquire this land. DOD also included in its report the results of a capability and encroachment assessment of its training ranges that evaluated the services' ability to support assigned training missions. In that section, the services described any planned or ongoing actions to remedy shortfalls identified during the assessment.
Second, DOD's report identified goals and milestones for tracking planned actions and measuring progress in the implementation of DOD's training range sustainment plan. DOD's report identified seven shared goals in support of its plan: (1) mitigate encroachment pressures on training activities from competing operating space; (2) mitigate frequency spectrum competition; (3) meet military airspace challenges; (4) manage increasing military demand for range space; (5) address effects from new energy infrastructure and renewable energy effects; (6) anticipate climate change effects; and (7) sustain excellence in environmental stewardship. Also, the report included discussion of each military service's milestones and needed actions for reaching those milestones, using these goals as a common framework.
Third, DOD's report identified projected funding requirements for each of the military services to implement their planned actions. DOD's report delineated four funding categories to be used by the services to project their range sustainment requirements: (1) modernization and investment, (2) operations and maintenance, (3) environmental, and (4) encroachment. DOD identified a total of approximately $1.68 billion in funding requirements across the services for fiscal year 2015 for these categories.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: The Department of Defense (DOD) relies on access to military land,  airspace, and sea space to provide its forces with a realistic training  environment; to that end, its training ranges within the United States and  overseas help prepare forces to face combat or 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 2015 Sustainable Ranges Report, range capability challenges  include insufficient resources and outdated equipment and systems that  are needed to complete training requirements. Encroachment challenges  include incompatible development and use of land adjacent to DOD  training activities, reallocation of electromagnetic spectrum, and foreign  investment located in proximity to military training areas. Further, another  challenge identified in DOD’s report is the implementation of the Budget  Control Act of 2011, which reduced funding of DOD’s readiness  accounts and continues to negatively affect range capability by hindering  range modernization, among other issues. According to DOD’s 2015  Sustainable Ranges Report, DOD anticipates that the department’s ability  to take action on encroachment challenges will also be limited because of  funding. To respond to these challenges and increase the long-term  sustainability of its military range resources, DOD has launched a number  of efforts aimed at preserving its training ranges and at addressing the  effects of its training activities on the environment. The efforts include 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 (as amended) (“the Act”) required DOD to submit to  Congress 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 for training of the Armed Forces. The Act required  submission of the plan at the same time as the President submitted his  budget for fiscal year 2004. Further, section 366, as amended, requires  the Secretary of Defense to submit an annual progress report to  Congress each year through fiscal year 2018 that describes the progress  made in implementing the training range sustainment plan and any  additional actions taken, or to be taken, to address training constraints  caused by limitations on the use of military lands, marine areas, and  airspace. Additionally, the Act includes a provision that GAO submit  evaluations of DOD’s reports to Congress within 90 days of receiving a  report. Appendix I contains the text of section 366 of the Act.
Since 2004, DOD has submitted annual sustainable ranges reports. Also,  since that time, we have submitted our evaluations of DOD’s reports.  Most of our reviews of DOD’s 2004–2011 reports found that DOD’s  reports either did not fully address certain statutory reporting  requirements mandated by section 366 or that improvements were  needed in the reports. However, our review of DOD’s 2012–2014 reports  found that DOD addressed the reporting requirements that it describe the  progress made in implementing its training range sustainment plan and  any additional actions taken, or to be taken, to address training  constraints caused by limitations on the use of military lands, marine  areas, and airspace. Further, we found that the reports provided updates  to several elements of the plan that the Act required DOD to include in its  annual progress reports, including (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.  In July 2013, we reported that DOD had implemented all 13  recommendations made to improve its Sustainable Ranges Reports and  range assessments.
This review is our 12th annual report that evaluates DOD’s latest  Sustainable Ranges Report. In this review, we evaluated the extent to  which DOD’s 2015 Sustainable Ranges Report met the statutory  reporting requirements contained in section 366, as amended.  Specifically, this report focuses on the extent to which DOD’s report  described its progress in implementing its sustainable ranges plan and  described any actions taken or to be taken in addressing training  constraints caused by limitations on the use of military lands, marine  areas, or airspace. We also reviewed any updates to the elements of the  plan required by the Act to be included in DOD’s original report in 2004.  These elements included: (1) proposals to enhance training range  capabilities and address any shortfalls in current DOD resources  identified pursuant to DOD’s assessment and evaluation; (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 planned actions.
To determine the extent to which DOD’s 2015 Sustainable Ranges  Report met the reporting requirements specified in section 366(a)(5) 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 in the Act. We also reviewed the memorandum that the  Office of the Secretary of Defense sent to each of the military services to  request data for the Sustainable Ranges Report to determine what  differences, if any, there were in the types of information that were  requested for the report this year from each of the military services and  the capability and encroachment range assessments conducted by each  of the services. Finally, we met with officials from the Office of the Deputy  Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness and the military services to  discuss changes, if any, to the services’ submission of information on  training ranges to DOD for its 2015 report and opportunities, if any, for  improving future sustainable ranges reports. The intent of our review was  not to comprehensively evaluate the data presented in the 2015  Sustainable Ranges Report, but rather to determine the extent to which  the report met the mandated statutory requirements.
We conducted this performance audit from February 2015 to June 2015  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: DOD’s 2015 Sustainable Ranges Report Met Statutory Reporting Requirements
paragraphs: DOD’s 2015 Sustainable Ranges Report met the statutory reporting  requirements to describe DOD’s progress in implementing its training  range sustainment plan and to describe any actions taken or to be taken  in addressing training constraints caused by limitations on the use of  military lands, marine areas, or airspace. DOD also provided updates to  several elements of the plan required by the Act including: (1) proposals  to enhance training range capabilities and to address any shortfalls in  current DOD resources identified pursuant to DOD’s assessment and  evaluation; (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 planned actions.
subsections: section_title: DOD Reported on Proposals to Enhance Range Capabilities and to Address Shortfalls
paragraphs: In our review of DOD’s 2015 Sustainable Ranges Report, we found that  DOD reported on its proposals to enhance training range capabilities and  to 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. To do so,  DOD updated the report sections pertaining to each military service’s  issues related to range capability and encroachment and special  interests, included a section in its report on evolving challenges that could  affect the sustainability of ranges, and reported on the results of a training  range assessment. In conducting the training range assessment, the  Marine Corps, for example, identified several training shortfalls that it is  working to remedy, such as the capability to fully exercise a large Marine  Air-Ground Task Force in a realistic training scenario. The area currently  being used is not large enough to accommodate a full-scale, live-fire  Marine Expeditionary Brigade exercise. To address this shortfall, DOD  was authorized to expand this training area by approximately 103,000  acres exclusively for military use and an additional 50,000 acres for joint  military and recreational use. Efforts are under way to acquire this  additional land.
Additionally, the 2015 report identified seven emerging challenges to the  military services’ training ranges. The seven challenges are: (1) budget  reductions affecting range capability, (2) foreign investment and national  security, (3) threatened and endangered and candidate species, (4)  demand for electromagnetic spectrum, (5) continued growth in domestic  use of Unmanned Aerial Systems, (6) early coordination with renewable  energy industry, and (7) offshore oil and gas development. In December  2014, we reported on the risks to DOD ranges and installations from  foreign investment encroachment and on the department’s ability to  address these risks. In that review, we found that DOD had not  conducted a risk assessment that included prioritizing test and training  ranges based on mission criticality and assessing the degree to which  foreign encroachment could pose a threat to the mission of the range,  among other things. We also reported that DOD had not obtained  sufficient information on commercial activity being conducted near test  and training ranges in the level of detail that officials said they needed to  determine whether specific transactions on federally owned or managed  land in proximity to ranges pose a threat to the range. We made two  recommendations to DOD: (1) develop and implement guidance for  conducting a risk assessment on foreign encroachment and (2)  collaborate with other federal agencies to obtain additional information on  transactions near ranges. According to DOD’s 2015 Sustainable Ranges  Report, the department remains focused on the issue of foreign  investment in industries located in proximity to military training and testing  areas because of potential surveillance and collection capabilities  provided to foreign entities that invest in these assets. DOD concurred  with the recommendations and is continuing to develop strategies  designed to mitigate the effects on training from foreign investment and  national security encroachment. DOD is also working with agencies with  land and airspace management authority to obtain information related to  foreign investment and transactions in proximity to DOD activities.
As part of the preparation for input into the 2015 Sustainable Ranges  Report, DOD tasked the military services to conduct an assessment of  current and future training range capabilities to support its assigned  training mission and an evaluation of the adequacy of current range  resources to meet its mission. In its 2015 report, DOD updates the critical  range and training issues identified by the military services and provides a  comprehensive update to the individual training range capability and  encroachments assessments for all four military services.
According to DOD’s report, the military services assessed the ranges’  assigned training mission areasattributes and 12 encroachment factors to evaluate their ability to support  assigned training missions. These capability attributes and encroachment  factors were developed by DOD and the services in 2008 and help DOD  create a unified reporting and analytical framework that integrates data  from each of the services conducting assessments. Figure 1 describes   against a common set of 13 capability  the 13 capability attributes and 12 encroachment factors that the services  used in their assessments.
For its 2015 report, DOD evaluated 15 Army ranges, 10 Marine Corps  ranges, 21 Navy ranges, and 36 Air Force ranges. The military services  assigned a rating to each capability and encroachment item—indicated as  red, yellow, or green—to convey the severity of the effects of the  constraints on the ranges’ ability to support their assigned training  mission requirements.
DOD summarized its results of the assessments in a section of the report  entitled Historical Information, Results, and Future Projections that  provided a qualitative assessment of each range by presenting overall  rating scores from prior years as well as comments on whether the  capabilities or encroachment pressures have been improving or  degrading over the years and the outlook for the future. The results of the  capability and encroachment assessment for fiscal year 2015 are in figure  2.
Further, following the assessment details for each range, the military  services provided observations that included explanations of how any  capability and encroachment shortfalls rated severe or moderate risk  were affecting training at a specific range. The services also described  any planned or ongoing actions to remedy the shortfalls. For example,  according to DOD’s 2015 Sustainable Ranges Report:
The Army identified training areas at Fort Stewart, Georgia, as being  partially mission capable because there was a shortfall of landspace  to conduct light and heavy maneuver training. As a result of limited  landspace, units were not able to have realistic training. Currently, the  Army had no actions or plans to increase the landspace.
The Marine Corps was prohibited from conducting live-fire individual-  and unit-level training using artillery and other munitions at Marine  Corps Base Hawaii. Due to landspace, airspace, and munitions  restrictions, units were forced to train at other military services ranges  in Hawaii.
The Navy identified two assigned training missions as being partially  mission capable as a result of adjacent land use at Naval Air Station  Fallon, Nevada. Specifically, power lines and telecommunications  towers affected low-altitude helicopter training and tactics. This  encroachment prohibited training events, reduced realism of  segments of the training, constrained flight altitudes, and complicated  all-weather training. The Navy did not have a solution to resolve these  issues.
The Air Force identified several training areas as being partially  mission capable because of limited access to needed airspace. At  Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico, training has been limited  because the Air Force shares the Army’s airspace. Air Force training  is a low priority for Army airspace, and daily coordination of schedules  is needed in order to gain access to it.
Finally, the Army and Navy provided additional information and  perspectives on any areas of special interest that affect or may affect its  training capabilities and encroachment situation. In the 2015 Sustainable  Ranges Report, for example, the Army discussed the effect of force  structure reductions on aging infrastructure, stating that it needed  additional authorizations through the Base Realignment and Closure  process to reduce excess infrastructure. Also, the Navy discussed its  efforts to allow at-sea training while minimizing adverse effects to marine  mammals. A key challenge identified by the Navy was endangered  species and critical habitat encroachment that has resulted in excluding  or reducing training events. We have previously reported that highlighting  the services’ most pressing range sustainability issues helps DOD  officials prioritize the department’s actions to address range issues in the  most efficient and effective manner.
section_title: DOD Used Goals and Milestones to Update Its Progress in Implementing Its Training Range Sustainment Plan
paragraphs: In its 2015 Sustainable Ranges Report, DOD identified goals and  milestones to help address the statutory requirements to describe its  progress in implementing its training range sustainment plan. DOD has  seven shared goals in support of this plan. The goals are: (1) mitigate  encroachment pressures on training activities from competing operating  space; (2) mitigate frequency spectrum competition; (3) meet military  airspace challenges; (4) manage increasing military demand for range  space; (5) address effects from new energy infrastructure and renewable  energy effects; (6) anticipate climate change effects;excellence in environmental stewardship. Each military service has  developed its own milestones and needed actions for reaching those  milestones, using these goals as a common framework. In the 2015  Sustainable Ranges Report, each service provided updates to its  milestones and actions. For example:   and (7) sustain
The Army has partially completed actions to execute training land  acquisitions to offset the shortfall of nearly 5 million acres in training  land assets. While the Army has purchased over 32,500 acres of land,  it has postponed other purchases due to delays and costs associated  with endangered species management and mitigation and Army force  structure decisions.
The Navy has ongoing actions to meet its milestones of updating  encroachment action plans and using Navy Community Plans and  Liaisons Officers to engage communities where there is potential  encroachment of installations and land ranges.
The Marine Corps has ongoing actions to analyze and assess  frequency spectrum issues that potentially could affect training  capabilities at range complexes.
The Air Force has met its milestone of incorporating frequency  spectrum as a key and quantifiable factor in the Air Force corporate  basing process.
According to the 2015 Sustainable Ranges report, these goals and  milestones will be reviewed and updated annually to ensure that DOD  continues to address future training requirements and constraints.
section_title: DOD Reported Its Projected Funding Requirements for Implementing Planned Actions
paragraphs: In its 2015 Sustainable Ranges Report, DOD met the statutory  requirement to track its progress in implementing the training range  sustainment plan by identifying the funding requirements needed to  accomplish its goals. Requested funding for fiscal years 2015 through  2019 are identified in table 1.
DOD has delineated four funding categories to be used by the services to  project their range sustainment requirements: (1) modernization and  investment, (2) operations and maintenance, (3) environmental, and (4)  encroachment. The funding requirements section included descriptions  and specific examples for each funding category. For instance, DOD  described the environmental funding category as funds dedicated to the  environmental management of ranges, including range assessments,  response actions, and natural and cultural resource-management  planning and implementation. Examples of the environmental funding  category include conducting range assessments and environmental  mitigation costs associated with range modernization and range  construction. The funding requirement section of DOD’s report also  provides an explanation of any fluctuations in the funding categories  occurring over the requested 5-year funding period covered in the report.  For example, the Army’s requested funding for the modernization and  investment category increased from $18.8 million in fiscal year 2015 to  $121.1 million in fiscal year 2019. The Army attributes these fluctuations  to range construction project delays and related adjustments in target  requirements.
section_title: Agency Comments
paragraphs: We are not making any recommendations in this report. We received  written comments on a draft of this report from the Office of the Deputy  Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness. In its written response,  DOD agreed with our report. We also received technical comments to  clarify our draft report, which we incorporated as appropriate. DOD’s  written response is reprinted in its entirety in appendix II.
We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional  committees; the Secretary of Defense; the Deputy Assistant Secretary of  Defense for Readiness; the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force;  and the Commandant of the Marine Corps. In addition, the report is  available at no charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov.
If you or your staff have 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  III.
section_title: Appendix I: Section 366 of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003
paragraphs: SEC. 366. Training Range Sustainment Plan, Global Status of Resources  and Training System, and Training Range Inventory.  (a) PLAN REQUIRED———(1) The Secretary of Defense shall develop a  comprehensive plan for using existing authorities available to the  Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of the military departments to  address training constraints caused by limitations on the use of military  lands, marine areas, and airspace that are available in the United States  and overseas for training of the Armed Forces.  (2) As part of the preparation of the plan, the Secretary of Defense shall  conduct the following:  (A) An assessment of current and future training range requirements of  the Armed Forces.  (B) An evaluation of the adequacy of current Department of Defense  resources (including virtual and constructive training assets as well as  military lands, marine areas, and airspace available in the United States  and overseas) to meet those current and future training range  requirements.  (3) The plan shall include the following:  (A) Proposals to enhance training range capabilities and address any  shortfalls in current Department of Defense resources identified pursuant  to the assessment and evaluation conducted under paragraph (2).  (B) Goals and milestones for tracking planned actions and measuring  progress.  (C) Projected funding requirements for implementing planned actions.  (D) Designation of an office in the Office of the Secretary of Defense and  in each of the military departments that will have lead responsibility for  overseeing implementation of the plan.  (4) At the same time as the President submits to Congress the budget for  fiscal year 2004, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a  report describing the progress made in implementing this subsection,  including———  (A) the plan developed under paragraph (1);  (B) the results of the assessment and evaluation conducted under  paragraph (2); and  (C) any recommendations that the Secretary may have for legislative or  regulatory changes to address training constraints identified pursuant to  this section.  (5) At the same time as the President submits to Congress the budget for  each of fiscal years 2005 through 2008, the Secretary shall submit to  Congress a report describing the progress made in implementing the plan  and any additional actions taken, or to be taken, to address training  constraints caused by limitations on the use of military lands, marine  areas, and airspace.  (b) READINESS REPORTING IMPROVEMENT———Not later than June  30, 2003, the Secretary of Defense, using existing measures within the  authority of the Secretary, shall submit to Congress a report on the plans  of the Department of Defense to improve the Global Status of Resources  and Training System to reflect the readiness impact that training  constraints caused by limitations on the use of military lands, marine  areas, and airspace have on specific units of the Armed Forces.  (c) TRAINING RANGE INVENTORY———(1) The Secretary of Defense  shall develop and maintain a training range inventory for each of the  Armed Forces———  (A) to identify all available operational training ranges;  (B) to identify all training capacities and capabilities available at each  training range; and  (C) to identify training constraints caused by limitations on the use of  military lands, marine areas, and airspace at each training range.  (2) The Secretary of Defense shall submit an initial inventory to Congress  at the same time as the President submits the budget for fiscal year 2004  and shall submit an updated inventory to Congress at the same time as  the President submits the budget for fiscal years 2005 through 2008.  (d) GAO EVALUATION———The Secretary of Defense shall transmit  copies of each report required by subsections (a) and (b) to the  Comptroller General. Within 60 days after receiving a report, the  Comptroller General shall submit to Congress an evaluation of the  report. (e) Armed Forces Defined.--In this section, the term ``Armed Forces''  means the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps.
section_title: Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Defense
section_title: Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contact
section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the contact named above, Harold Reich (Assistant Director),  Richard Powelson, Michael Silver, Amie Steele, Sonja Ware, and  Alexander Welsh made key contributions to this report.
section_title: Related GAO Products
paragraphs: 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   014 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.