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. 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. 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.