Defense Infrastructure: Army and Marine Corps Grow the Force
Construction Projects Generally Support the Initiative
(06-MAR-08, GAO-08-375).
In January 2007 the President announced an initiative, referred
to as Grow the Force, to increase the end strength in the Army by
more than 74,000 by 2013 and the Marine Corps by 27,000 personnel
by 2011 to enhance U.S. forces, reduce stress on deployable
personnel, and provide necessary forces for success in the Global
War on Terrorism. The Department of Defense (DOD) estimates that
it will need more than $17 billion for facilities to accommodate
the planned personnel increases. GAO was asked to review (1) the
process the Army and Marine Corps used to develop construction
projects associated with Grow the Force, (2) the extent to which
the projects submitted in DOD's budget requests for fiscal years
2007 and 2008 support the initiative, and (3) whether the Army
and Marine Corps plan to use temporary facilities while
construction projects are completed. GAO reviewed the
construction projects associated with Grow the Force in DOD's
budget requests for fiscal years 2007 and 2008, reviewed
stationing documents, and interviewed officials at Army and
Marine Corps headquarters and six installations on the process
used to develop projects. In comments on a draft of this report,
DOD disagreed with GAO's assessment that 1 Army project and 12
Marine Corps projects do not support Grow the Force but did not
provide sufficient documentation that existing capacity issues
would be exacerbated by additional personnel.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-08-375
ACCNO: A81218
TITLE: Defense Infrastructure: Army and Marine Corps Grow the
Force Construction Projects Generally Support the Initiative
DATE: 03/06/2008
SUBJECT: Army personnel
Cost analysis
Defense budgets
Force planning
Force structure
Future budget projections
Marine Corps personnel
Military budgets
Military facility construction
Military forces
Military personnel
Military personnel retention
Personnel management
Personnel recruiting
Strategic planning
Army Grow the Force Initiative
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-08-375
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
Report to Congressional Committees:
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
March 2008:
Defense Infrastructure:
Army and Marine Corps Grow the Force Construction Projects Generally
Support the Initiative:
GAO-08-375:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-08-375, a report to the Senate and House Committees
on Appropriations, Subcommittees on Military Construction, Veterans
Affairs, and Related Agencies.
Why GAO Did This Study:
In January 2007 the President announced an initiative, referred to as
Grow the Force, to increase the end strength in the Army by more than
74,000 by 2013 and the Marine Corps by 27,000 personnel by 2011 to
enhance U.S. forces, reduce stress on deployable personnel, and provide
necessary forces for success in the Global War on Terrorism. The
Department of Defense (DOD) estimates that it will need more than $17
billion for facilities to accommodate the planned personnel increases.
GAO was asked to review (1) the process the Army and Marine Corps used
to develop construction projects associated with Grow the Force, (2)
the extent to which the projects submitted in DOD�s budget requests for
fiscal years 2007 and 2008 support the initiative, and (3) whether the
Army and Marine Corps plan to use temporary facilities while
construction projects are completed. GAO reviewed the construction
projects associated with Grow the Force in DOD�s budget requests for
fiscal years 2007 and 2008, reviewed stationing documents, and
interviewed officials at Army and Marine Corps headquarters and six
installations on the process used to develop projects.
In comments on a draft of this report, DOD disagreed with GAO�s
assessment that 1 Army project and 12 Marine Corps projects do not
support Grow the Force but did not provide sufficient documentation
that existing capacity issues would be exacerbated by additional
personnel.
What GAO Found:
The Army and Marine Corps followed their typical process to develop
construction projects when they developed the Grow the Force projects
submitted in DOD�s budget requests for fiscal years 2007 and 2008;
however, the process was compressed due to the short period of time
between the announcement of the initiative and submission of budget
requests. For example, the active duty Army took about 2 months and the
Marine Corps took 6 months to develop projects submitted in DOD�s
budget requests for fiscal years 2007 and 2008; the typical process
takes about 2 years.
Nearly all of the military construction projects submitted as Grow the
Force projects in fiscal years 2007 and 2008 supported the Grow the
Force initiative. GAO found that 68 of the 69 projects submitted by the
Army and Army National Guard, totaling more than $2.3 billion, and 37
of the 49 projects submitted by the Marine Corps, totaling more than
$665 million, supported Grow the Force. However, GAO found that 1 Army
project and 12 Marine Corps projects did not support Grow the Force
because they addressed existing deficiencies and were needed regardless
of whether Grow the Force occurred or they supported another
initiative. For example, the Marine Corps included a $7 million
wastewater system modification project at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina,
in its fiscal year 2008 budget request to address environmental issues.
Officials said the project was already planned for a future budget
request and would be needed regardless of whether Grow the Force had
occurred. Additionally, GAO determined that 3 Marine Corps projects,
totaling $58 million, were to construct facilities for wounded Marines
that supported another initiative, not Grow the Force. While most of
the fiscal years 2007 and 2008 projects were linked to Grow the Force,
it may be more difficult to identify some Marine Corps and Army Reserve
projects as supporting the initiative in future budget requests because
the Marine Corps may not link installationwide projects to Grow the
Force and the Army Reserve plans to identify projects for a related
force structure effort as Grow the Force projects.
GAO�s analysis shows that some units will arrive at installations
before facilities are constructed; however, the Army does not plan to
purchase or lease temporary facilities, while the Marine Corps plans to
do so to bridge the gap between when units are established and
permanent facilities are constructed. The Army plans to use existing
facilities, including facilities vacated by deployed units, to bridge
the gap between the time when personnel arrive and the completion date
of construction projects. The majority of new units will be established
at Marine Corps installations before permanent facilities are complete
and will require temporary facilities. The Marine Corps requested $147
million in fiscal year 2008 for temporary facilities, including
armories and trailers, to bridge the gap between the time units arrive
and the completion date of construction projects. A Marine Corps
official expects that additional funding for temporary facilities will
be required but the extent of the funding requirements have not yet
been determined.
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
[hyperlink, http://www.GAO-08-375]. For more information, contact Brian
J. Lepore at (202) 512-4523 or [email protected].
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Results in Brief:
Background:
Army and Marine Corps Used a Compressed Version of the Typical Process
to Determine Construction Projects for Grow the Force:
Most Projects Support Grow the Force, but Some Lack a Clear Link to the
Initiative:
Army's and Marine Corps' Plans to Use Temporary Facilities:
Concluding Observations:
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Defense:
Appendix III: Assessment of Army Grow the Force Projects:
Appendix IV: Assessment of Marine Corps Grow the Force Projects:
Appendix V: Assessment of Army National Guard Grow the Force Projects:
Appendix VI: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
Tables:
Table 1: Proposed Army and Marine Corps Increase in End Strength from
2007 through 2013:
Table 2: Army and Marine Corps Estimated Military Construction and
Family Housing Funding Requirements for Grow the Force, Fiscal Year
2007 through Fiscal Year 2013:
Table 3: Analysis of Army and Marine Corps Projects Requested in Fiscal
Years 2007 and 2008 for Grow the Force:
Table 4: Assessment of Army Grow the Force Projects:
Table 5: Assessment of Marine Corps Grow the Force Projects:
Table 6: Assessment of Army National Guard Grow the Force Projects:
Figures:
Figure 1: Army's Process for Developing Grow the Force Construction
Projects Included in the Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008 Budget Requests
Compared with the Typical Process:
Figure 2: Marine Corps' Process for Developing Grow the Force
Construction Projects Included in the Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008
Supplemental Budget Requests Compared with the Typical Process:
United States Government Accountability Office: Washington, DC 20548:
March 6, 2008:
The Honorable Tim Johnson:
Chairman:
The Honorable Kay Bailey Hutchison:
Ranking Member:
Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related
Agencies: Committee on Appropriations:
United States Senate:
The Honorable Chet Edwards:
Chairman:
The Honorable Zach Wamp:
Ranking Member:
Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related
Agencies: Committee on Appropriations:
House of Representatives:
In January 2007 the President announced a permanent increase in the
Army and Marine Corps end strength through the Grow the Force
initiative to enhance overall U.S. forces, reduce stress on deployable
personnel, and provide necessary forces for success in the Global War
on Terrorism.[Footnote 1] This planned expansion will increase the
Army's end strength by more than 74,000 soldiers by 2013 and the Marine
Corps' end strength by 27,000 Marines by 2011. Currently, the Army and
Marine Corps estimate that the construction of operational and support
facilities and housing associated with this expansion will total more
than $17 billion through 2013.[Footnote 2] The Army and Marine Corps
have already requested more than $3 billion for construction projects
related to the expansion in the Department of Defense's (DOD) fiscal
year 2007 and fiscal year 2008 budget requests.[Footnote 3] Grow the
Force is just one of several initiatives--including Base Realignment
and Closure, Army modularity, and overseas rebasing--that will require
a significant investment in military construction.
In the report accompanying its 2008 Military Construction, Veterans
Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill, the House
Appropriations Committee raised concerns about the Army's and Marine
Corps' ability to adequately plan for and execute the military
construction and family housing projects that support the proposed end
strength increase over the next 5 years. The committee report directed
us to review the planning and budgeting process for military
construction projects associated with Grow the Force submitted in DOD's
budget requests for fiscal years 2007 and 2008.[Footnote 4] In response
to that direction we examined (1) the process the Army and Marine Corps
used to develop the construction projects to accommodate the increased
end strength due to the Grow the Force initiative, (2) the extent to
which the construction projects submitted in DOD's budget requests for
fiscal years 2007 and 2008 support the initiative, and (3) whether the
Army and Marine Corps plan to use temporary facilities while
construction projects are completed.
To examine the process the Army and Marine Corps used to develop
construction projects to accommodate the increased end strength, we
reviewed information about the process typically used to develop
construction projects and the process the Army and Marine Corps used to
develop Grow the Force construction projects. We discussed this process
with knowledgeable officials in the Office of the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisitions, Technology and Logistics; key offices within
the Army, Army National Guard, Army Reserve, and Marine Corps
headquarters; and selected Army and Marine Corps installations. To
determine the extent to which the construction projects submitted in
DOD's budget requests for fiscal years 2007 and 2008 support the Grow
the Force initiative, we analyzed key documents, including budget
justification documents for all construction projects submitted for the
fiscal year 2007 supplemental budget request, the fiscal year 2008
Global War on Terrorism supplemental budget request, and the
President's fiscal year 2008 budget request. We included in our scope
only those projects that the Army and Marine Corps submitted in DOD's
budget requests for fiscal years 2007 and 2008. We determined that a
project supported the Grow the Force initiative if budget justification
documentation for the project stated that it supported the initiative,
cited a particular unit that was being established or increasing in
size as part of the Grow the Force initiative, and referred to a
capacity issue due to the additional personnel. If the budget
justification documentation did not provide sufficient information to
determine whether the project supported the Grow the Force initiative,
we discussed the project with officials at the service headquarters or
the installation to obtain the needed information. We discussed our
methodology and assessment of whether projects supported the Grow the
Force initiative with Army and Marine Corps officials, who generally
agreed with our approach. While we evaluated the extent to which the
projects submitted in DOD's budget requests for fiscal years 2007 and
2008 supported the Grow the Force initiative, we did not validate the
need for projects. To determine whether the Army and Marine Corps
planned to use temporary facilities, we reviewed Army and Marine Corps
stationing plans and project documentation and interviewed
knowledgeable officials within the Army and Marine Corps headquarters
and selected Army and Marine Corps installations. We conducted this
performance audit from June 2007 through March 2008 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 the evidence
obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions
based on our audit objectives. Further details on our scope and
methodology are in appendix I.
Results in Brief:
The Army and Marine Corps followed their typical process for developing
Grow the Force construction projects submitted in the fiscal year 2007
and fiscal year 2008 budget requests, except that the process was
compressed due to the short period of time between when the initiative
was announced and budget justification documentation was submitted. For
example, the active duty Army took about 2 months to develop Grow the
Force construction projects included in its fiscal year 2007
supplemental budget request and the President's fiscal year 2008 budget
request and the Marine Corps took 6 months to develop projects
submitted in its fiscal years 2007 and 2008 supplemental budget
requests, while the typical process takes about 2 years. Due to the
limited time to develop projects, a Marine Corps headquarters official
said projects that the installations submitted in the President's
fiscal year 2008 budget were developed using the typical process and
moved up from future budget requests, rather than new projects
developed specifically for Grow the Force.
Nearly all of the military construction projects submitted as Grow the
Force projects in DOD's budget requests for fiscal years 2007 and 2008
supported the Grow the Force initiative. Specifically, we found that 68
of the 69 projects submitted by the Army and Army National Guard,
totaling more than $2.3 billion, and 37 of the 49 projects submitted by
the Marine Corps, totaling more than $665 million, supported Grow the
Force. However, we found that one Army project to upgrade a railroad
yard at Fort Lewis, Washington ($14.6 million) did not support Grow the
Force. This project was to address an existing deficiency that would
not necessarily be made worse by additional personnel from Grow the
Force and was needed regardless of whether Grow the Force occurred.
Likewise, we determined that 12 Marine Corps projects, totaling $210
million, did not support the Grow the Force initiative. Specifically,
the Marine Corps included 7 projects, totaling $137 million, that
address existing facility deficiencies that would not necessarily be
made worse by additional personnel from Grow the Force and would be
needed regardless of whether Grow the Force occurred, and 5 projects,
totaling nearly $73 million, to construct facilities that support other
initiatives, including an initiative for wounded Marines.
Our analysis shows that some units will arrive at installations before
facilities are constructed; however, the Army does not plan to purchase
or lease temporary facilities, while the Marine Corps plans to do so to
bridge the gap between when units are established and permanent
facilities are constructed. The Army plans to use existing facilities,
including facilities vacated by deployed units, to bridge the gap
between the time new units arrive at the installation and when
construction projects are completed and has not yet requested
additional funding for temporary facilities. The Marine Corps has
requested $147 million for temporary facilities to bridge the gap
between the time new units arrive at the installation and when
construction projects are completed. A Headquarters Marine Corps
official expects that the Marine Corps will need additional funding in
the future for temporary facilities, but has not yet determined the
extent of the funding requirements. Officials from Marine Corps
installations that we met with said temporary facilities will be used
as long as they are needed to bridge the gap between when a unit
arrives and the permanent facility is completed--usually about 3 to 7
years.
In written comments on a draft of this report, DOD disagreed with our
assessment that 1 Army project and 12 Marine Corps projects did not
support Grow the Force. However, we did not change our report because
DOD did not provide sufficient documentation that the existing capacity
issues these projects were designed to address would be exacerbated by
additional personnel from Grow the Force. DOD's comments and our
evaluation of them are in the agency comments section of this report.
DOD also provided technical comments, which we incorporated as
appropriate. DOD's comments are reproduced in appendix II.
Background:
The Grow the Force initiative will increase the end strength of the
Army and Marine Corps collectively by more than 100,000 by 2013, as
shown in table 1.
Table 1: Proposed Army and Marine Corps Increase in End Strength from
2007 through 2013:
Service: Active Army[A];
Fiscal year 2007: 36,000[B];
Fiscal year 2008: 7,000;
Fiscal year 2009: 7,000;
Fiscal year 2010: 7,000;
Fiscal year 2011: 7,000;
Fiscal year 2012: 1,000;
Fiscal year 2013: 0;
Total increase: 65,000.
Service: Army Reserve;
Fiscal year 2007: 0;
Fiscal year 2008: 0;
Fiscal year 2009: 0;
Fiscal year 2010: 0;
Fiscal year 2011: 0;
Fiscal year 2012: 0;
Fiscal year 2013: 1,010;
Total increase: 1,010.
Service: Army National Guard[A];
Fiscal year 2007: 0;
Fiscal year 2008: 1,319;
Fiscal year 2009: 1,247;
Fiscal year 2010: 1,335;
Fiscal year 2011: 1,432;
Fiscal year 2012: 1,487;
Fiscal year 2013: 1,381;
Total increase: 8,201.
Service: Marine Corps;
Fiscal year 2007: 9,000[C];
Fiscal year 2008: 5,000;
Fiscal year 2009: 5,000;
Fiscal year 2010: 5,000;
Fiscal year 2011: 3,000;
Fiscal year 2012: 0;
Fiscal year 2013: 0;
Total increase: 27,000.
Service: Total;
Fiscal year 2007: 45,000;
Fiscal year 2008: 13,319;
Fiscal year 2009: 13,247;
Fiscal year 2010: 13,335;
Fiscal year 2011: 11,432;
Fiscal year 2012: 2,487;
Fiscal year 2013: 2,391;
Total increase: 101,211.
Source: DOD.
[A] In September 2007, the Secretary of Defense approved the Army's
proposal to complete the growth of the active Army and Army National
Guard by 2010. This table does not reflect the accelerated growth
because DOD has not yet requested funding to accelerate the growth.
[B] About 30,000 soldiers are part of the temporary end strength
increase that was made permanent in the John Warner National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007.
[C] About 5,000 Marines are part of the temporary end strength increase
that was made permanent in the John Warner National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007.
[End of table]
The Army and Marine Corps are using personnel from their increased end
strength to establish new units, as well as adding personnel to
existing units. The Army's increased end strength will be used to
create six new Brigade Combat Teams (21,000 soldiers),[Footnote 5]
establish new combat support and combat service support units (16,000
soldiers),[Footnote 6] address shortfalls in existing units (13,000
soldiers), and establish additional training and headquarter
capabilities (15,000 soldiers). The Army Reserve is adding two new
brigades to its force structure and the Army National Guard will add
new units and add personnel to existing units to increase its military
police, engineering, and medical units to increase combat support and
combat service support capabilities. The Marine Corps is using
personnel from its increased end strength to establish new units and
add personnel to existing units to address shortfalls in critical
occupations, including military police, infantry battalions,
intelligence battalions, and explosive ordnance disposal teams.
DOD projects that facility requirements associated with Grow the Force
will cost more than $17 billion, as shown in table 2.[Footnote 7]
Table 2: Army and Marine Corps Estimated Military Construction and
Family Housing Funding Requirements for Grow the Force, Fiscal Year
2007 through Fiscal Year 2013 (Dollars in millions):
Service: Army[A];
Military construction and family housing funding requested in fiscal
year 2007 and fiscal year 2008: $2,769[B]; Estimated military
construction and family housing requests (fiscal year 2009 through
fiscal year 2013): $7,489; Total estimated military construction and
family housing requests (fiscal year 2007 through fiscal year 2013):
$10,259.
Service: Marine Corps;
Military construction and family housing funding requested in fiscal
year 2007 and fiscal year 2008: $951[C]; Estimated military
construction and family housing requests (fiscal year 2009 through
fiscal year 2013): $6,134; Total estimated military construction and
family housing requests (fiscal year 2007 through fiscal year 2013):
$7,085.
Service: Total;
Military construction and family housing funding requested in fiscal
year 2007 and fiscal year 2008: $3,720; Estimated military construction
and family housing requests (fiscal year 2009 through fiscal year
2013): $13,623; Total estimated military construction and family
housing requests (fiscal year 2007 through fiscal year 2013): $17,344.
Source: DOD.
Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.
[A] Army funding data include costs for the Army, Army Reserve, and
Army National Guard.
[B] Funding total includes $401 million for planning and design in
fiscal years 2007 and 2008 and about $16 million for projects that were
added to the fiscal year 2008 appropriations.
[C] Funding total includes about $75 million for planning and design in
fiscal years 2007 and 2008.
[End of table]
The Army requested about $2.8 billion for military construction in its
budget requests for fiscal years 2007 and 2008, including over $400
million in the fiscal year 2007 supplemental budget request.[Footnote
8] The remaining $7.5 billion is for projects to support new combat
support and combat service support units; new brigade combat
teams;[Footnote 9] and quality of life projects, such as child
development centers, at installations that are gaining additional
personnel. The Marine Corps requested $951 million for military
construction in its budget requests for fiscal years 2007 and 2008,
including approximately $493 million in the supplemental budget
requests for fiscal years 2007 and 2008. The remaining $6.1 billion
will include projects for newly established units or units increasing
in size through Grow the Force and quality of life projects.
Army and Marine Corps Used a Compressed Version of the Typical Process
to Determine Construction Projects for Grow the Force:
The Army and Marine Corps followed all of the steps typically used to
determine construction projects when they developed the Grow the Force
construction projects submitted in DOD's budget requests for fiscal
years 2007 and 2008, but the process was compressed.[Footnote 10]
Specifically, the limited time available between when the Grow the
Force initiative was announced and the fiscal year 2007 and fiscal year
2008 budget requests were submitted gave the services less time than
during the typical process to develop and submit projects.
The Army's typical process for developing construction projects
generally takes over 2 years; however, the Army completed the process
in about 2 months for Grow the Force projects included in its fiscal
year 2007 supplemental budget request and the President's fiscal year
2008 budget request. In general, the Army's typical process to develop
construction projects includes five steps: (1) Army headquarters
provides guidance to installations, (2) installation officials develop
construction projects, (3) construction projects are submitted to Army
headquarters for review and approval, (4) senior Army officials review
and approve construction projects, and (5) construction projects are
included in the Army budget for submission to Congress. For Grow the
Force projects included in the fiscal year 2007 supplemental budget
request and the President's fiscal year 2008 budget request, the Army
included all of the steps from the typical process, but completed them
in a compressed time frame, as shown in figure 1.[Footnote 11]
Figure 1: Army's Process for Developing Grow the Force Construction
Projects Included in the Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008 Budget Requests
Compared with the Typical Process:
[See PDF for image]
This figure is an illustration of the Army's Process for Developing
Grow the Force Construction Projects Included in the Fiscal Years 2007
and 2008 Budget Requests Compared with the Typical Process. The
following information is depicted:
Army process:
(1) Army headquarters provides construction guidance.
(2) Public Works officials at the installations develop construction
projects.
(3) Projects submitted to Installation Command and the Assistant Chief
of Staff for Installation Management for review.
(4) Projects are presented to the Army Military Construction Integrated
Product Team and Project Review Board and reviewed and prioritized by
senior Army leadership.
(5) The construction projects are submitted into the Army budget and
Future Years Defense Program and submitted to Congress.
Grow the Force:
The entire process to develop Grow the Force construction projects
occurred in February and March 2007. In those two months:
2 weeks for #'s 1 and 2;
6 weeks for #'s 3, 4[A], and 5.
Typical:
2 years, 3 months: Headquarters review, prioritization, ans submission
to Congress;
#'s 1 and 2 5 months; Headquarters provides guidance, installations
submit projects;
#3: 7 months;
#4: 6 months;
#5: 9 months.
Source: GAO analysis of Army data.
[A] The Army did not present Grow the Force projects to the Project
Review Board due to the compressed time frames for developing and
submitting projects.
[End of figure]
According to Army officials, projects submitted in the President's
fiscal year 2009 budget request were also developed using the steps of
the typical process in a compressed time frame. The projects were
developed in about 6 months instead of 2 years. Army officials expect
that Grow the Force projects submitted in the President's fiscal year
2010 budget request and beyond will follow the typical process and time
frames.
As with the Army, the Marine Corps' process for developing construction
projects generally takes about 2 years; however, the Marine Corps
completed the process in 6 months for Grow the Force projects included
in DOD's supplemental budget requests for fiscal years 2007 and 2008.
In general, the Marine Corps' typical process for developing
construction projects includes 6 steps: (1) Marine Corps headquarters
sends guidance on facility projects to the installations, (2)
installations develop project proposals and submit them to Marine Corps
headquarters, (3) a military construction review board prioritizes the
projects and sets funding limits, (4) the Naval Facilities Engineering
Command reviews projects and validates the cost and scope of the
projects, (5) Marine Corps headquarters reviews projects, and (6)
construction projects are included in the Department of the Navy budget
for submission to Congress. For Grow the Force projects included in the
fiscal year 2007 and fiscal year 2008 supplemental budget requests, the
Marine Corps included all of the steps from the typical process, but
completed them in a compressed time frame, as shown in figure 2.
[Footnote 12]
Figure 2: Marine Corps' Process for Developing Grow the Force
Construction Projects Included in the Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008
Supplemental Budget Requests Compared with the Typical Process:
[See PDF for image]
This figure is an illustration of the Marine Corps' Process for
Developing Grow the Force Construction Projects Included in the Fiscal
Years 2007 and 2008 Supplemental Budget Requests Compared with the
Typical Process. The following information is depicted:
Marine Corps process:
(1) Headquarters Marine Corps send guidance on facilities to
installations.
(2) Installations develop and submit proposals for construction
projects to Headquarters Marine Corps.
(3) Military Construction Review Board prioritizes projects and sets
funding limits.
(4) Headquarters Marine Corps reviews projects in terms of cost and
scope.
(5) Construction projects are included in the Department of the Navy
budget for submission to Congress.
Grow the Force:
The entire process to develop Grow the Force construction projects
occurred from September 2006 through February 2007. During that six
month period:
#1: 2 weeks;
#2: 6 weeks;
#'s 3[A], 4, and 5: 2 months;
#6: 2 months.
Typical: About 2 years;
#1: 1 month;
#2: 4 months;
#3: 2 months;
#4: 6-7 months;
$5: 1 month;
#6: 9 months.
Source: GAO analysis of Marine Corps data.
[A] Since Grow the Force projects included in the fiscal year 2007 and
fiscal year 2008 supplemental budget requests had priority for funding,
they did not go through the Military Construction Review Board;
however, a Marine Corps headquarters official notified the review board
of these projects.
[End of figure]
Similarly, the Marine Corps followed all of the steps of the typical
process for Grow the Force projects submitted in the President's fiscal
year 2008 budget request. A Marine Corps headquarters official said
that the installations did not submit new projects developed
specifically for Grow the Force in the President's fiscal year 2008
budget request. Rather, they submitted projects that were already in
the development process for future budget requests due to the limited
time available to develop projects and environmental reporting
requirements. Installations followed the typical process when
developing these projects.
According to a Marine Corps official, installations followed the
typical process to develop projects included in the President's fiscal
year 2009 budget request and had the same amount of time to develop
projects, although Marine Corps headquarters provided the guidance to
installations to develop projects about a month later than for the
typical process and installations submitted projects to Marine Corps
headquarters about a month later than usual. A Marine Corps official
expects that Grow the Force projects submitted in the President's
fiscal year 2010 budget request and beyond will follow the typical
process and time frames for developing construction projects.
As with the Army and Marine Corps, Army National Guard projects
included in the President's fiscal year 2008 budget request were
developed following the typical military construction process.
According to a National Guard Bureau official, the Army National
Guard's process to determine projects for the President's fiscal year
2009 budget request was the same as the typical military construction
process; however, the projects were developed in a compressed time
frame. The Army National Guard's Grow the Force projects submitted in
the President's fiscal year 2010 budget request and beyond will follow
the typical process and time frames.
Unlike the other components, the Army Reserve has not yet requested
Grow the Force construction funding, but Army Reserve officials said
that they have followed their typical process and time frames to
develop construction projects to be included in future budget requests.
Most Projects Support Grow the Force, but Some Lack a Clear Link to the
Initiative:
We found that nearly all of the Grow the Force construction projects
submitted by the Army and Army National Guard, and most by the Marine
Corps, in DOD's fiscal year 2007 and fiscal year 2008 budget requests
supported the initiative. Specifically, we found that 65 Army projects,
3 Army National Guard projects, and 37 Marine Corps projects supported
Grow the Force, but 13 projects did not, as shown in table 3.[Footnote
13]
Table 3: Analysis of Army and Marine Corps Projects Requested in Fiscal
Years 2007 and 2008 for Grow the Force (Dollars in thousands):
Army:
Supports Grow the Force: Number of projects: 65;
Supports Grow the Force: Total budget request: $2,260,050;
Does not support Grow the Force: Number of projects: 1;
Does not support Grow the Force: Total budget request: $14,600.
Army National Guard:
Supports Grow the Force: Number of projects: 3;
Supports Grow the Force: Total budget request: 77,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: Number of projects: 0;
Does not support Grow the Force: Total budget request: 0.
Marine Corps:
Supports Grow the Force: Number of projects: 37;
Supports Grow the Force: Total budget request: 665,560;
Does not support Grow the Force: Number of projects: 12;
Does not support Grow the Force: Total budget request: 210,220.
Total:
Supports Grow the Force: Number of projects: 105;
Supports Grow the Force: Total budget request: $3,002,610;
Does not support Grow the Force: Number of projects: 13;
Does not support Grow the Force: Total budget request: $224,820.
Source: GAO analysis of DOD data.
[End of table]
We determined that one Army project to upgrade a railroad yard at Fort
Lewis, Washington, did not support Grow the Force because the project
is in response to an existing deficiency. Specifically, the Army's
budget justification states that current facilities are overtaxed to
support deployment from Fort Lewis as a result of growth through other
Army initiatives. While approximately 2,000 personnel are being added
to Fort Lewis through Grow the Force, we assessed this project as not
supporting Grow the Force because the project was needed regardless of
whether Grow the Force occurred and we did not identify a clear link
between the additional personnel and an increased number of
deployments, which would exacerbate the current capacity issues at the
railroad yard. An official in the Office of the Assistant Chief of
Staff for Installation Management agreed with our assessment.
As a result of the compressed time frame to develop and submit
projects, we found that the 22 projects submitted by the Marine Corps
in the President's fiscal year 2008 budget request had already been
planned and were moved up from future years' budgets to meet existing
deficiencies. We determined that 10 of these projects would support the
Grow the Force increase because the existing deficiencies would be
exacerbated by having more Marines on the installation due to the Grow
the Force initiative. For example, officials from Twentynine Palms,
California, said that they had already planned to include projects in
their fiscal year 2010 and fiscal year 2011 military construction
budget requests to build operations facilities designed to house
multiple battalions due to existing deficiencies in administrative
space on the installation. While the projects were not originally
intended for the new personnel, installation officials identified these
as projects that could be moved up to meet the new requirements for
Grow the Force.
However, we determined that the remaining 12 of the 22 projects
totaling $210 million did not support the initiative because they
address existing deficiencies rather than new units associated with
Grow the Force, or address initiatives other than Grow the Force. We
found that 7 of the Marine Corps projects totaling $137 million do not
support Grow the Force because they address existing deficiencies on
the installations that needed to be addressed regardless of whether
Grow the Force occurred and we could not clearly identify that existing
capacity issues these projects were designed to address would be
exacerbated by additional personnel from Grow the Force. For example,
the Marine Corps included a $7 million wastewater system modification
project at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, which budget justification
documentation indicates is needed to limit environmental impacts and
does not make reference to capacity issues from additional personnel
through Grow the Force. Additionally, installation officials said this
project would be needed regardless of whether Grow the Force occurred
and was already planned to be included in a future budget request.
Similarly, according to project documentation and information from
installation officials, two projects to construct new operations
facilities at Camp Pendleton, California, were to address existing
quality issues, rather than capacity issues resulting from additional
Marines added to the facility through Grow the Force.
Additionally, we determined that 5 of the 12 projects that did not
support Grow the Force, totaling nearly $73 million, supported other
initiatives. For example, the Marine Corps submitted 2 projects for
physical security upgrades that support installation security and force
protection efforts, rather than supporting Grow the Force. The
remaining three projects were barracks at Camp Lejeune and Camp
Pendleton and a headquarters building at Marine Corps Base Quantico,
Virginia, totaling $58 million, that support an initiative for wounded
Marines, rather than Grow the Force.[Footnote 14] Marine Corp officials
agreed that the 3 Wounded Warrior projects do not support the Grow the
Force initiative. However, Marine Corps officials disagreed with our
assessment that the remaining 9 projects do not support Grow the Force
because they believe that each of the projects will help the
installations manage issues related to additional personnel on the
installation.
While most of the Army, Army National Guard, and Marine Corps projects
were clearly linked to Grow the Force, it may be more difficult to
identify some Marine Corps and Army Reserve projects as supporting the
initiative in future budget requests. Specifically, a Marine Corps
official expected that installations would identify future unit-
specific construction projects related to Grow the Force as supporting
the initiative in budget justification documentation. However, the
official expected that installationwide projects, including mess halls
or quality of life projects, such as child development centers, would
not be clearly linked to Grow the Force in future budget justifications
because these installationwide projects would benefit and be used by
all of the personnel on the installation, rather than only those added
through Grow the Force. Further, we found that the Army Reserve, which
submitted its first Grow the Force projects in the President's fiscal
year 2009 budget request, plans to link projects that support other
related force structure changes to Grow the Force in budget
justification documentation. Specifically, Army Reserve officials said
they plan to link projects for about 16,000 soldiers to Grow the Force
even though these personnel are not part of Grow the Force. These
16,000 soldiers are part of a related effort to realign the Army's
forces to better match operational needs, called rebalancing, and it is
not clear what the facility requirements for these personnel may
include. Unless budget justification documents clearly and
appropriately link projects to the Grow the Force initiative, Congress
will not have full visibility over the military construction projects
associated with the Grow the Force initiative.
Army's and Marine Corps' Plans to Use Temporary Facilities:
Our analysis shows that some units will arrive at installations before
facilities are constructed; however, the Army does not plan to purchase
or lease temporary facilities, while the Marine Corps plans to do so to
bridge the gap between when units are established and permanent
facilities are constructed. Our analysis shows that units will be
established at 11 Army installations prior to the completion of planned
construction projects. However, the Army has not requested funding to
purchase or lease temporary facilities to support the additional
forces. To bridge the gap, the Army plans to utilize existing space,
including space vacated by units deploying overseas, to accommodate the
additional personnel. For example, installation officials at Fort
Carson, Colorado, said they have used space temporarily vacated by
brigade combat teams deployed overseas to accommodate additional
personnel at the installation. However, the officials expressed concern
about whether they would continue to have sufficient space on the
installation to accommodate additional personnel with brigade combat
teams returning from overseas deployments. According to National Guard
Bureau officials, the Army National Guard will have units established
before the completion of facilities for those units; however, the
states, which are responsible for stationing personnel, have not yet
submitted requests for any leased facilities.
The majority of new Marine Corps units established between fiscal year
2007 and fiscal year 2011 will arrive at installations before permanent
facilities are available. The Marine Corps requested $147 million in
the President's fiscal year 2008 budget request and plans to purchase
or lease about 1,500 temporary facilities to house units while
permanent facilities are completed. The majority of these facilities
will be used at Camp Pendleton, California; Twentynine Palms,
California; and Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. For example, Camp
Pendleton requested nearly $40 million to lease some temporary
facilities, such as office trailers, and purchase other temporary
facilities, such as armories. In its fiscal year 2007 supplemental
budget request, the Marine Corps requested $18 million to purchase
temporary facilities for Twentynine Palms, including trailers, portable
armories, and storage containers, to accommodate the increase in end
strength until permanent facilities are completed. Camp Lejeune, which
is receiving the largest end strength increase from Grow the Force,
requested funding to lease trailers and purchase portable armories,
which installation officials said would be used until the permanent
facilities are complete. Each installation is responsible for
determining temporary facility needs, and Marine Corps officials noted
that temporary facility needs could vary from day to day depending on
what units are deploying or being established and the type of space
that is needed. According to installation officials we spoke with,
temporary facilities will typically be used for 3 to 7 years, depending
on the time between when units arrive at the installation and when
construction is complete. A Marine Corps headquarters official expects
that the Marine Corps will need additional funding for temporary
facilities in the future, but has not yet determined the extent of the
funding requirements.
Concluding Observations:
While most projects submitted in DOD's budget requests for fiscal years
2007 and 2008 that were identified as Grow the Force projects showed a
clear link to the Grow the Force initiative, some future Marine Corps
and Army Reserve projects may not be clearly and appropriately
identified as supporting Grow the Force. While the Marine Corps intends
to clearly identify unit-specific projects as part of the initiative,
the link between Grow the Force and installationwide projects may not
be clear. Moreover, Army Reserve officials plan to link construction
projects that do not support the end strength increase to Grow the
Force. Because the Marine Corps intends to make some linkage between
the projects and Grow the Force and the Army Reserve had not yet
submitted projects for Grow the Force at the time of our review, we are
not making a recommendation at this time.
Additionally, it is not clear whether the active duty Army can
accommodate the increased personnel through Grow the Force using only
existing facilities, particularly since the Army plans to complete its
active duty end strength increase by 2010, rather than 2013, as
originally estimated. Because we did not examine whether the Army's
temporary facilities' plan was efficient or feasible, we are not making
a recommendation at this time.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
In commenting on a draft of this report, DOD stated that it disagreed
with our assessment that 1 Army project and 12 Marine Corps projects
did not support Grow the Force. DOD did not provide sufficient
documentation that the existing capacity issues these projects were
designed to address would be exacerbated by additional personnel from
Grow the Force, which is why these projects did not meet our criteria
for supporting Grow the Force. We agree that projects that address
existing deficiencies, in addition to any number of other projects that
DOD might undertake without being explicitly established for Grow the
Force, can also enable DOD's implementation of the Grow the Force
initiative; our report does not say otherwise. It is important to note
that we did not assess whether the projects were needed on an
installation, but only whether DOD could provide sufficient
documentation that the project met our criteria for supporting Grow the
Force. For these reasons, we have not changed our report. DOD's
comments are reprinted in appendix II. DOD also provided technical
comments, which we incorporated into this report as appropriate.
We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Defense,
Secretary of the Army, Secretary of the Navy, Commandant of the Marine
Corps, and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. We will
also make copies available to others upon request. In addition, this
report will be available at no charge on GAO's Web site at [hyperlink
http://www.gao.gov].
If you or your staff have any questions concerning this report, please
contact me at (202) 512-4523 or [email protected]. Contact points for our
Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on
the last page of this report. GAO staff who made contributions to this
report are listed in appendix VI.
Signed by:
Brian J. Lepore:
Director:
Defense Capabilities and Management:
[End of section]
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
To examine the process the Army and Marine Corps used to develop
construction projects for Grow the Force, we reviewed information on
the Army's and Marine Corps' typical processes for identifying
construction projects and the Army and Marine Corps stationing plans.
Additionally, we interviewed knowledgeable officials with the Office of
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and
Logistics; the Army's Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation
Management, Operations and Plans (G-3), Program Analysis & Evaluation
(G-8), Army Force Management (G-3), Installation Management Command,
and the Army Corps of Engineers; Headquarters Marine Corps, Marine
Corps Combat Development and Integration Command, and Naval Facilities
Engineering Command; National Guard Bureau; and Army Reserve. We also
contacted and visited officials at selected Army and Marine Corps
installations, including Fort Bragg, North Carolina; Fort Carson,
Colorado; Fort Lewis, Washington; Camp Lejeune, North Carolina; Camp
Pendleton, California; and Twentynine Palms, California, to discuss the
process to determine construction requirements. We selected these
installations based on (1) the total amount of funding requested for
Grow the Force projects in DOD's budget requests for fiscal years 2007
and 2008 and (2) the number of personnel to be added to the
installation through 2013 as a result of Grow the Force.
To determine the extent to which Grow the Force projects submitted by
the Army, Marine Corps, and Army National Guard supported the
initiative, we analyzed budget justification documentation for projects
submitted for the fiscal year 2007 supplemental budget request, the
fiscal year 2008 Global War on Terrorism supplemental budget request,
and the President's fiscal year 2008 budget request. We included in our
scope only those projects that the Army and Marine Corps submitted in
the fiscal years 2007 and 2008 budget requests. Using the data in the
budget justification documentation for each project, we categorized
projects as either supporting Grow the Force or not supporting Grow the
Force based on three criteria: (1) a statement affirming the project
was in support of Grow the Force, (2) information that the project was
for a unit being established as part of Grow the Force, and (3)
reference to a capacity issue due to the additional personnel. In cases
where we could not determine whether the project met our criteria, we
sought additional information from appropriate headquarters or
installation officials. We discussed our methodology and assessment
with the appropriate Army and Marine Corps officials, who generally
agreed with our approach. While we evaluated the extent to which
projects submitted in DOD's budget requests for fiscal years 2007 and
2008 supported the Grow the Force initiative, we did not validate the
need for projects.
To examine the Army's and Marine Corps' planned use of temporary
facilities, we reviewed the Army's and Marine Corps' stationing plans
and analyzed project documentation included in the Army and Marine
Corps budget requests as well as documentation provided by the Marine
Corps installations to determine which units may need temporary
facilities. For the Army, we analyzed the difference between the date
that construction is expected to be completed and the date units are
expected to be established at the installation for unit-specific
projects included in the fiscal year 2007 supplemental budget request
and the President's fiscal year 2008 budget request to determine the
extent to which temporary facilities may be required. For the Marine
Corps we analyzed project documentation for temporary facilities and
documentation about temporary facilities provided by the installations
and compared this information to the total number of new Grow the Force
units for fiscal year 2007 through fiscal year 2011 to see how many
units would require temporary facilities. Additionally, we interviewed
knowledgeable officials in the Army, Army National Guard, and Marine
Corps headquarters and selected Army and Marine Corps installations to
discuss the overall strategy for temporary facilities, as well as
installation-specific strategies.
We conducted this performance audit from June 2007 through March 2008
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 the
evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives.
[End of section]
Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Defense:
Acquisition, Technology And Logistics:
Office Of The Under Secretary Of Defense:
3000 Defense Pentagon:
Washington, DC 20301-3000:
February 22, 2008:
Mr. Brian J. Lepore:
Director, Defense Capabilities and Management:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street, NW:
Washington, DC 20548:
Dear Mr. Lepore:
The Department of Defense (DoD) response to the GAO draft report GAO-08-
375, "Defense Infrastructure: Army and Marine Corps Grow the Force
Construction Projects Generally Support the Initiative", dated January
22, 2008 (GAO Code 351057), is enclosed.
The Department disagrees with the GAO assertion that some of the U.S.
Army (USA) and U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) military construction (MILCON)
projects do not support Grow the Force (GTF).
My point of contact for this matter is Ms. Patty Vaught, (703) 571-
9069, [email protected].
Sincerely,
Signed by:
Wayne Arny:
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense:
(Installations and Environment):
Enclosure: As stated:
[End of section]
Appendix III: Assessment of Army Grow the Force Projects:
Table 4 shows our assessment of the Army's Grow the Force projects
submitted in the fiscal year 2007 supplemental budget request and the
President's fiscal year 2008 budget request. We determined that 65 of
the Army's projects support Grow the Force, while 1 project does not
support Grow the Force because it addresses an existing deficiency that
needed to be addressed regardless of whether Grow the Force occurred.
Table 4: Assessment of Army Grow the Force Projects (Dollars in
thousands):
Fiscal year 2007 supplemental budget request:
Location: Fort Carson, CO;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: $18,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Stewart, GA;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 30,500;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Riley, KS;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 24,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Campbell, KY;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 18,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Leonard Wood, MO;
Project: Trainee Barracks Complex;
Supports Grow the Force: 77,100;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Drum, NY;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 14,600;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Bragg, NC;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 11,800;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Bliss, TX;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 38,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Hood, TX;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 18,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
President's fiscal year 2008 budget request; Does not support Grow the
Force:
Location: Fort Richardson, AK;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 42,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Richardson, AK;
Project: Barracks;
Supports Grow the Force: 36,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Richardson, AK;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 14,800;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Wainwright, AK;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 11,600;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Wainwright, AK;
Project: Barracks;
Supports Grow the Force: 20,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Huachuca, AZ;
Project: General Instructional Building;
Supports Grow the Force: 13,600;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Huachuca, AZ;
Project: Advanced Individual Training Trainee Complex;
Supports Grow the Force: 105,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Carson, CO;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 59,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Carson, CO;
Project: Barracks;
Supports Grow the Force: 53,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Carson, CO;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 13,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Carson, CO;
Project: Hospital Addition and Dental Clinic;
Supports Grow the Force: 18,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Carson, CO;
Project: Family Housing Privatization;
Supports Grow the Force: 98,300;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Stewart, GA (Hunter Army Airfield);
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 16,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Stewart, GA;
Project: Fire Station;
Supports Grow the Force: $5,500;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Stewart, GA;
Project: Barracks;
Supports Grow the Force: 25,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Stewart, GA;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 15,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Leavenworth, KS;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 23,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Leavenworth, KS;
Project: Barracks;
Supports Grow the Force: 12,800;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Riley, KS;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 43,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Riley, KS;
Project: Barracks;
Supports Grow the Force: 50,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Riley, KS;
Project: Child Development Center;
Supports Grow the Force: 8,500;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Riley, KS;
Project: Health and Dental Clinic;
Supports Grow the Force: 8,800;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Campbell, KY;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 24,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Campbell, KY;
Project: Barracks;
Supports Grow the Force: 27,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Leonard Wood, MO;
Project: Automated Multipurpose Machine Gun Range;
Supports Grow the Force: 4,150;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Leonard Wood, MO;
Project: Automated Pistol Range;
Supports Grow the Force: 2,700;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Leonard Wood, MO;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 56,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Leonard Wood, MO;
Project: Barracks;
Supports Grow the Force: 26,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Leonard Wood, MO;
Project: Dining Facility-Basic Combat Training Complex;
Supports Grow the Force: 22,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: White Sands Missile Range, NM;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 71,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Drum, NY;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 41,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Drum, NY;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 38,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Drum, NY;
Project: Barracks;
Supports Grow the Force: 61,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Bragg, NC;
Project: Barracks;
Supports Grow the Force: 73,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Bragg, NC;
Project: Unit Maintenance Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 88,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Bragg, NC;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 54,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Bragg, NC;
Project: Family Housing Privatization;
Supports Grow the Force: 59,400;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Jackson, SC;
Project: Basic Training Complex;
Supports Grow the Force: 85,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Bliss, TX;
Project: Barracks;
Supports Grow the Force: 11,400;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Bliss, TX;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 84,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Bliss, TX;
Project: Health and Dental Clinic;
Supports Grow the Force: 16,500;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Bliss, TX;
Project: Family Housing Privatization;
Supports Grow the Force: 35,600;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Hood, TX;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 46,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Hood, TX;
Project: Barracks;
Supports Grow the Force: 45,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Sam Houston, TX;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 10,600;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Sam Houston, TX;
Project: Barracks;
Supports Grow the Force: 6,600;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Eustis, VA;
Project: Barracks;
Supports Grow the Force: $32,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Eustis, VA;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 43,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Lee, VA;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 9,800;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Lee, VA;
Project: Barracks;
Supports Grow the Force: 6,900;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Myer, VA;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 8,400;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Myer, VA;
Project: Barracks;
Supports Grow the Force: 12,400;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Lewis, WA;
Project: Railroad Yard Upgrade;
Supports Grow the Force: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: $14,600.
Location: Fort Lewis, WA;
Project: Barracks;
Supports Grow the Force: 32,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Lewis, WA;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 62,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Lewis, WA;
Project: Unit Operations Facilities;
Supports Grow the Force: 51,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Location: Fort Lewis, WA;
Project: Family Housing Privatization;
Supports Grow the Force: 72,700;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Total:
Supports Grow the Force: $2,260,050;
Does not support Grow the Force: $14,600.
Total number of projects:
Supports Grow the Force: 65;
Does not support Grow the Force: 1.
Source: GAO analysis of DOD data.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Appendix IV: Assessment of Marine Corps Grow the Force Projects:
Table 5 shows our assessment of the Marine Corps' Grow the Force
projects submitted in the fiscal years 2007 and 2008 supplemental
budget requests and the President's fiscal year 2008 budget request. We
determined that 37 of the projects support Grow the Force, while 12
projects do not support Grow the Force. Of the 12 projects that do not
support Grow the Force, 7 of the projects address existing deficiencies
that needed to be addressed regardless of whether Grow the Force
occurred and 5 of the projects support another initiative.
Table 5: Assessment of Marine Corps Grow the Force Projects (Dollars in
thousands):
Fiscal year 2007 supplemental budget request:
Location: Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, AZ;
Project: Grow the Force Interim Facility Site Preparation;
Supports Grow the Force: $1,200;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Pendleton, CA;
Project: Grow the Force Interim Facility Site Preparation;
Supports Grow the Force: 39,730;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, CA;
Project: Grow the Force Interim Facility Site Preparation;
Supports Grow the Force: 4,800;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Twentynine Palms, CA;
Project: Grow the Force Interim Facility Site Preparation;
Supports Grow the Force: 27,340;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe, HI;
Project: Grow the Force Interim Facility Site Preparation;
Supports Grow the Force: 2,170;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Lejeune, NC;
Project: Mess Hall, Hadnot Point;
Supports Grow the Force: 16,100;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Lejeune, NC;
Project: 3/9 Maintenance/Operations Complex;
Supports Grow the Force: 41,490;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Lejeune, NC;
Project: Additions to Regimental Headquarters (Hadnot Point);
Supports Grow the Force: 8,600;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Lejeune, NC;
Project: Military Police Company Operations Complex (French Creek);
Supports Grow the Force: 5,800;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Lejeune, NC;
Project: Truck Company Maintenance/Operations (Hadnot Point);
Supports Grow the Force: 9,150;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Lejeune, NC;
Project: Explosive Ordnance Disposal Addition (French Creek);
Supports Grow the Force: 2,570;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Lejeune, NC;
Project: 3/9 Bachelor Enlisted Quarters (Hadnot Point);
Supports Grow the Force: 40,560;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Lejeune, NC;
Project: Grow the Force Interim Facility Site Preparation (Base-wide);
Supports Grow the Force: 50,670;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point, NC;
Project: Grow the Force Interim Facility Site Preparation;
Supports Grow the Force: 27,050;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Marine Corps Air Station New River, NC;
Project: Grow the Force Interim Facility Site Preparation (New River);
Supports Grow the Force: $850;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Fiscal year 2008 Global War on Terrorism supplemental budget request:
Location: Camp Pendleton, CA;
Project: Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance - Intelligence
Battalion Addition;
Supports Grow the Force: 1,114;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Pendleton, CA;
Project: Explosive Ordnance Disposal Operations Facility;
Supports Grow the Force: 13,090;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Pendleton, CA;
Project: Bachelor Enlisted Quarters and Mess Hall Headquarters (13)
Area;
Supports Grow the Force: 24,390;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Pendleton, CA;
Project: Military Police Company;
Supports Grow the Force: 8,240;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Pendleton, CA;
Project: Armory, Regimental & Battalion Headquarters, 53 Area (Camp
Horno);
Supports Grow the Force: 5,160;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Pendleton, CA;
Project: 11th Marine Regimental Headquarters, Armory, Bachelor Enlisted
Quarters at 43 Area (Camp Horno);
Supports Grow the Force: 34,970;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Pendleton, CA;
Project: 5th Marine Regiment Addition (San Mateo);
Supports Grow the Force: 10,890;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Pendleton, CA;
Project: Armory, Intelligence Battalion - 16 Area;
Supports Grow the Force: 4,180;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Pendleton, CA;
Project: Public Private Venture (Phase 6B);
Supports Grow the Force: 10,692;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Twentynine Palms, CA;
Project: Public Private Venture (Phase 2A);
Supports Grow the Force: 1,074;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Twentynine Palms, CA;
Project: Fiscal year 2007 supplemental budget request: : Regimental
Combat Team Headquarters Facility; Supports Grow the Force: Fiscal year
2007 supplemental budget request: : 4,440;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Twentynine Palms, CA; Camp Lejeune, NC;
Project: Maintenance/Operations Complex 2/9 (Hadnot Point);
Supports Grow the Force: 43,340;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
President's fiscal year 2008 budget request:
Location: Camp Pendleton, CA;
Project: 1st Marine Logistics Group Armory;
Supports Grow the Force: 8,150;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Pendleton, CA;
Project: 1st Marine Logistics Group, Group and Battalion Operations
Center;
Supports Grow the Force: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: $22,220;
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Check[A];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Pendleton, CA;
Project: 1st Marine Logistics Group Operations Center;
Supports Grow the Force: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: 18,160;
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Check[A];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Pendleton, CA;
Project: Bachelor Enlisted Quarters-Wounded Warrior Battalion;
Supports Grow the Force: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: 25,940;
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative:
[Check[B].
Location: Camp Pendleton, CA;
Project: Consolidated Communications and Electronics Shops;
Supports Grow the Force: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: 16,840;
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Check[A];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Pendleton, CA;
Project: Force Intelligence Operations Center;
Supports Grow the Force: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: 24,990;
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Check[A];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Pendleton, CA;
Project: Public Private Venture; Supports Grow the Force: 25,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, CA;
Project: Hanger Modification;
Supports Grow the Force: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: 26,760;
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Check[C];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Twentynine Palms, CA;
Project: Landfill;
Supports Grow the Force: $13,560;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Twentynine Palms, CA;
Project: Military Operations in Urban Terrain Facility;
Supports Grow the Force: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: $21,390;
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Check][C];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Twentynine Palms, CA;
Project: Multi-Battalion Operations Center;
Supports Grow the Force: $33,770;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Twentynine Palms, CA;
Project: Multi-Battalion Operations Center;
Supports Grow the Force: $33,650;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Twentynine Palms, CA;
Project: Armory;
Supports Grow the Force: $5,920;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Twentynine Palms, CA;
Project: Public Private Venture;
Supports Grow the Force: $50,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Lejeune, NC;
Project: Bachelor Enlisted Quarters - Wounded Warriors Battalion;
Supports Grow the Force: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: $27,270;
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative:
[Check][B].
Location: Camp Lejeune, NC;
Project: Landfill, Phase III;
Supports Grow the Force: $14,170;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Lejeune, NC;
Project: Main gate, Physical Security Upgrades;
Supports Grow the Force: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: $7,920;
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Lejeune, NC;
Project: Multi-purpose machine gun range;
Supports Grow the Force: $17,250;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Camp Lejeune, NC;
Project: Physical Security Upgrades - Piney Green;
Supports Grow the Force: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: $6,660;
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative:
[Check][D].
Location: Camp Lejeune, NC;
Project: Wastewater System Modifications;
Supports Grow the Force: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: $7,070;
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Check][E];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, SC;
Project: Consolidated Dining Facility;
Supports Grow the Force: $24,430;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: [Empty].
Location: Marine Corps Base Quantico, VA;
Project: Warfare Support Center; Supports Grow the Force:
Fiscal year 2007 supplemental budget request: [Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: $5,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
[Empty];
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative:
[Check][B].
Total:
Supports Grow the Force: $665,560;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: $210,220;
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency:
$137,430;
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: $72,790.
Total number of projects:
Supports Grow the Force: 37;
Does not support Grow the Force: Amount of project: 12;
Does not support Grow the Force: Addresses existing deficiency: 7;
Does not support Grow the Force: Supports another initiative: 5.
Source: GAO analysis of DOD data.
[A] Project addresses existing quality issues, rather than a capacity
issue that would be made worse with the addition of personnel through
Grow the Force.
[B] Project supports the Wounded Warrior initiative.
[C] Project does not support a unit established or increasing in size
due to Grow the Force and the project is part of an ongoing multiphase
project.
[D] Project supports installation security and force protection
initiatives.
[E] Project provides a backup system to limit environmental impacts,
rather than addressing a capacity issue that would be made worse with
the addition of personnel through Grow the Force.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Appendix V: Assessment of Army National Guard Grow the Force Projects:
Table 6 shows our assessment of the Army National Guard's Grow the
Force projects submitted in the President's fiscal year 2008 budget
request. We determined that all of the Army National Guard's projects
support Grow the Force.
Table 6: Assessment of Army National Guard Grow the Force Projects
(Dollars in thousands):
Fiscal year 2008 President's budget:
Project: Professional Education Center;
Location: Camp Joseph T. Robinson, AR;
Supports Grow the Force: $18,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Project: Regional Training Institute;
Location: Camp Grafton, ND;
Supports Grow the Force: $34,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Project: Regional Training Institute;
Location: Fort Pickett, VA;
Supports Grow the Force: $25,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: [Empty].
Total:
Supports Grow the Force: $77,000;
Does not support Grow the Force: $0.
Total number of projects:
Supports Grow the Force: 3;
Does not support Grow the Force: 0.
Source: GAO analysis of DOD data.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Appendix VI: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contact:
Brian J. Lepore, 202-512-4523, [email protected]:
Staff Acknowledgments:
Mike Kennedy, Assistant Director; Hilary Benedict; Renee Brown; Rebecca
Guerrero; Linda Keefer; and Elizabeth Morris made key contributions to
this report.
[End of section]
Footnotes:
[1] Unless otherwise noted, we include the active duty Army, Army
Reserve, and Army National Guard when we refer to the Army.
[2] DOD estimates the total cost of the expansion, including military
construction funding, will be about $103 billion.
[3] The Army submitted Grow the Force projects in its fiscal year 2007
supplemental budget request and the President's fiscal year 2008 budget
request. The Marine Corps submitted Grow the Force projects in its
fiscal year 2007 supplemental budget request, fiscal year 2008 Global
War on Terrorism supplemental budget request, and the President's
fiscal year 2008 budget request.
[4] H.R. Rep. No. 110-186, at 12 (2007).
[5] Brigade combat teams are the modular Army's means of maneuvering
against, closing with, and destroying the enemy. Three standard designs
make up the maneuver power of the modular Army: heavy brigade combat
teams, infantry brigade combat teams, and Stryker brigade combat teams.
In December 2007, the Army announced that it will station two infantry
brigade combat teams each at Fort Carson, Fort Bliss, and Fort Stewart.
[6] Combat support and combat service support units provide various
capabilities, including military police, engineering, and
transportation capabilities.
[7] The Army, including the Army Reserve and Army National Guard,
estimates that it will cost about $71.1 billion through fiscal year
2013 to implement the Grow the Force initiative, with military
construction comprising about 14 percent ($10.3 billion) of the total.
The Marine Corps estimates that it will cost about $32.4 billion to
implement the Grow the Force initiative, with military construction
comprising about 22 percent ($7.1 billion) of the total.
[8] We recently reported on the Army's funding plan for Grow the Force.
See GAO, Force Structure: Need for Greater Transparency for the Army's
Grow the Force Initiative Funding Plan, GAO-08-354R (Washington, D.C.:
Jan. 18, 2008).
[9] According to Army officials, facilities to support each brigade
combat team will cost about $500 million.
[10] The Army included Grow the Force construction projects in its
fiscal year 2007 supplemental budget request and the President's fiscal
year 2008 budget request. The Marine Corps included Grow the Force
construction projects in its fiscal year 2007 supplemental budget
request, fiscal year 2008 Global War on Terrorism Supplemental budget
request, and the President's fiscal year 2008 budget request.
[11] The Army did not present Grow the Force projects to the Project
Review Board due to the compressed time frames for developing and
submitting projects.
[12] Since Grow the Force projects included in the fiscal year 2007 and
fiscal year 2008 supplemental budget requests had priority for funding,
they did not go through the Military Construction Review Board;
however, a Marine Corps headquarters official notified the review board
of these projects.
[13] Appendixes III, IV, and V provide our assessment of the Army,
Marine Corps, and Army National Guard projects submitted in the fiscal
year 2007 supplemental request, fiscal year 2008 Global War on
Terrorism supplemental budget request, and the President's fiscal year
2008 budget request.
[14] In 2006, the Commandant of the Marine Corps directed that the
Marine Corps establish a Wounded Warrior Regiment to track and assist
wounded marines and sailors.
[End of section]
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance
and accountability of the federal government for the American people.
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]
and select "Subscribe to Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room LM:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
To order by Phone:
Voice: (202) 512-6000:
TDD: (202) 512-2537:
Fax: (202) 512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
E-mail: [email protected]:
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Congressional Relations:
Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, [email protected]:
(202) 512-4400:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7125:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Public Affairs:
Chuck Young, Managing Director, [email protected]:
(202) 512-4800:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
*** End of document. ***