Subsequently,  the House conference report accompanying the 2004 military construction  appropriation bill also directed the department to prepare comprehensive  master plans with yearly updates through fiscal year 2009. The Senate report also directed GAO to  monitor the comprehensive master plans being developed and  implemented for the overseas regional commands and to provide the  congressional defense committees with a report each year giving an  assessment of the plans. The Senate report also directed GAO to review DOD’s master  planning effort for Guam as part of its annual review of DOD’s overseas  master plans. Master Plans Generally Reflect Changes in Overseas Basing Strategies and Requirements, Key Challenges, and Our Prior Recommendations

The fiscal year 2008 master plans, which provide infrastructure  requirements at U.S. military facilities in each of the overseas regional  commands’ area of responsibility, reflect changes—to include recent  decisions in the U.S. overseas defense basing strategies and  requirements—and they generally describe the challenges that DOD faces  in implementing the plans as well as our prior recommendations for  improving the plans. U.S. First, the master plans do not  address the issue of residual value—the value of property being turned  over to the host nation based on its reuse of property. Consequently, as  we have noted in the past, DOD officials believe that residual value  cannot be readily predicted and therefore should not be assumed in the  master plans. Second, while PACOM’s master plan provided details on other challenges,  it did not describe the challenges the command faces in addressing  training limitations for the Seventh Air Force in South Korea, although  senior officials told us that these limitations could cause the United States  to pursue alternatives, such as training in other locations, downsizing, or  relocating, which could affect overseas basing plans. Even though our prior recommendations have not been fully addressed,  we continue to believe that they have merit and that Congress would  benefit from disclosure of this information. Planning Effort for Guam Is in Its Initial Stages with Many Key Decisions and Challenges to Be Addressed

DOD’s planning effort for the buildup of military forces and infrastructure  on Guam is in its initial stages, with many key decisions and challenges yet  to be addressed. Third, DOD officials said that additional time is needed to fully  address the challenges related to funding uncertainties, operational  requirements, and Guam’s unique economic and infrastructure  requirements. According  to Navy officials, a new carrier pier with additional capabilities will need  to be constructed in order to accommodate this plan. However, we have previously recommended that overseas regional  commands address the extent to which they are seeking residual value  compensation for U.S. capital improvements at installations returned to  host nations and that PACOM explain how it plans to address existing  training limitations that may affect infrastructure and funding  requirements. In July 2006, the Senate report accompanying the fiscal year 2007 military  construction appropriation bill directed DOD to provide a master plan on  the military buildup in Guam. Completion of a Guam master plan depends on the outcome  of the environmental impact assessments and statement that could take up  to 3 years to complete, on decisions that finalize the exact size and  makeup of the forces to be moved to Guam, and on efforts that address  challenges associated with the military buildup, including funding,  operational requirements, and local economic and infrastructure needs. However, to further facilitate  annual review and oversight by Congress and other users of the overseas  master plans, Congress should consider requiring the Secretary of Defense  to ensure that (1) future overseas master plans address the extent to  which the regional commands are seeking residual value compensation for  U.S. capital improvements at installations returned to host nations and (2)  future PACOM plans address existing training limitations in its area of  responsibility and the potential effects of those limitations on  infrastructure and funding requirements. To help ensure the best application of limited federal funds and the  leveraging of all available options for supporting the military buildup on  Guam until DOD prepares a master plan, Congress should consider  requiring the Secretary of Defense to report periodically to all the defense  committees on the status of DOD’s planning efforts for Guam, including  DOD’s efforts to complete its environmental impact statement, identify the  exact size and makeup of the forces to be moved to Guam and the  associated infrastructure required, and address the various challenges  associated with the military buildup.
Why GAO Did This Study

Over the next several years, implementation of the Department of Defense's (DOD) Integrated Global Presence and Basing Strategy will result in the realignment of U.S. forces and the construction of new facilities costing billions of dollars at installations overseas. The Senate and House reports accompanying the fiscal year 2004 military construction appropriation bill directed GAO to monitor DOD's overseas master plans and to provide congressional defense committees with assessments each year. The Senate report accompanying the fiscal year 2007 military construction appropriation bill directed GAO to review DOD's master planning effort for Guam as part of these annual reviews. This report, first, examines how the overseas plans have changed and the extent to which they address the challenges faced by DOD and, second, assesses the status of DOD's planning effort and the challenges associated with the buildup of military forces and infrastructure on Guam.

What GAO Found

The fiscal year 2008 overseas master plans, which provide infrastructure requirements at U.S. military facilities in each of the overseas regional commands' area of responsibility, have been updated to reflect U.S. overseas defense basing strategies and requirements as well as GAO's prior recommendations for improving the plans. The plans also address DOD's challenges to a greater extent than they did in previous years. However, two areas continue to be of concern. First, the master plans do not address the issue of residual value--that is, the value of property being turned over to the host nation based on its reuse of property. Although DOD officials believe that residual value cannot be readily predicted and therefore should not be in the master plans, compensation received for U.S capital improvements at installations returned to host nations could affect U.S. funding requirements for overseas construction. Second, the master plan for PACOM, which provides details on the command's training limitations in Japan and several other challenges, does not provide details regarding training limitations for the Air Force in South Korea, which could cause the United States to pursue alternatives, such as training in other locations, downsizing, or relocating that could affect overseas basing plans. Without addressing the residual value issue and providing details on these training challenges, DOD cannot provide Congress a comprehensive view enabling it to make informed decisions regarding funding. GAO has previously recommended that overseas regional commands address residual value issues and that PACOM explain how it plans to address existing training limitations. Because these recommendations have not been fully addressed, GAO considers them to be open and believes that they still have merit. DOD's planning effort for the buildup of military forces and infrastructure on Guam is in its initial stages, with many key decisions and challenges yet to be addressed. Among the challenges to be addressed is completing the required environmental impact statement, initiated in March 2007. According to DOD officials, this statement and associated record of decision could take up to 3 years to complete and will affect many of the key decisions on the exact location, size, and makeup of the military infrastructure development--decisions needed to develop a master plan for the military buildup on Guam. DOD and the services are still determining the exact size and makeup of the forces to be moved to Guam, needed in order to identify the housing, operational, quality of life, and services support infrastructure required for the Marine Corps realignment and the other services' buildup. DOD officials said that additional time is needed to fully address other challenges associated with the Guam military buildup, including funding requirements, operational requirements, and community impact. Until the environmental assessment and initial planning efforts are completed, Congress will need to be kept abreast of developments and challenges affecting infrastructure and funding decisions to make appropriate funding and oversight decisions.