Requirements to Comply with Environmental Laws Have Affected Some Training Activities, but Readiness Data Do Not Confirm that These Laws Hamper Military Readiness

The requirement to comply with environmental laws has affected some  training activities and how they are conducted, but our review of DOD’s  readiness data does not confirm that compliance with these laws hampers  overall military readiness. However, DOD  officials responsible for planning and facilitating training events may  implement adjustments to training events, referred to as “workarounds,”  to ensure training requirements are still accomplished. 1). For example, Fort Stewart, Fort Lewis, and Marine Corps Base Camp  Pendleton officials said trainers instruct units to pretend restricted  training areas are holy grounds, mine fields, or any other restricted area in  theatre and advise them to avoid these areas. DOD’s Use of Exemptions Has Allowed Some Training Activities to Continue and Enabled Others to Avoid Potential Delays

DOD has used the exemptions from the Marine Mammal Protection Act  and Migratory Bird Treaty Act to continue to conduct training activities  that might otherwise have been prohibited, delayed, or canceled, and the  Endangered Species Act exemptions have enabled DOD to avoid potential  training delays by providing it greater autonomy in managing its training  lands. The Navy has twice invoked exemptions from the Marine Mammal  Protection Act to continue using mid-frequency active sonar in its training  exercises that would otherwise have been prevented. DOD’s exemption to  the Migratory Bird Treaty Act eliminated the possibility of having to cancel  military training exercises, such as Navy live-fire training exercises at the  Farallon de Medinilla Target Range in the Pacific Ocean. Endangered Species and Migratory Bird Act Exemptions Have Not Adversely Affected the Environment, and the Effect of the Marine Mammal Protection Act Exemption Has Not Been Determined

On the basis of meetings with officials within and outside DOD and visits  to 17 training ranges, we found no instances where DOD’s use of  exemptions from the Endangered Species Act or Migratory Bird Treaty Act  has adversely affected the environment; however, the impact of the Marine  Mammal Protection Act exemption has not yet been determined. However, NGO officials we spoke with were  concerned that DOD’s use of its integrated natural resources management  plans in lieu of critical habitat designations may weaken oversight of  endangered species found on military lands. Moreover,  the services employ a variety of measures and conservation activities to  mitigate the effects of their training activities on endangered species  populations on their lands. In order to advise decision makers on a proposed  project, policy or program, best practices and our prior work recommend  that agencies develop a business case whereby they can assess and  demonstrate the viability of proposed initiatives. Congress Lacks a Sound Basis for Assessing the Need to Enact the Three Proposed Exemptions

Because DOD has not provided any specific examples to support  assertions that its training activities have been hindered by the  requirements of the Clean Air Act, RCRA, or CERCLA, Congress lacks a  sound basis for assessing the need to enact these three remaining  exemptions. Without a sound business  case that demonstrates the benefits and adverse effects on training and  readiness, costs, and risk associated with the proposed exemptions, DOD  will have little on which to base any further requests, and Congress will  have difficulty determining whether additional exemptions from  environmental laws are warranted. Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

To determine the effects, if any, of environmental laws and the  Department of Defense’s (DOD) use of exemptions to the Migratory Bird  Treaty Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, and the Endangered  Species Acton training activities and military readiness, we judgmentally  selected and visited 17 military training locations throughout the  continental United States, which included training sites from each military  service component, to directly observe the effects of environmental laws  and DOD’s use of exemptions on training activities, military readiness, and  the environment. We also met with officials  from other federal regulatory agencies, such as the U.S. To assess the extent to which DOD has demonstrated that proposed  statutory exemptions from the Clean Air Act; Resource Conservation and  Recovery Act; and the Comprehensive Environmental Response,  Compensation, and Liability Act would help the department to achieve its  training and readiness goals, we reviewed the department’s most recent  annual sustainable range reports, its Readiness and Range Preservation  Initiative, and other documents for elements of a sound business case.
Why GAO Did This Study

A fundamental principle of military readiness is that the military must train as it intends to fight, and military training ranges allow the Department of Defense (DOD) to accomplish this goal. According to DOD officials, heightened focus on the application of environmental statutes has affected the use of its training areas. Since 2003, DOD has obtained exemptions from three environmental laws and has sought exemptions from three others. This report discusses the impact, if any, of (1) environmental laws on DOD's training activities and military readiness, (2) DOD's use of statutory exemptions from environmental laws on training activities, (3) DOD's use of statutory exemptions on the environment, and (4) the extent to which DOD has demonstrated the need for additional exemptions. To address these objectives, GAO visited 17 training locations; analyzed environmental impact and readiness reports; and met with officials at service headquarters, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, federal regulatory agencies, and nongovernmental environmental groups.

What GAO Found

Compliance with environmental laws has caused some training activities to be cancelled, postponed, or modified, and DOD has used adjustments to training events, referred to as "workarounds," to accomplish some training objectives while meeting environmental requirements. Some DOD trainers instruct units to pretend restricted training areas are holy grounds, mine fields, or other restricted areas in theater, simulating the need to avoid specific areas and locations when deployed. GAO's review of readiness data for active duty combat units did not confirm that compliance with environmental laws hampers overall military readiness. Since 2006, the Navy has twice invoked the Marine Mammal Protection Act exemption to continue using mid-frequency active sonar in training exercises that would otherwise have been prevented. DOD's exemption from the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, authorizing the taking of migratory birds, eliminated the possibility of having to delay or cancel military training exercises, such as Navy live-fire training at the Farallon de Medinilla Target Range. The exemption to the Endangered Species Act, which precludes critical habitat designation on DOD lands, enables DOD to avoid potential training delays by providing greater autonomy in managing its training lands. On the basis of meetings with officials within and outside DOD and visits to 17 training ranges, GAO found no instances where DOD's use of exemptions from the Endangered Species Act or Migratory Bird Treaty Act has adversely affected the environment, but the impact of the Marine Mammal Protection Act exemption has not yet been determined. The services employ a variety of measures and conservation activities to mitigate the effects of training activities on the natural resources located on DOD lands. Additionally, regulatory officials GAO spoke to said DOD has done an effective job protecting and preserving endangered species and habitats on its installations. However, some nongovernmental organizations have expressed concern that the Endangered Species Act exemption allowing DOD to avoid critical habitat designations may weaken oversight from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. DOD has not presented a sound business case demonstrating the need for the proposed exemptions from the Clean Air Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. Best practices and prior GAO work recommend that agencies develop a business case that includes, among other things, expected benefits, costs, and risks associated with a proposal's implementation. However, DOD has not provided any specific examples showing that training and readiness have been hampered by requirements of these laws. Meanwhile some federal, state, and nongovernmental organizations have expressed concern that the proposed exemptions, if granted, could harm the environment. Until DOD develops a business case demonstrating the need for these exemptions, Congress will lack a sound basis for assessing whether to enact requested exemptions.