oversight

Military Housing: Costs of Separate Barracks for Male and Female Recruits in Basic Training

Published by the Government Accountability Office on 1999-03-01.

Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)

                  United States General Accounting Office

GAO               Report to Congressional Committees




March 1999
                  MILITARY HOUSING
                  Costs of Separate
                  Barracks for Male and
                  Female Recruits in
                  Basic Training




GAO/NSIAD-99-75
             United States
GAO          General Accounting Office
             Washington, D.C. 20548

             National Security and
             International Affairs Division

             B-282081

             March 1, 1999

             The Honorable John Warner
             Chairman
             The Honorable Carl Levin
             Ranking Minority Member
             Committee on Armed Services
             United States Senate

             The Honorable Floyd D. Spence
             Chairman
             The Honorable Ike Skelton
             Ranking Minority Member
             Committee on Armed Services
             House of Representatives

             In response to a mandate in the National Defense Authorization Act for
             Fiscal Year 1999, we determined each military service’s costs if required to
             provide housing for male and female recruits during basic training in
             separate structures.1 We also (1) obtained the services’ views on housing
             male and female recruits in separate barracks and (2) reviewed the
             services’ compliance with the act’s requirement to provide separate and
             secure areas for male and female recruits if they are housed in the same
             barracks.


             In June 1998, the Secretary of Defense approved plans of the military
Background   services to improve initial entry training programs and policies. The plans
             included measures to provide for the safety, security, privacy and
             appropriate supervision of recruits in barracks, a goal that responds to
             recommendations made by the Federal Advisory Committee on
             Gender-Integrated Training and Related Issues (also known as the
             Kassebaum-Baker panel). With these measures in place, the Army, Navy,
             and Air Force planned to continue housing male and female recruits on
             separate floors or in separate areas of the same barracks. The Marine
             Corps planned to continue housing male and female recruits in separate
             barracks.

             Housing for male and female recruits has also been a concern of the
             Congress. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999
             required the services to provide separate and secure housing for male and

             1
              P.L. 105-261 section 521(d), October 17, 1998.



             Page 1                                            GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
                   B-282081




                   female recruits with separate entrances and with sleeping and latrine areas
                   separated by permanent walls.2 According to the act, if an installation
                   cannot meet this requirement by October 1, 2001, it must house males and
                   females in separate facilities.

                   The services conduct gender-integrated basic training at Forts Leonard
                   Wood, Jackson, and McClellan;3 Great Lakes Naval Training Command;
                   and Lackland Air Force Base. The Marine Corps conducts
                   gender-segregated basic training at Marine Corps Recruit Depot, Parris
                   Island. The Army plans to move Fort McClellan’s gender-integrated basic
                   training to Fort Leonard Wood in fiscal year 1999 and begin
                   gender-integrated basic training at Fort Sill in May 1999.


                   We determined that the services would not incur additional construction
Results in Brief   costs if they housed male and female recruits in separate barracks. Our
                   analysis showed that on the basis of the peak number of male and female
                   recruits at each basic training installation during fiscal year 1998, the
                   barracks capacity at each installation was sufficient to house male and
                   female recruits in separate barracks. To meet personnel requirements over
                   the next 5 years, the Army and the Navy forecast an increase in the annual
                   number of recruits in basic training. If the two services’ forecast is
                   accurate, some new barracks would need to be constructed to meet
                   recruit housing requirements. However, our analysis showed that the
                   amount of new construction and the associated costs would be the same
                   whether male and female recruits are housed in the same or in separate
                   barracks.

                   The Army had previously estimated that $271 million would be needed for
                   barracks construction if male and female recruits were housed in separate
                   barracks. The Army based this estimate on the assumption that, to
                   maintain unit integrity, it would house only one training unit in a barracks.
                   Thus, the Army assumed that barracks areas vacated when females moved
                   out would not be reassigned to males from other training units and that
                   new barracks would be constructed for the females. We believe that
                   effective leadership and management oversight could overcome problems
                   in sharing of barracks space and that the added costs of constructing
                   separate buildings could thereby be avoided. The Army already assigns


                   2
                    P.L. 105-261 section 521(a), (b), and (c), October 17, 1998.
                   3
                    For the purposes of this report, we have included in basic training the Army’s One Station Unit
                   Training. This training combines basic training and advanced individual training into one continuous
                   course.



                   Page 2                                                          GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
B-282081




more than one training unit to its newer 1,200-person recruit barracks
providing each unit with a separate area of the barracks. Our analysis
assumed that recruit barracks could be shared by more than one training
unit and that each unit could be provided a separate floor or area for
housing its members.

Army, Navy, and Air Force officials opposed housing male and female
recruits in separate barracks. According to these officials,
gender-integrated training is important in order to train recruits in a
fashion mirroring the way they will operate and fight in their operational
units, and this training can be conducted most effectively and efficiently
when male and female recruits are assigned to separate areas of the same
barracks. They also said that current recruit housing practices already
provide separate and secure housing and that little, if any, additional
security would be achieved if males and females were housed in separate
buildings. They further said that placing males and females in separate
barracks would (1) increase requirements for enlisted female supervisors
to manage the barracks, thereby exacerbating an existing shortage of
females in this skill area and (2) add training costs because of the time lost
traveling between barracks whenever males and females attended the
same training event.

According to service officials, recruit barracks at gender-integrated basic
training installations, except for some at Fort Jackson, comply with the
recruit housing requirements of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1999. Male and female recruits are assigned to separate and
secure sleeping and latrine areas on different floors or in discrete sections
of the barracks. Separate entrances are provided to the male and female
housing areas, and a security watch normally controls access to the areas.
To bring Fort Jackson’s barracks into full compliance, the Army plans to
replace temporary walls in older barracks with permanent walls and
install alarmed, metal doors. These modifications are estimated to cost
about $314,000 and are scheduled to be completed by March 30, 1999.
During our January 1999 visits to the installations that conduct
gender-integrated basic training, we toured several barracks. These
barracks provided separate and secure sleeping and latrine areas for males
and females.

Appendixes I through IV contain details of our analysis of each service’s
costs if required to provide housing for male and female recruits in
separate barracks. Appendix V provides a summary of our analysis.
Appendix VI contains our objectives, scope, and methodology.



Page 3                                          GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
                     B-282081




                     In oral comments on a draft of this report, the Department of Defense
Agency Comments      (DOD) did not agree with the results of our analysis showing that no
and Our Evaluation   additional barracks construction costs would be incurred if male and
                     female recruits lived in separate barracks. DOD endorsed the Army’s view
                     that all soldiers assigned to a recruit training company should be housed
                     in the same barracks for unit cohesion and to instill values and teamwork.
                     If males and females were required to live in separate buildings, DOD stated
                     that only one company should be housed in a barracks to maintain unit
                     integrity. To accomplish this, DOD stated that additional barracks costing
                     $271 million would be needed at Army gender-integrated basic training
                     installations.

                     We agree that unit integrity is an important element of the Army’s training
                     doctrine. However, limiting a barracks to a single training unit would leave
                     large areas of some buildings unoccupied if female recruits were moved to
                     separate buildings. Spending $271 million to build additional barracks, yet
                     leaving entire barracks floors vacant would, in our opinion, be wasteful.
                     Using the Army’s own argument, the principal of unit integrity would
                     already be broken by housing female members of training units in separate
                     buildings. Housing different training companies in separate areas or on
                     separate floors of a single barracks would not appear to erode unit
                     integrity to any additional extent yet would provide more efficient use of
                     space and minimize construction costs.

                     DOD  disagreed with our conclusion that no additional construction funds
                     would be required at the Navy’s recruit training installation if males and
                     females were required to live in separate barracks. DOD reiterated the
                     Navy’s position that $32 million in added construction would be needed to
                     provide new barracks of similar design to existing barracks and to provide
                     some extra capacity needed for assignment flexibility. While maintaining
                     similar construction designs and permitting flexibility would be desirable,
                     we believe it would be wasteful to spend additional funds on facilities that,
                     in fact, are not required, simply for the purposes of conformity and
                     flexibility.

                     DOD also stated that while our analysis of Air Force barracks spaces is
                     technically correct, it assumed that all barracks would be used for housing
                     recruits. As such, DOD stated that the analysis did not consider that the Air
                     Force plans to keep one barracks closed at any given time to provide for
                     renovations. If all barracks were used for housing, the planned
                     renovations would have to be terminated and there would also be some
                     increase in costs to operate and maintain the additional building. We have



                     Page 4                                         GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
B-282081




modified our report to reflect this comment. However, the Air Force’s
recruit housing capacity numbers 7,000 and its peak recruit housing
requirement numbers 5,684. With the extra housing capacity, we believe
that, as an alternative to halting planned renovations, the Air Force could
perform the renovation work in phases by closing sections of a barracks
instead of an entire barracks at a time.

Notwithstanding its support for separate male and female barracks in the
Marine Corps, DOD stated it supported Army, Navy, and Air Force views
that male and female recruits should continue to be housed in separate
areas of the same barracks.

DOD also provided some technical comments, which we have incorporated
as appropriate.


We are sending copies of this report to other interested congressional
committees; the Secretaries of Defense, the Army, the Navy, and the Air
Force; and the Commandant of the Marine Corps. We will also make
copies available to other interested parties on request.

Please contact me at (202) 512-5140 if you or your staff have any questions
about this report. Major contributors to this report are listed in
appendix VII.




Mark E. Gebicke
Director, Military Operations
  and Capabilities Issues




Page 5                                         GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
Contents



Letter                                                                                              1


Appendix I                                                                                          8
                        Separate Barracks at Fort Leonard Wood                                      8
Separate Barracks in    Separate Barracks at Fort Jackson                                          10
the Army                Separate Barracks at Fort Sill                                             11
                        Army Estimates of Additional Barracks Costs                                12
                        Army Concerns About Separate Barracks                                      12


Appendix II                                                                                        14
                        Costs of Separate Barracks                                                 14
Separate Barracks in    Navy Concerns About Separate Barracks                                      15
the Navy                Compliance With Separate and Secure Provisions                             15


Appendix III                                                                                       17
                        Costs of Separate Barracks                                                 17
Separate Barracks in    Air Force Concerns About Separate Barracks                                 18
the Air Force           Compliance With Separate and Secure Provisions                             18


Appendix IV                                                                                        20
                        Costs of Separate Barracks                                                 20
Separate Barracks in    Marine Corps Comments About Separate Barracks                              20
the Marine Corps        Compliance With Separate and Secure Provisions                             20


Appendix V                                                                                         22
Comparison of Peak
Recruit Barracks
Requirements and
Costs for Fiscal Year
2003
Appendix VI                                                                                        23
Objectives, Scope,
and Methodology




                        Page 6                                        GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
                        Contents




Appendix VII                                                                                    25
Major Contributors to
This Report
Table                   Table V:1 Comparison of Barracks Requirements and Costs                 22




                        Abbreviations

                        DOD        Department of Defense


                        Page 7                                     GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
Appendix I

Separate Barracks in the Army


                       The Army conducts gender-integrated basic training at Fort Leonard
                       Wood, Missouri; Fort Jackson, South Carolina; and Fort McClellan,
                       Alabama.1 Because the Army is transferring Fort McClellan’s
                       gender-integrated training to Fort Leonard Wood in fiscal year 1999, we
                       included Fort McClellan’s trainee population as part of our analysis of
                       facilities at Fort Leonard Wood. The Army also plans to begin
                       gender-integrated basic training at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, in May 1999.


                       Fort Leonard Wood has 30 similar, three-story barracks. With a maximum
Separate Barracks at   capacity of 290 recruits in each building, Fort Leonard Wood’s total recruit
Fort Leonard Wood      housing capacity is 8,700 trainees.2 Females are assigned to the first floor
                       and males normally are assigned to the second and third floors.

                       During fiscal year 1998, the peak recruit population at Fort Leonard Wood
                       numbered 5,267, including 3,922 males and 1,345 females. If Fort
                       McClellan’s fiscal year 1998 training load had also been conducted at Fort
                       Leonard Wood, the peak recruit population would have increased to 7,601,
                       consisting of 5,674 males and 1,927 females. On the basis of this peak
                       population and the capacity of the existing barracks inventory, our
                       analysis showed that Fort Leonard Wood could provide housing for males
                       and females in separate buildings with no additional barracks construction
                       costs. Assigning male and female recruits to separate barracks would no
                       longer allow for all members of a training company to be housed in the
                       same barracks. Our analysis assumed that male and female barracks
                       would house recruits from more than one training company although each
                       company could be provided a separate floor for housing its members.

                       Over the next 5 years, the Army projects a substantial increase—about
                       21 percent—in its annual recruit training load. On the basis of this
                       projected increase, we estimated that Fort Leonard Wood’s fiscal
                       year 2003 peak recruit training population would be 9,292 recruits,
                       consisting of 6,725 males and 2,567 females. To meet the housing needs for
                       these recruits, Fort Leonard Wood would need additional barracks
                       capacity, even if males and females continued to be housed in the same
                       barracks. Although plans have not been finalized, the Army recognizes the

                       1
                        For the purposes of this report, we included in basic training the Army’s One Station Unit Training.
                       This training combines basic training and advanced individual training into one continuous course.
                       2
                        Because of several factors, including limited latrine and laundry facilities in the barracks, Fort
                       Leonard Wood usually assigns one training unit, called a company, with 240 recruits to each barracks.
                       However, headquarters officials responsible for the Army’s barracks facilities confirmed that each of
                       the barracks can adequately house 290 recruits. For this reason, in our analysis we used 290 as the
                       capacity of each barracks.



                       Page 8                                                          GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
                           Appendix I
                           Separate Barracks in the Army




                           need to construct additional barracks to meet future recruit housing
                           requirements.

                           Our analysis showed that Fort Leonard Wood would need 592 additional
                           barracks spaces to meet the projected recruit housing requirement in
                           fiscal year 2003 if males and females are housed in the same barracks. The
                           analysis showed that if males and females are housed in separate barracks,
                           Fort Leonard Wood would need 635 additional barracks spaces. In either
                           case, three new barracks each housing 290 recruits would be needed to
                           meet the housing requirement. For this reason, construction costs would
                           be the same whether males and females are housed in the same or in
                           separate barracks.

                           Our estimate of the cost to construct three recruit barracks similar to Fort
                           Leonard Wood’s existing barracks is about $22 million in fiscal year 2000
                           dollars. However, the Army’s current concept for new recruit barracks
                           calls for the construction of a larger complex consisting of barracks and
                           other facilities for dining, administration, training, and support functions.
                           The Army’s standard plan for this barracks complex includes housing for
                           1,200 recruits, company operations and training spaces, a battalion
                           headquarters, classrooms, a dining hall, a central energy plant, and an
                           outdoor running track. The Army estimated that such a complex, which
                           would meet the projected additional recruit housing requirements at Fort
                           Leonard Wood, would cost about $56 million. Regardless of how the Army
                           decides to meet the projected recruit housing requirement, no additional
                           barracks construction costs would be required if male and female recruits
                           were housed in separate barracks. Appendix V contains additional details
                           of our analysis.


Compliance With Separate   Army officials stated that the barracks at Fort Leonard Wood are in
and Secure Provisions      compliance with the requirement for separate and secure housing for
                           males and females. In barracks that house both males and females, males
                           normally occupy the second and third floors and females occupy the first
                           floor. Each floor contains sleeping and latrine areas and is separated by
                           permanent walls from other floors. Separate entrances are used for the
                           male and female areas and a security watch is maintained on each floor
                           when recruits are in the sleeping areas. In addition, locked doors
                           separating male and female areas are alarmed and centrally monitored
                           24 hours a day.




                           Page 9                                          GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
                           Appendix I
                           Separate Barracks in the Army




                           During our visit to Fort Leonard Wood in January 1999, we toured three
                           barracks. These barracks provided separate and secure sleeping and
                           latrine areas for males and females.


                           Fort Jackson has 16 recruit barracks with a total housing capacity of 9,320
Separate Barracks at       recruits. Six of these barracks are of the Army’s “starship” design each
Fort Jackson               with a housing capacity of 1,100 recruits.3 Ten barracks are the older
                           three-story design, with a housing capacity of 272 recruits each. Males and
                           females in starship barracks are assigned to separate bays of the buildings,
                           and males and females in the older three-story barracks are assigned
                           either to separate floors or to separate areas on the same floor of the
                           buildings.

                           During fiscal year 1998, the peak recruit population at Fort Jackson
                           numbered 7,047, consisting of 4,580 males and 2,467 females. On the basis
                           of this peak population and the existing barracks inventory, our analysis
                           showed that Fort Jackson could provide housing for males and females in
                           separate buildings with no additional barracks construction costs. Similar
                           to Fort Leonard Wood, assigning male and female recruits to separate
                           barracks would no longer allow for all members of a training company to
                           be housed in the same barracks although members of the same company
                           could be assigned to a separate floor or area in the barracks.

                           On the basis of the Army’s projected increase in its annual recruit training
                           load over the next 5 years, we estimated that Fort Jackson’s fiscal
                           year 2003 peak recruit training population would number 8,715, consisting
                           of 5,429 males and 3,286 females. On the basis of this peak population and
                           the existing barracks inventory, our analysis showed that Fort Jackson
                           could provide housing for males and females in separate buildings with no
                           additional barracks construction costs. Appendix V contains additional
                           details of our analysis.


Compliance With Separate   Army officials stated that the barracks at Fort Jackson require some
and Secure Provisions      modifications to be in complete compliance with the recruit housing
                           provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999.
                           In some of the older barracks at Fort Jackson, males and females were
                           assigned to separate areas on the same floors. The areas have separate
                           entrances and provide separate sleeping and latrine areas. However, a

                           3
                            A starship-designed barracks normally has three stories and five separate wings. The first floor is used
                           for operations and training, and the second and third floors are used for recruit housing.



                           Page 10                                                          GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
                       Appendix I
                       Separate Barracks in the Army




                       temporary wall separates the male and female areas. The wall is designed
                       so that it can be knocked down in an emergency to provide an alternative
                       exit from the area. If the wall is knocked down, an alarm sounds. Army
                       officials stated that the temporary walls will be replaced with permanent
                       walls with metal doors. Each door will have a concealed magnetic switch
                       wired to an alarm monitored 24 hours a day. The Army estimated that the
                       modifications would cost about $314,000 and would be completed by
                       March 30, 1999. To provide increased security, the Army also planned
                       modifications in the starship barracks, where males and females are
                       assigned to separate bays each containing sleeping and latrine areas. Each
                       bay has an entry door and a fire escape door. A watch is posted at the
                       entry door when recruits occupy the bay, and the fire escape door is kept
                       locked to the outside. Army officials stated that they plan to install
                       monitored security alarms on each entry door. The estimated cost for the
                       alarms was about $300,000, and the work was expected to be completed
                       by June 7, 1999.

                       During our visit to Fort Jackson in January 1999, we toured two barracks:
                       one of the starship design and one of the older design. The barracks
                       provided separate and secure sleeping and latrine areas for males and
                       females. However, as discussed above, an alarmed temporary wall
                       separated the male and female areas in the older barracks.


                       Fort Sill has five recruit barracks with a total housing capacity of 5,500
Separate Barracks at   recruits. Each of these barracks is of the newer starship design with a
Fort Sill              housing capacity of 1,100 recruits. Gender-integrated basic training at Fort
                       Sill is scheduled to start in May 1999.

                       During fiscal year 1998, the peak recruit population at Fort Sill numbered
                       3,460 males. On the basis of the Army’s projected increase in its annual
                       recruit training load, we estimated that Fort Sill’s fiscal year 2003 peak
                       male recruit training population would number 4,101. The Army estimated
                       that Fort Sill’s peak female recruit population over the next 5 years would
                       number 1,023, providing a total peak population of 5,124 recruits. On the
                       basis of these estimated numbers and the existing barracks inventory, our
                       analysis showed that Fort Sill could provide housing for males and females
                       in separate buildings with no additional barracks construction costs.
                       Appendix V contains additional details of our analysis.

                       Army officials stated that Fort Sill’s barracks are designed so that male
                       and female recruits can be housed in compliance with the separate and



                       Page 11                                        GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
                      Appendix I
                      Separate Barracks in the Army




                      secure recruit housing provisions of the National Defense Authorization
                      Act for Fiscal Year 1999. We did not visit Fort Sill during our review.


                      The Army previously estimated that $271 million would be required to
Army Estimates of     provide housing for male and female recruits in separate buildings at Forts
Additional Barracks   Leonard Wood, Jackson, and Sill. This estimate included construction of
Costs                 five new and modification of two existing starship design barracks
                      complexes. In preparing the estimate, the Army assumed that unit integrity
                      would be maintained in barracks assignments and that only one training
                      company would be housed in a barracks or barracks wing. Under this
                      assumption, significant new barracks construction would be required
                      because most barracks space vacated when females moved out would
                      remain vacant, requiring new barracks to be built to house the females. To
                      illustrate, consider a single recruit training company that occupies a
                      three-story barracks, with females assigned to the first floor and males
                      assigned to the second and third floors. Under the Army’s assumption, if
                      the females moved out, spaces on the first floor would not be reassigned
                      to male trainees from another company. With no consolidation of male
                      recruits into fewer barracks, females would have no barracks to move to,
                      requiring construction of new barracks to house nearly the entire female
                      recruit population.

                      Maintaining unit integrity is an important element of the Army’s training
                      doctrine, and we believe that different training companies could share a
                      barracks without sacrificing unit integrity by occupying separate floors or
                      areas. Such sharing already occurs in the newer starship design recruit
                      barracks. Further, assuming continuation of gender-integrated training, all
                      recruits in a training company would not be housed in the same barracks if
                      male and females recruits were required to be housed in separate
                      buildings. We believe that effective leadership and management oversight
                      could overcome problems in sharing barracks space and that the added
                      cost of new construction could thereby be avoided. Our estimates, as
                      discussed above, assumed that recruit barracks would be shared by more
                      than one training company, although each company could be provided a
                      separate floor for housing its members.


                      Army officials stated that they opposed housing male and female recruits
Army Concerns About   in separate barracks. According to the officials, gender-integrated training
Separate Barracks     is important to the Army in order to train recruits in a fashion mirroring
                      the way they will operate and fight in their operational units, and this



                      Page 12                                        GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
Appendix I
Separate Barracks in the Army




training can be conducted most effectively and efficiently when male and
female recruits are assigned to separate areas of the same barracks. In
their opinion, keeping male and female recruits in the same barracks
enhances unit integrity and command and control of the training units.

Army officials also stated that the current recruit housing practices
provide separate and secure housing for males and females and that little,
if any, additional security would be achieved if males and females were
housed in separate buildings. The officials also stated that placing males
and females in separate barracks would (1) require an increase in the
number of enlisted female supervisors needed to manage the buildings and
(2) reduce training effectiveness because of the additional coordination
required and the time lost to provide for travel between barracks
whenever males and females attended the same training event.




Page 13                                      GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
Appendix II

Separate Barracks in the Navy


                    The Navy’s sole installation for conducting recruit basic training is the
                    Navy Recruit Training Command at Great Lakes, Illinois. The Navy has no
                    plans to conduct basic training at any other location. Recruit basic training
                    at Great Lakes is gender-integrated and housing for males and females is
                    provided on separate floors of the same barracks.


                    Great Lakes operates its barracks under a waiver from the Department of
Costs of Separate   Defense (DOD) recruit barracks standard, which allows each occupant
Barracks            72 net square feet of living area. Under the waiver, Great Lakes provides
                    each barracks occupant with 50 net square feet of living area. This
                    provides Great Lakes with a maximum capacity of 16,168 recruits in 15
                    barracks. Each barracks has three floors, and each floor has four separate
                    sections, called compartments, for a total of 12 compartments. Each
                    compartment includes sleeping and latrine areas and normally houses a
                    training unit, called a division, consisting of 88 to 94 recruits. Eight
                    compartments of one barracks are used to house recruits removed from
                    the normal training sequence for medical reasons or for remedial training
                    needs.

                    During fiscal year 1998, the peak recruit population at Great Lakes
                    numbered 14,515, consisting of 11,718 males and 2,797 females. With this
                    peak training population and the existing barracks inventory, Great Lakes
                    could provide housing for males and females in separate buildings with no
                    additional barracks construction. This assumes that Great Lakes continues
                    to operate under the waiver allowing 50 net square feet of living area for
                    each recruit.

                    The Navy forecasts an increase in its recruit training load over the next
                    5 years. Between fiscal year 1999 and 2003, the Navy forecasts a peak
                    recruit training population of 17,217 recruits, consisting of 14,634 males
                    and 2,583 females. The Navy was considering options for meeting the
                    expected increase in recruit housing requirements. Although plans have
                    not been finalized, Great Lakes officials stated that one additional
                    barracks with three floors and 12 compartments would be needed,
                    providing that males and females continued to occupy separate floors of
                    the same barracks. Using standard DOD estimating methods and allowing
                    72 net square feet of living area for each recruit, we estimated that this
                    new barracks, with a maximum capacity of 1,128 recruits, would cost
                    about $32 million in fiscal year 2000 dollars.




                    Page 14                                        GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
                      Appendix II
                      Separate Barracks in the Navy




                      We estimated that if males and females were housed in separate buildings,
                      the same amount of additional housing, 1,128 spaces in 12 compartments,
                      would be required to meet the projected peak recruit populations for
                      males and females. However, instead of one building, two barracks would
                      be required—one with 752 spaces in eight compartments and one with 376
                      spaces in four compartments. Assuming that the Navy would construct an
                      eight-compartment barracks and a four-compartment barracks, the cost of
                      the two barracks would be about the same as the cost to meet the
                      increased training population with males and females in the same
                      barracks—$32 million. Thus, we concluded that no additional construction
                      costs would be required if males and females were housed in separate
                      barracks. Appendix V contains additional details of our analysis.

                      Officials at Great Lakes stated that they would prefer that any new
                      barracks constructed at Great Lakes be similar to the existing
                      12-compartment barracks. They stated that, instead of an
                      eight-compartment and a four-compartment barracks, two
                      12-compartment barracks would be needed to meet the projected peak
                      recruit populations if males and females were housed separately. The
                      officials stated that although this approach could result in excess barracks
                      capacity, recruit population projections are uncertain and some housing
                      flexibility should be included in any building plans. Constructing an
                      additional barracks would require another $32 million.


                      Navy officials at Great Lakes stated that they opposed housing male and
Navy Concerns About   female recruits in separate barracks. They stated that current practices
Separate Barracks     provide separate and secure housing for males and females and that little,
                      if any, additional security would be gained if males and females were in
                      separate buildings. The officials also stated that placing females in
                      separate barracks would require an increase in the number of enlisted
                      female supervisors needed to manage the buildings. According to the
                      officials, this would present a problem because the Navy already has a
                      shortage of females in this skill area.


                      Navy officials stated that the barracks at Great Lakes are in compliance
Compliance With       with the recruit housing provisions of the National Defense Authorization
Separate and Secure   Act for Fiscal Year 1999. In barracks that house both males and females,
Provisions            males occupy the first and second floors and females occupy the third
                      floor. Each of the four compartments on each floor contains sleeping and
                      latrine areas and is separated by permanent walls from other



                      Page 15                                        GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
Appendix II
Separate Barracks in the Navy




compartments. Each compartment has three entrances. The front and rear
entrances are kept locked and only training supervisors have keys. The
third entrance is an emergency exit in the latrine area. This entrance is
locked to the outside and is centrally monitored with an alarm system.
Also, a security watch monitors access to each compartment 24 hours a
day, and each barracks has a security watch at the main entrance to the
building on the first floor 24 hours a day.

During our visit to Great Lakes in January 1999, we toured one barracks.
The barracks provided separate and secure sleeping and latrine areas for
males and females.




Page 16                                      GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
Appendix III

Separate Barracks in the Air Force


                    The Air Force’s sole installation for conducting recruit basic training is
                    Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas. The Air Force has no
                    plans to conduct basic training at any other location. Recruit basic training
                    at Lackland is gender-integrated and housing for males and females is
                    provided in separate, discrete areas of the same barracks.


                    Lackland has seven similar, three-story barracks. Each building provides
Costs of Separate   recruit housing on the second and third floors. Each floor includes
Barracks            10 separate dormitories, and each dormitory contains sleeping and latrine
                    areas for one training unit, called a flight. Although the standard size of a
                    training unit is 48 trainees, 50 to 60 trainees are often assigned to each
                    unit. Using 50 trainees as a typical unit size, each barracks at Lackland has
                    a capacity of 1,000 trainees and Lackland’s total recruit capacity numbers
                    7,000.

                    During fiscal year 1998, the peak recruit population at Lackland numbered
                    5,684, consisting of 4,178 males and 1,506 females. Air Force officials
                    projected that the recruit training load at Lackland would remain constant
                    over the next 5 years. Therefore, no significant change in the peak number
                    of male and female recruits was expected.

                    With the existing barracks inventory and on the basis of the fiscal
                    year 1998 and projected peak male and female recruit populations, our
                    analysis showed that Lackland could provide housing for males and
                    females in separate buildings with no additional barracks construction
                    costs. Air Force officials said that while our analysis is technically correct,
                    it assumed that all barracks would be used for housing recruits. As such,
                    the analysis did not consider that the Air Force plans to keep one barracks
                    closed at any given time to provide for renovations. If all barracks were
                    used for housing, the officials said the planned renovations would have to
                    be terminated and there would also be some increase in costs to operate
                    and maintain the additional building. The Air Force estimated that about
                    $1.4 million would be required to initially open the additional building and
                    that $1.3 million would be required annually to operate and maintain the
                    building. Because Lackland’s housing capacity exceeds peak recruit
                    requirements by over 1,300 spaces, we believe that, as an alternative to
                    halting planned renovations, the Air Force could perform the renovation
                    work in phases by closing sections of a barracks instead of an entire
                    barracks at a time. Appendix V contains additional details of our analysis.




                    Page 17                                          GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
                      Appendix III
                      Separate Barracks in the Air Force




                      Air Force officials stated that they oppose housing males and females in
Air Force Concerns    separate barracks during recruit basic training. First, they noted that
About Separate        because male and female recruits are already assigned to physically
Barracks              separate and secure areas, little, if any, additional security would be
                      achieved if males and females were in separate buildings. Second, they
                      stated that assigning females to separate buildings would increase
                      requirements for female training supervisors and thereby increase training
                      costs. Third, they noted that Lackland’s barracks are not all located in the
                      same area—a distance of nearly a mile separates some of the buildings.
                      The separation is not currently a problem because males and females that
                      train together are housed in the same building. However, if housed in
                      separate buildings, travel time would be required whenever males and
                      females attended the same training event. The officials estimated that up
                      to 3 hours a day could be spent in needless travel between barracks and
                      gender-integrated training events, making it extremely difficult to continue
                      gender-integrated training. Finally, the officials stated that
                      gender-integrated training is essential to the Air Force and that segregating
                      males and females into separate barracks would adversely affect
                      gender-integrated training effectiveness and in the long run degrade
                      operational unit readiness.


                      Air Force officials stated that the barracks at Lackland are in compliance
Compliance With       with the recruit housing provisions of the National Defense Authorization
Separate and Secure   Act for Fiscal Year 1999. Male and female recruits are housed separately in
Provisions            discrete dormitories, each of which contains sleeping and latrine areas.
                      Each dormitory has a separate entrance, and access is controlled by a
                      watch posted at the door. The main entrance to each barracks also has a
                      security watch 24 hours a day and all entryways and fire exits are
                      monitored by surveillance cameras.

                      Air Force officials stated that one modification is planned for Lackland’s
                      barracks to increase security. Currently, a door connects the dormitories
                      in each barracks. The doors are solid wood, 2 inches thick, and are
                      alarmed and kept locked at all times. Keys to the doors are controlled by
                      training supervisors. The doors were included in the original construction
                      of the barracks because the buildings were designed for use as emergency
                      shelters, if needed. To obtain increased security, Lackland plans to remove
                      the doors and have the passageways sealed with cinder block walls. This
                      work will be done during planned renovations of the barracks, and all
                      work is expected to be completed by March 2001. The Air Force estimated
                      that this work will cost about $87,500.



                      Page 18                                        GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
Appendix III
Separate Barracks in the Air Force




During our visit to Lackland in January 1999, we toured one barracks. The
barracks provided separate and secure sleeping and latrine areas for males
and females.




Page 19                                      GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
Appendix IV

Separate Barracks in the Marine Corps


                      The Marine Corps conducts recruit basic training for males and females at
                      only one installation—the Marine Corps Recruit Depot, Parris Island,
                      South Carolina. The Marine Corps has no plans to conduct basic training
                      for females at any other location. Recruit basic training at Parris Island is
                      gender separate and housing for male and female recruits is primarily
                      provided in separate barracks.


                      Parris Island has 25 barracks with a total housing capacity for 8,324
Costs of Separate     recruits. Normally, 18 buildings with a capacity of 6,772 trainees are
Barracks              available for male recruits, and 6 buildings with a capacity of 1,152
                      trainees are available for female recruits. One building is used for male
                      and female recruits assigned to the Support Battalion for medical
                      rehabilitation, physical conditioning, or remedial swim training. This
                      building has eight separate bays, and females are assigned to one of these
                      bays.

                      During fiscal year 1998, the peak recruit population at Parris Island
                      numbered 6,505, consisting of 5,708 males and 797 females. Marine Corps
                      officials projected that the recruit training load at Parris Island would
                      remain constant over the next 5 years. Therefore, no significant change in
                      the peak number of male and female recruits was expected.

                      With one exception, the Marine Corps already houses male and female
                      recruits in separate barracks. If required, Parris Island has sufficient
                      barracks capacity to move the females in the one shared barracks to a
                      separate building. Thus, Parris Island would need no additional barracks
                      construction if the services were required to house males and females in
                      separate buildings.


                      The Marine Corps does not conduct gender-integrated basic training
Marine Corps          similar to the other services. Marine Corps officials stated that they
Comments About        support separate barracks for males and females during Marine Corps
Separate Barracks     recruit basic training.

                      Marine Corps officials stated that Parris Island is in compliance with the
Compliance With       Fiscal Year 1999 National Defense Authorization Act’s requirements for
Separate and Secure   separate and secure housing for males and females. Only 1 of the 25
Provisions            barracks at Parris Island houses both males and females. In this building,
                      males and females are assigned to separate bays with separate entrances
                      and separate sleeping and latrine areas. The bays are separated by



                      Page 20                                         GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
Appendix IV
Separate Barracks in the Marine Corps




permanent walls, and the female bay has alarmed doors and a security
watch posted when occupied. During our visit to Parris Island in
January 1999, we toured five barracks, including the barracks that houses
males and females. The barracks provided separate and secure sleeping
and latrine areas for males and females.




Page 21                                       GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
Appendix V

Comparison of Peak Recruit Barracks
Requirements and Costs for Fiscal Year 2003

                                         In our analysis of each installation conducting gender-integrated training,
                                         we determined the costs of providing housing for male and female recruits
                                         in the same barracks and in separate barracks. The analysis matched the
                                         peak number of barracks spaces required over the next 5 years with the
                                         number of barracks spaces available. If additional spaces would be needed
                                         to meet housing needs, we estimated the costs to construct the barracks.
                                         As shown in the following table, the analysis showed that the amount of
                                         new construction and the associated costs would be the same whether
                                         male and female recruits are housed in the same or in separate barracks.


Table V:1 Comparison of Barracks Requirements and Costs
Dollars in millions
                                                                      Males and
                                                                   females in the          Males and females in separate barracks
Installation            Barracks space                            same barracks                  Males             Females             Total
Fort Leonard Wood       Required                                             9,292                6,725               2,567            9,292
                        Available                                            8,700                6,090               2,610            8,700
                        Additional needed                                      592                  635                    0             635
                        GAO estimated cost                                     $22                  $22                  $0              $22
Fort Jackson            Required                                             8,715                5,429               3,286            8,715
                        Available                                            9,320                6,020               3,300            9,320
                        Additional needed                                         0                    0                   0                 0
                        GAO estimated cost                                       $0                  $0                  $0                 $0
Fort Sill               Required                                             5,124                4,101               1,023            5,124
                        Available                                            5,500                4,400               1,100            5,500
                        Additional needed                                         0                    0                   0                 0
                        GAO estimated cost                                       $0                  $0                  $0                 $0
Great Lakes Naval       Required                                            17,217              14,634                2,583           17,217
Training Commanda
                        Available                                           16,168              13,912                2,256           16,168
                        Additional needed                                    1,049                  722                 327            1,049
                        GAO estimated cost                                     $32                  $21                 $11              $32
Lackland Air Force      Required                                             5,684                4,178               1,506            5,684
Base
                        Available                                            7,000                5,000               2,000            7,000
                        Additional needed                                         0                    0                   0                 0
                        GAO estimated cost                                       $0                  $0                  $0                 $0
                                         Note: The Marine Corps is not included in the table because male and female recruits are already
                                         in separate barracks.
                                         a
                                            Great Lakes data is fiscal year 2002, its projected peak year.




                                         Page 22                                                             GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
Appendix VI

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology


              As directed by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
              1999, we determined each military service’s costs if required to provide
              housing for male and female recruits during basic training in separate
              structures. We also (1) obtained the services’ views on housing male and
              female recruits in separate barracks and (2) reviewed the services’
              compliance with the act’s requirement to provide separate and secure
              areas for male and female recruits if they are housed in the same barracks.

              We performed work at the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the
              headquarters of each military service. We also visited each military
              installation, except Fort McClellan, that conducts recruit basic training
              concurrently for males and females—Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri; Fort
              Jackson, South Carolina; Great Lakes Naval Recruit Training Command,
              Illinois; Lackland Air Force Base, Texas; and Marine Corps Recruit Depot,
              Parris Island, South Carolina. We did not visit Fort McClellan because the
              Army plans to transfer its gender-integrated basic training function to Fort
              Leonard Wood during the summer of 1999. We also did not visit Fort Sill,
              which is scheduled to begin gender-integrated training in 1999, but we did
              obtain and review applicable information from the installation. For the
              purposes of this report, we included in basic training the Army’s One
              Station Unit Training. This training combines basic training with advanced
              individual training into one continuous course.

              To determine the costs of providing housing for male and female recruits
              in separate buildings, we interviewed responsible agency personnel and
              reviewed information from each service pertaining to (1) male and female
              peak recruit training populations for fiscal year 1998 and projected male
              and female peak recruit populations for fiscal years 1999-2003; (2) existing
              and planned recruit barracks inventories, capacities, and assignment
              practices; and (3) military construction costs for recruit barracks. At each
              installation visited, we discussed with local officials how the recruit
              training population could be matched with the existing barracks inventory
              to provide separate housing for males and females and whether additional
              barracks construction would be required. If additional barracks were
              required, we independently estimated construction costs using DOD’s
              standard methods for estimating costs of military construction projects.1


              1
               We estimated barracks construction costs on the basis of the square footage of each required
              barracks. First, to determine square footage, we multiplied our estimate of the number of required
              additional barracks spaces by the DOD maximum gross building square feet allowed for each recruit
              barracks space. Then, to determine construction costs, we multiplied the square footage by the DOD
              standard recruit barracks construction cost per square foot for fiscal year 2000. Finally, using DOD and
              service data, we adjusted this amount for geographic area cost differences and added cost allowances
              for support facilities; contingencies; and supervision, inspections, and overhead.



              Page 23                                                         GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
Appendix VI
Objectives, Scope, and Methodology




To obtain the services’ views on housing male and female recruits in
separate barracks and to review the services’ compliance with the act’s
provisions requiring separate and secure housing, we discussed the issues
with officials at service headquarters and at the installations conducting
basic training concurrently for males and females. Also, during our visits
to the basic training installations, we toured barracks to observe how the
provisions were being met. If compliance had not been achieved, we
obtained information concerning the installation’s plans for meeting the
provisions.

We conducted our review between December 1998 and February 1999 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.




Page 24                                       GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
Appendix VII

Major Contributors to This Report


                        Carol Schuster, Associate Director
National Security and   William Solis, Assistant Director
International Affairs
Division, Washington,
D.C.
                        Gary Phillips, Evaluator in Charge
Norfolk Field Office    James Ellis, Senior Evaluator
                        Sharon Reid, Senior Evaluator




(703270)                Page 25                              GAO/NSIAD-99-75 Military Housing
Ordering Information

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.
Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the
following address, accompanied by a check or money order
made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when
necessary. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also.
Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address
are discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office
P.O. Box 37050
Washington, DC 20013

or visit:

Room 1100
700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)
U.S. General Accounting Office
Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000
or by using fax number (202) 512-6061, or TDD (202) 512-2537.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and
testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any
list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a
touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on
how to obtain these lists.

For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET,
send an e-mail message with "info" in the body to:

info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web Home Page at:

http://www.gao.gov




PRINTED ON    RECYCLED PAPER
United States                       Bulk Rate
General Accounting Office      Postage & Fees Paid
Washington, D.C. 20548-0001           GAO
                                 Permit No. G100
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested