Consolidation at Ingleside Has Not Been Justified
NSIAD-93-147: Published: Feb 16, 1993. Publicly Released: Feb 16, 1993.
- Full Report:
Pursuant to a legislative requirement, GAO evaluated the Navy's plans to consolidate its mine warfare forces at Ingleside, Texas, focusing on the Navy's justifications for consolidating forces.
GAO found that: (1) the consolidation of mine warfare forces at Ingleside was substantially more costly than consolidation of alternative sites; (2) the Navy made cost adjustments to its study on alternative sites, which considerably narrowed the range of single-site cost estimates while increasing the cost of dual-site alternatives; (3) the cost adjustments were unwarranted or inconsistent and did not identify operating and support cost differentials, such as housing costs for personnel; (4) the Navy did not consider the desirability of locating mine warfare forces on both coasts so that training would be integrated with the fleets they are supposed to protect; (5) the Navy failed to show how stated operational, training, and environmental benefits associated with the Ingleside site justified its higher cost; (6) the Navy did not consider how planned downsizing and relocations of fleets and squadrons would free space for mine warfare forces at some alternative sites; and (7) the Ingleside site did not offer any transit time advantages over other sites.
Recommendation for Executive Action
Status: Closed - Not Implemented
Comments: The Navy, contrary to GAO's recommendation, continued to move ships and forces to Ingleside, Texas. The action is nearly completed. GAO has initiated a general survey of the Navy's mine warfare operations (code 73077) and will evaluate the operational readiness of the Mine Warfare Command.
Recommendation: Because the Secretary's report does not justify locating the mine warfare forces at Ingleside, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Navy to withhold implementation of such plans until: (1) the National Academy of Sciences reports the results of its study; and (2) the Navy reports a comparative evaluation and analysis of homeport alternatives, including consideration of operating and support cost differentials and relative effectiveness scores.
Agency Affected: Department of Defense