Alabama ARW. Anniston Army Depot. Fort Rucker. Redstone Arsenal. Arizona ARW. Davis-Monthan AFB. Fort Huachuca. Luke AFB. MCAS Yuma. Yuma Proving Ground. Arkansas WG. Little Rock AFB. Pine Bluff Arsenal. California RQW. Beale AFB. Camp Parks. Camp Pendleton. Defense Distribution Depot San Joaquin. Edwards AFB. Fort Hunter Liggett. Fort Irwin. Los Angeles AFB. MCLB Barstow. March ARB. Marine Corps Air Station Miramar.
Naval Air Facility El Centro. Naval Air Station Lemoore. Naval Base Coronado. Naval Base Point Loma. Naval Base San Diego. Naval Support Activity Monterey. Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach.
Travis Air Force Base. Vandenberg AFB. Colorado WG. Buckley AFB. Fort Carson. Peterson AFB. Schriever AFB. USAF Academy. Connecticut AW. Naval Submarine Base New London. Delaware th AW. Dover AFB. Naval Support Activity Washington.
Pentagon - Air Force. Florida FW. Eglin AFB. Hurlburt Field. MacDill AFB. Naval Air Station Jacksonville. Naval Air Station Key West. Naval Air Station Pensacola. Naval Air Station Whiting Field. Naval Station Mayport. Naval Support Activity Orlando. Naval Support Activity Panama City. Patrick AFB. Tyndall AFB.
Army Garrison-Miami. Georgia ACW. Fort Benning. Fort Gordon. Fort Stewart. Hunter Army Airfield. Marine Corps Logistics Base - Albany. Moody AFB. Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay. Robins AFB. Idaho FW. Mountain Home AFB. Illinois ARW. Naval Station Great Lakes. Rock Island Arsenal.
Scott Air Force Base. Indiana FW. Naval Support Activity Crane. Iowa WG. Kansas IW. Fort Leavenworth.
Fort Riley. McConnell AFB. Kentucky AW. Fort Campbell. Fort Knox. Louisiana FW. Barksdale Air Force Base. Fort Polk. Maine ARW. Portsmouth Naval Shipyard. Maryland WG. Aberdeen Proving Ground. Fort Detrick. Fort George G. Meade - Navy. Naval Air Station Patuxent River.
Naval Support Activity Annapolis - U. Naval Academy. Massachusetts IW. Hanscom AFB. Westover ARB. Michigan ATKW. Hart-Dole-Inouye Federal Center. Minnesota AW. Mississippi AW. Columbus AFB. Keesler AFB. Naval Air Station Meridian. Naval Construction Battalion Center Gulfport. Stennis Space Center. Missouri BW. Fort Leonard Wood. Whiteman AFB. Montana AW. Malmstrom Air Force Base. Nebraska ARW. Offutt AFB. Nevada AW. Creech AFB.
Naval Air Station Fallon. Nellis AFB. New Hampshire ARW. New Jersey WG. Naval Weapons Station Earle. Picatinny Arsenal. New Mexico SOW. Cannon AFB. Holloman AFB. Kirtland Air Force Base. New York AW. Fort Drum. Fort Hamilton. Naval Support Activity Saratoga Springs. North Carolina AW. Camp Lejeune. Fort Bragg. Pope Army Airfield. Seymour Johnson AFB. Includes all federal buildings on a base, including those leased by the federal government.
Includes land owned or used by the federal government. For example, the number of employees at Air Force bases averaged 7,, and the number of employees at Navy, Army, Marine Corps, and joint bases averaged 8,, 13,, 12,, and 23,, respectively.
There are also significant variations between the bases within each service. For instance, Air Force bases range in size from Arnold Air Force Base, a research and development base with about military and civilian employees, to Nellis Air Force Base, an aviation combat training base with about 13, employees.
The agency then used statistical techniques to explore how particular characteristics of each base, such as its size or geographic location, related to its BOS costs. CBO calculated the independent relationships between a number of base characteristics and BOS costs at bases.
Branch of Service. Many of the activities and equipment on a base reflect the primary mission of units hosted there. For example, bases hosting aviation units have runways and those hosting ground combat units often have large areas for training. To assess how mission is associated with BOS costs, CBO considered base type: aviation, ground, logistics, research and development, naval, space-related, training, or other.
Some U. Long shipping distances could also contribute to high BOS costs at those bases. However, some of those bases receive support from the host nation, reducing the costs borne by the U.
Share of Transient Personnel. The base population data available to CBO exclude personnel who are at the base for less than six months. To account for the possible effect of such transient personnel on BOS costs, CBO used an indicator to designate bases that have a few thousand or more transient personnel a year.
CBO obtained that information from discussions with DoD officials and a review of DoD websites that provide details about missions and current activities on bases.
Bases that were identified as having many transient personnel include those that provide training as a primary mission and those that host other individual or unit training programs. Climate Extremes. Extreme temperatures and large amounts of precipitation affect BOS costs by requiring above-average expenditures for such services as snow removal in cold climates particularly on bases with runways or upkeep of cooling systems in hot climates.
Using information on world climate zones, CBO constructed an indicator for bases in arctic or hot climates to account for the effect of such climates on BOS costs. Cost of Living. The omitted characteristics include:. CBO adjusted the data provided by the services to more closely reflect BOS activities at certain bases. When such bases were separately allocated BOS funds by their parent services, CBO combined those amounts under the corresponding joint designation.
Physical Size. The report includes information on the number of buildings, square feet of space in those buildings, land area acreage , and location for each site. A base may consist of one or more sites. The number and composition of the personnel who work or live on a base greatly influence the provision of services such as housing, health care, and education, and others that support morale, welfare, and recreation. That number excludes contractors, family members, and transient personnel on a base.
Additional Information. Using information obtained from various DoD websites, discussions with DoD officials, and visits to selected bases, CBO compiled data on other relevant base features—the primary mission of resident units, related DoD bases or sites, the local cost of living, and the local climate. However, some bases with small populations have annual BOS costs that are relatively high.
Bases with more people generally have more square feet of building space. Bases with large populations do not necessarily have proportionally higher BOS costs—for example, Naval Station Norfolk—because there are some fixed costs to operating a base. CBO found that, on average, bases with larger populations do not have proportionately larger annual BOS costs, suggesting that there is an economy of scale for BOS costs related to personnel.
Not only are fixed costs spread among a larger population, but employees at larger bases may have more expertise in specific tasks, increasing the overall efficiency and productivity of providing services. As a result, a base with twice as many employees as another has BOS costs that are, on average, less than twice as high.
CBO divided bases into six categories based on population:. In calculating those amounts, CBO did not adjust BOS costs for other base characteristics such as the branch of service hosting the base or the primary mission of the units it supports. Even when BOS costs are adjusted for those characteristics, as discussed in the next section of this report, the basic finding of an economy of scale persists.
That result is consistent with the notion that an economy of scale is operating at larger bases, so that an increase in population leads to a less-than-proportional increase in BOS costs. For another measure of size—building space—CBO found no economies of scale. The cost of BOS services to support additional building space remained constant, regardless of how large the base was.
CBO found that, on average, total BOS costs for an additional employee were much lower at large bases than at smaller ones. When employees are assigned to a new base, the additional BOS costs are generally less the larger the base is. That finding suggests that there are high fixed costs to operate a base. Future work could expand the analysis by collecting data for each base over multiple years. Analyzing data for two or more years could more clearly show the effect of changes in size on the growth of BOS costs at particular bases.
In addition to size, the branch of service that operates the base also correlated with BOS costs. The finding that Navy bases were associated with lower BOS costs may reflect their nature: They provide pier support to relatively self-sufficient ships, which, for example, supply their own housing and meals for parts of the year. For joint bases, lower costs might be an indication of efficiencies gained from resource sharing among two or more military services.
Includes bases that host units and organizations that provide administrative and miscellaneous support. Each of these characteristics is compared with its opposite; for example, bases outside the United States are compared with those inside the country. Space-related, naval, and administrative-support or miscellaneous-support bases tended to have greater annual BOS costs—by 56 percent, 40 percent, and 42 percent, respectively—than training bases see Table 3. Those results could be related to additional costs for security and specialized equipment on those bases.
Lastly, bases in extremely hot and dry, extremely hot and humid, or extremely cold and snowy climates were associated with annual BOS costs that were about 27 percent higher than costs at bases with more moderate climates. The higher costs could result from the additional resources needed for climate control, unusual facility deterioration, and other related problems. For example, they could be used to explore how BOS costs might change when new units are added to a base or when existing units are relocated among bases.
When an existing unit moves from one base to another, BOS costs change at both bases. The net effect of the move would depend on specific characteristics of the two bases, such as size and location. In its calculations, CBO averaged the personnel and building space requirements for the three types of BCTs: armored, infantry, and Stryker.
Appendix B examines the effect of unit relocations on BOS costs, focusing on how they differ when units are moved to or from bases outside the United States.
The cost to support an additional brigade combat team is expected to be less at large bases than at smaller bases. To illustrate the implications of relocating a BCT from one base to another—which would reduce costs at the former host base and increase costs at the new one—CBO considered two scenarios:. In general, relocating a BCT from a small or very small base to a larger one would lead to lower overall BOS costs under both scenarios.
Negative numbers shaded represent reduced costs. Positive numbers represent increased costs. Under Scenario 1, moves to bases of a different size that would not involve relocating units from small or very small bases would all increase annual BOS costs see Table 4.
Under Scenario 2, moves from smaller bases to larger ones would give rise to greater savings at the former host base because some facilities would no longer be supported. Those results are general and intended as a starting point.
The number and location of those bases change little from year to year. DoD refers to the number of active-duty military personnel on September 30, the last day of the fiscal year, as end strength. That sample consists of bases for which sufficient information was available. Joint bases are used by multiple military services and hosted by one service.
They are consolidations of separate bases next to or near each other that were formerly operated by different services. Because of their unique nature, CBO grouped joint bases in their own distinct category. For an example of previous research in this vein, see Joseph G. Bolten, John Halliday, and Edward G. Building space includes square footage in buildings owned or leased by the federal government, as well as federal buildings that fall in neither of those categories. Acreage includes government-owned land, public land, public land withdrawn for military use, licensed and permitted land, and foreign land used by DoD.
Common climate-zone demarcations include polar or arctic, temperate, arid, tropical, Mediterranean, and mountainous categories. CBO created the indicator using long-term temperature and other climate-related information obtained from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Army Criminal Investigation Command there. Previous editions of the report are available at www. In addition, depending on the base, a number of other personnel flow through on a transient basis for such things as training or temporary duty.
However, CBO identified bases with a relatively large transient population of students and other trainees at least a few thousand annually and included that as a characteristic of those bases in its analysis. Land area and building space also serve as measures of size. However, land area is less precise for that purpose because many bases include large portions of unused land. Building space, which better indicates the utilized portion, is itself determined, for the most part, by population.
Units and other transient personnel rotate in and out of some bases located outside the United States, such as the Marine Corps installations complex in Okinawa, Japan shown in Figure 4. To support those large transient populations, those bases may, therefore, have relatively high building space or BOS costs for a relatively small number of full-time personnel. Note that, as a result of this relationship, the slope of the trend line in Figure 5 is less than 45 degrees. The magnitude of fixed costs is indicated by the large intercept in the estimated equation in Table A Building space on some bases may include family housing, which is funded through a separate appropriation.
CBO found similar relationships for other base types—ground, aviation, logistics, and research and development—but those effects were not statistically significant. That is, those effects were weak enough that they could also have occurred by chance. A large number of transients and a relatively high cost of living also tend to be associated with higher BOS costs, but those effects are not statistically significant.
There may be onetime costs such as environmental cleanup at the base that loses the BCT, and onetime costs at the new host such as the costs of moving the unit and constructing facilities. Estimating those onetime costs is beyond the scope of this report.
T he Congressional Budget Office used a regression model to estimate the correlation between annual base operations support BOS costs and base characteristics.
0コメント