Defense Needs Better System for Assuring Adequate Security at Reasonable Cost on U.S. Bases

Gao ID: PLRD-81-1 March 6, 1981

The military services spend enormous amounts of money annually for people, equipment, research, and for programs to upgrade facilities to maintain the physical security of military people and equipment. An evaluation was performed of the system for providing physical security at U.S. military bases.

Although the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Review has the authority and responsibility to establish uniform physical security policy, the Department of Defense (DOD) and its Physical Security Review Board have not taken an active role in providing guidance except for a few highly sensitive assets such as nuclear weapons. The design of security programs for all other assets is left to the services and local commands. This approach does not ensure consistent coverage of similar assets or proper emphasis on the most appropriate assets. No specific efforts are being made within DOD or among the services to ensure that proper physical security is provided at a reasonable cost. As a result, protective measures at many locations appear unneeded or questionable considering the cost and the degree of protection provided. In view of the enormous cost of protection, the disparate and independent approaches taken to provide security by the services and bases, and the questionable need for security people and equipment at many locations, an established management system within DOD or among the services would appear to offer opportunities to assure adequate protection at a reasonable cost.

Recommendations

Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.

Director: No director on record Team: No team on record Phone: No phone on record


The Justia Government Accountability Office site republishes public reports retrieved from the U.S. GAO These reports should not be considered official, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Justia.