Military barracks found with mold, pests, broken AC and brown water

It’s hard to “Be All You Can Be,” as the U.S. Army’s recruiting slogan says, when military housing is not all it should be.

A new audit by the top government watchdog says some barracks, not just in the Army, are so bad that they degrade quality of life and military readiness. The report has drawn bipartisan, bicameral outrage and a blunt admission from the Pentagon.

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) audit highlights three main points:

• Some military living quarters “are substandard” and “pose potentially serious health and safety risks,” a problem made worse because the Defense Department’s (DOD) “assessments of conditions are unreliable.”
• Defense officials can’t make informed decisions because they lack complete information about military housing finances. For example: “DOD did not know how much it spent on housing allowances for service members who would normally be required to live in barracks, but did not because of insufficient space or poor living conditions.”
• Authorities conduct “insufficient oversight” of military barracks and do not track information on the condition of barracks that’s needed to identify and address problems.

Those problems include mold, pests, broken air conditioning, brown drinking water and the failure to meet “minimum privacy and room configuration standards.” Residents have complained that poor living conditions “contributed to an environment where theft, property damage, and sexual assault were more likely,” according to the report.

Not surprisingly, the GAO said “poor living conditions can have significant effects on reenlistment.” The report comes at a bad time for the Army, which said last week that this is the “most challenging recruiting environment in a generation.”

With refreshing candor, the Pentagon didn’t dodge the issue.

“In return for the commitment and sacrifices that Service members make when they volunteer to defend our nation, the Department of Defense has a moral obligation to ensure that the places they live and work dignify their service,” Brendan Owens, an assistant secretary of defense and its chief housing officer, said by email. “The DOD has, in too many instances, failed to live up to our role in making sure housing for our Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, Airmen and Guardians honors their commitment and enables them to bring the best versions of themselves to their critical missions.”

Refreshing candor is good, but Congress wants action.

“This is reprehensible, and we expect you to take expeditious and appropriate action to hold those personnel accountable and ensure Service members are receiving the support they might require after that experience,” a bipartisan group of lawmakers wrote to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. “It is clear that there are failures at all levels. Across the enterprise, personnel are shirking their responsibilities to provide Service members with safe, habitable living spaces.”

The breadth of congressional concern was demonstrated by the broad spectrum of the letter’s signatories. It was led by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), and Reps. Jimmy Panetta (D-Calif.) and Jen A. Kiggans (R-Va.) and signed by 17 often ideologically incompatible politicians – from Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.) to Reps. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) and Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.).

For a military that relies on foreign intelligence, bad information about its own facilities is one glaring impediment to improving living conditions. The military calculates a “condition score” for each barracks, from 0 to 100, based on building systems such as electrical, plumbing and foundation. But those scores can’t be trusted.

At seven of 10 military installations GAO inspectors visited, they found conditions needing significant improvements – but also found the sites had condition scores above 80. One barracks was declared uninhabitable, yet the report said, “at the time the barracks closed, its condition score was above 90.” A D.C.-area facility with broken air conditioning in 25% of the rooms, 12 broken windows, a broken elevator and 50 rooms without adequate lighting had a condition score of 86. The audit did not specifically identify either facility and GAO declined a request to release that information, thus saving the bases from embarrassment.

But it did list the 10 facilities where the GAO conducted its performance audit from February 2022 to September 2023. Auditors visited and held discussion groups at two Army installations (Fort George G. Meade in Maryland and Fort Carson in Colorado); two Air Force installations (Joint Base Andrews-Naval Air Facility Washington in Maryland and Joint Base San Antonio); three Navy installations (Naval Support Activity Bethesda in Maryland; Naval Base Coronado in California; and Naval Base San Diego); and three Marine Corps installations (Marine Corps Base Quantico in Virginia; Marine Corps Recruit Depot in San Diego; and Camp Pendleton in California).

Worldwide, the military has nearly 9,000 barracks facilities, almost all government owned. The GAO’s review was limited to those housing junior, enlisted service members, unaccompanied by family. Lower-level (a group in the Army that includes privates through E-5-level sergeants), unaccompanied personnel are required to live in barracks. Some barracks look like college dormitories, which is what the Air Force calls them, though others have rows of beds in long, large rooms.

Illustrating just how desperate the situation can be, some “service members required to live in barracks sometimes take drastic action,” the GAO was told, “such as getting married, just to leave the barracks.”

The report’s 31 recommendations include increased oversight of barracks programs and improved guidance on barracks condition assessments. The Defense Department agreed with 23 of them and partially agreed with the remaining eight. That’s not quite good enough for the GAO, which said it “continues to believe DOD should fully implement all of these recommendations.”

This is not the first time the GAO said it has “reported on long-standing concerns regarding challenges with persistent military housing conditions, deferred facility maintenance, and aging infrastructure.” In 2002 and 2003, it documented problems in most barracks used for initial training, including inadequate heating and air conditioning, poor ventilation and plumbing problems. Last year, a GAO report said that for many years, the Pentagon’s facilities needs were not fully funded, “resulting in a backlog of at least $137 billion in deferred maintenance costs, as of fiscal year 2020 – a significant and growing risk to the department’s ability to support its missions.”

Owens promised his office will do better.

Addressing a portion of his statement directly to service members, Owens said: “I commit to act. I will move out aggressively to increase oversight and accountability in government-owned unaccompanied housing and to address unacceptable living conditions impacting our service members. … We will improve our responsiveness to your concerns as we strive to ensure a living experience that enhances your wellbeing and readiness.”