Subject: FW: BRAC List - Just off the Press
FYI
BRAC List - Just off the Press
REFERENCES
http://www.amc.army.mil/about_amc/pabracguidance.pdf
http://pub2.bravenet.com/forum/170685044/fetch/219104/
www.defenselink.mil/brac
http://tricare.osd.mil/eenews/downloads/RAObulletin033004.doc
http://www.mcia-inc.org/FW Base Closings Just Off-The-
Press.htm
http://www.mdvets.org/Senate_files/brac_list.htm
http://www.defenselink.mil/brac/docs/time03.pdf
Army bases currently proposed for closure or realignment in 2005
include:
* Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania
* Detroit Arsenal, Michigan
* Fort Belvoir, Virginia
* Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico
* Fort McPherson/Gillem, Georgia
* Fort Monmouth, New Jersey
* Fort Monroe, Virginia
* Fort Polk, Louisiana (to realign)
* Fort Richardson, Alaska
* Fort Sam Houston, Texas
* Fort Shafter, Hawaii
* Lima Army Tank Plant, Ohio
* Natick Soldier Center, Massachusetts
* Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey
* Redstone Arsenal, Alabama
* Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois
* Sierra Army Depot, California
* Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona
Air Force base closures and realignments include:
* Altus AFB, Oklahoma
* Beale AFB, California
* Brooks AFB, Texas
* Cannon AFB, New Mexico
* Columbus AFB, Mississippi
* Ellsworth AFB, South Dakota
* Goodfellow AFB, Texas
* Grand Forks AFB, North Dakota
* Hanscom AFB, Massachusetts
* Kirtland AFB, New Mexico
* Los Angeles AFB, California
* McConnell AFB, Kansas
* Nellis AFB, Nevada (to realign)
* Seymour Johnson AFB, North Carolina (to realign)
* Shaw AFB, South Carolina
* Vance AFB, Oklahoma
The Air Force will lose 2,260 military and 2,839 civilian manpower
positions, and 1,055 reserve drill authorizations next year, according
to the 2004 force-structure announcement released July 23. Many bases,
both active duty and reserve component, are affected by the
realignment.
In many cases, units will gain aircraft and missions, while others will
pare down.
Besides manpower reductions, the realignment formally announces the
retirement of the C-9A Nightingale and KC-135E Stratotanker aircraft.
According to Air Force officials, the 20 C-9s are being retired
because
of reduced-patient movement, range limitations and increasing
maintenance and upgrade costs. The aeromedical evacuation mission will
become a requirements-based system using all passenger-capable
aircraft.
The service will retire 44 of the Air National Guard and Air Force
Reserve Command's 43-year-old KC-135Es next year, replacing them with
24
KC-135Rs from the active-duty fleet. By the end of fiscal 2006, the Air
Force will have retired 68 of the KC-135Es.
Naval base closures and realignments include:
* Ingleside Naval Station, Texas
* Naval Postgraduate School, California
* Naval Air Station Meridian, Mississippi
* Naval Air Engineering Station Lakehurst, New Jersey
* Naval Recreation Station Solomons Island,
* Naval Surface Warfare Center Crane, Indiana
* Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren Division, Virginia
* Navy Supply Corps School, Georgia
* New Orleans Naval Support Activity, Louisiana
* Pascagoula Naval Station, Mississippi
* Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, New Hampshire
* Saratoga Springs Naval Support Unit, New York
Marine base closures and realignments include:
* Marine Corps Logistics Base Albany, Georgia
* Marine Corps Logistics Base Barstow, California (realignment)
* Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, California
* Marine Corps Mountain Warfare School, California
* Marine Reserve Support Unit, Kansas City
* Marine Corps Recruit Depot San Diego, California (realign or close).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 6:23 PM Subject: Public Affairs
Guidance (PAG) - Transformation through
Base Realignment And Closure (BRAC 2005)
Importance: Low
UNCLASSIFIED//
Note for addressees -- please retransmit to your subordinate commands.
1. REFERENCES. Ref. A: SECDEF MSG, DTG 131700Z FEB 03, SUBJ: Public
Affairs Guidance (PAG) - Transformation through Base Realignment And
Closure
(BRAC 2005); Ref. B: P.L. 101-510, as amended; Ref. C: Secretary of
Defense (SECDEF) memo on transformation through BRAC, 15 Nov 02. Ref.
A. is
DoD PAG on BRAC 2005; Ref. B. is the legislation authorizing a BRAC
round
in 2005. Ref C. is SECDEF's initial directions on BRAC 2005.
2. PURPOSE: This message provides updated PAG for BRAC 2005 and
supercedes
Ref A.
3. BACKGROUND: The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2002
authorized DoD to pursue one BRAC round in 2005. SECDEF's 15 Nov 02
memo
initiated the complex analysis and decision process that will involve
virtually all levels of DoD management, from installation through major
command and component/agency headquarters to OSD. All bases will be
considered and treated equally. All bases can expect to respond to a
comprehensive series of data calls. Ultimately, the SECDEF'S
realignment
and closure recommendations will be reviewed publicly by an independent
commission, the President and Congress.
3.1. Because of the potential impact upon DoD components and local
communities, BRAC is a subject of intense interest to all
stakeholders. As
a one-time authority, realignment and closure decisions will support
transformation of DoD. To provide SECDEF, the commission and the
President
with the optimal set of recommendations, the analytical work and
subsequent
deliberations must occur free from opinions, internal or external,
based on
non-certified data and speculation. Accordingly, DoD personnel may not
participate, in their official capacities, in activities of any
organization
that has as its purpose, either directly or indirectly, insulating
bases
from realignment or closure. Invitations to participate in such
organizations should be discussed with appropriate ethics counselors.
4. PUBLIC AFFAIRS POSTURE: Active. Base Realignments And Closures are
contentious and controversial. Commanders and their public affairs
officers
must be prepared to respond to questions and objectively communicate
the
details of the BRAC process to the public.
5. STATEMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE. (QUOTE) The Department Of Defense has
received Congressional authorization for a Base Realignment And Closure
round in 2005. BRAC is a means to achieve several goals: eliminate
excess
infrastructure; reshape our military; pursue jointness; optimize
military
readiness; and realize significant savings in support of transforming
the
Department of Defense.
At a minimum, BRAC 2005 must eliminate excess physical capacity, the
operation, sustainment and recapitalization of which diverts
scarceresources from defense capability. However, BRAC 2005 can make
an even more
profound contribution to transforming the department by rationalizing
our
infrastructure with defense strategy. BRAC 2005 should be the means by
which we reconfigure our current infrastructure into one in which
operational capacity maximizes both warfighting capability and
efficiency.
By creating joint organizational and basing solutions, we will
facilitate
multi-service missions, reduce waste, save money, and free up
resources to
recruit quality people, modernize equipment and infrastructure, and
develop
the capabilities needed to meet 21st Century threats.
The Secretary of Defense has directed that the BRAC 2005 process for
analyzing DoD installations begin immediately. After gathering
information
and completing a comprehensive analysis, the Secretary will submit
recommendations for realigning or closing bases by May 16, 2005, as
required
by law. (END QUOTE)
6. Q&As: The following Q&As are provided for response to query only.
Questions that cannot be answered within the scope of this guidance
will be
taken without comment and forwarded with proposed answers to OASD(PA).
Q1: Should communities perceive military construction (MILCON) as an
indicator of whether their installations will be realigned or closed?
A1: The presence or absence of funding for military construction is
not an
indication of military service intentions or future recommendations to
the
SECDEF under BRAC. The Department funds its military construction
based on
its current highest priority requirements recognizing that it may make
investments in installations that are ultimately selected for closure
or
realignment.
Q2: Will encroachment issues at military bases factor into the
decision-making process?
A2: In accordance with the requirements of the BRAC statute, the
department
will base all of its recommendations upon approved selection criteria
that
reflect military value as the primary consideration. The law further
requires that the selection criteria address the ability of both
existing
and potential receiving communities' infrastructure to support forces,
missions and personnel. To the extent that encroachment limits an
installation in fulfilling its mission requirements, it will be
factored
into military value. The proposed selection criteria must be made
available
for public review not later than Dec 31, 2003, and finalized by Feb 16,
2004.
Q3: There have been concerns and questions about environmental costs.
Will
environmental costs be factors in recommending a base for realignment
or
closure?
A3: In accordance with the requirements of the BRAC statute, the
department
will base all its recommendations upon approved selection criteria that
reflect military value as the primary consideration. The law further
requires that the selection criteria address the impact of costs
related to
environmental restoration as well as waste management and environmental
compliance. The proposed selection criteria must be made available for
public review not later than Dec 31, 2003 and finalized by Feb 16,
2004.
Q4: What were the closure results of the last four rounds of BRAC (88,
91,
93 AND 95) from the total available to the number selected for BRAC
action?
A4: The four prior rounds of BRAC resulted in recommendations to close
97
out of 495 major domestic installations. BRAC 88 - closed 16
majorinstallations; BRAC 91 - closed 26 major installations; BRAC 93 -
closed 28
major installations; and BRAC 95 - closed 27 major installations.
Q5: How much has the DoD saved through the previous rounds of closures
and
realignments?
A5: The four previous rounds produced net savings (cost avoidance) of
approximately $16.7 Billion through 2001 and approximately $6.5
Billion
annually thereafter. Independent studies have repeatedly verified that
savings from BRAC far exceeded costs.
Q6: How much excess capacity does the DoD currently have?
A6: The Department will not know its current excess capacity until the
completion of BRAC process. In April 1998, The Department completed a
report for Congress that estimated that it retained approximately
20-25% in
excess capacity across the department.
Q7: When will the department complete the BRAC analysis and make its
recommendations available to the public?
A7: The National Defense Authorization Act for FY02 established the
following milestones for the 2005 BRAC round: publish proposed
selection
criteria for a 30 day comment period by December 31, 2003; publish
final
selection criteria by February 16, 2004; and submit a report to
Congress
with the FY05 budget justification along with a comprehensive
installation
inventory and force structure plan. By May 16, 2005, the Secretary of
Defense will forward the recommendations for closure and realignment
to the
BRAC commission, at which time the information will be available to the
public. The BRAC commission must forward its report to the President
by
September 8, 2005. The President will have until September 23, 2005, to
accept or reject the recommendations on an all or nothing basis and
forward
the recommendations to Congress. Once the President forwards the
recommendations to Congress, Congress will have 45 legislative days
to enact
a joint resolution rejecting all the recommendations or they become
binding
on the department.
Q8: Where will funds come from to perform the BRAC
analysis/evaluations?
A8: BRAC analysis and evaluations are performed within available
resources.
They are currently funded by Operations and Maintenance (O&M) funds.
Q9: Will near-term future new force-structure bed downs be incorporated
into the BRAC 2005 process?
A9: Where the BRAC timeline can accommodate operational imperatives,
new
force structure bed downs will be incorporated in the BRAC process.
Using
the BRAC process offers the opportunity to make the most efficient and
effective use of the capacity and capabilities of the department.
Q10: If a base is approved for closure or realignment, how long will it
take?
A10: Under the BRAC law, actions to close or realign a base must be
initiated within two years of the date the President transmits the BRAC
commission's recommendations report to Congress, and must be completed
within six years of that same date.
Q11: Can bases/communities get an assessment of how they "scored"
during
the "95 BRAC"?
A11: How an installation "scored" in a previous BRAC round is not
indication of how it might "score" during the 2005 BRAC round. In
accordance with the BRAC statute, when considering installations for
closureor realignment, the department must consider all military
installations
equally, without regard to whether the installation has been previously
considered or proposed for closure or realignment by the department.
However, for those interested in historical information, the Office of
the
Secretary of Defense maintains the documentation used by the previous
BRAC
Commissions. The records are located at 1745 Jefferson Davis Highway,
Crystal Square 4, Suite 105, Arlington, VA. The information is open to
the
public; however, we ask that individuals call the office, 703-602-3207,
before arriving to ensure a government representative is present.
There is
a copier available.
Q12: How will "jointness" be assessed during this next BRAC?
A12: The BRAC law requires that closure and realignment
recommendations be
based on published selection criteria that must make military value the
primary consideration. The law further provides that military value
must
include impacts on joint warfighting, readiness and training.
In his November 15, 2002, memorandum, the SECDEF established the goals
and
priorities for the 2005 BRAC round. A primary objective of BRAC 2005,
in
addition to realigning our base structure to meet our post-cold war
force
structure, is to examine and implement opportunities for greater
jointness.
To reinforce the idea that we should be looking across traditional
lines to
examine the potential for jointness, the Secretary established an
internal
BRAC 2005 decision making body that is joint at every level. The
Infrastructure Executive Council (IEC), chaired by the Deputy
Secretary, and
composed of the secretaries of the military departments and their
chiefs of
services, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and under
secretary of
Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics) (USD(AT&L)), will be
the
policy making and oversight body for the entire BRAC 2005. The
sbordinate
Infrastructure Steering Group (ISG), chaired by the USD(AT&L) and
composed
of the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the military
department
assistant secretaries for installations and environment, the service
vice
chiefs, and the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations &
Environment) (DUSD(I&E)), will oversee joint cross-service analyses of
common business oriented functions and ensure the integration of that
process with the military department and defense agency specific
analyses of
all other functions.
Q13: How can communities be involved in BRAC to enhance their support
to
the base population/mission and their prospects during the BRAC 2005
round?
A13: The Defense Base Closure And Realignment Commission will solicit
community input once it has received the Secretary of Defense's base
closure
and realignment recommendations in May 2005.
Q14: If the final decision is to close or realign the base, with whom
will
community leaders work in the transition of the base from its current
mission to civilian use?
A14: Although an enormously complex undertaking, involving the
Department
of Defense, other federal agencies, and state and local governments,
each
military department will have a central point of contact at the closing
activity to assist in coordinating the involvement of the various
organizations. Additionally, DoD's Office Of Economic Adjustment is
chartered to assist local communities with planning for the reuse of
closing
and realigning installations and in that capacity will provide
individual
community assistance.
Q15: How will property be disposed of or sold? A15: The BRAC statute
provides the department with a variety of mechanisms
for disposing of property at closed or realigned military
installations.
While we cannot speculate on which mechanism might be used at any given
installation, in previous rounds of BRAC, federal real property was
made
available by public benefit conveyances for airport, education, and
homeless
assistance; federal transfers to Native American tribes; economic
development conveyances to local redevelopment authorities; and public
sales, just to name a few.
Q16: How will you decide reuse of the base?
A16: The Department of Defense does not decide the reuse of former
military
installations. Once the property is declared surplus to the needs of
the
federal government, it is the job of the local community, through its
designated local redevelopment authority, to plan for the reuse of the
surplus property.
Q17: Our base has some environmental contamination. Will the DoD clean
it
up?
A17: DoD has a continuing obligation to perform environmental cleanup
at
all of its installations, regardless of whether a base is identified
for
closure or realignment.
Q18: During the time cleanup is taking place -- several years in many
cases
-- will the base property be vacant and unused until all the cleanup
is
completed?
A18: In previous rounds, from the time of the base's selection for
closure,
several options were available for property to be used until it was
disposed
so that communities could begin using base facilities promptly and
economic
redevelopment could occur. Consistent with public health and safety,
once a
contractual arrangement was in place, property could be leased or, in
certain circumstances, deeded while the property was being
environmentally
prepared for transfer.
Q19: What comment do you have for communities impacted by closure?
A19: Communities affected by closure and realignment decisions in the
last
four rounds of BRAC have successfully transitioned to productive
economic
development. We are committed to working with BRAC 05 communities to
duplicate that success.
Q20. There are websites on the internet that indicate that a list of
potential base closures already exists. Does DoD maintain a list of
bases
it wants to close?
A20: No, the department does not maintain a list of bases it wants to
close. The BRAC analytical process will not result in departmental
closure
and realignment recommendations until May 2005.
Q21. How will the realignment of military forces and bases overseas
impact
BRAC 2005 efforts?
A21. On March 20, 2003, the Secretary directed the development of a
comprehensive and integrated presence and basing strategy looking out
10
years. Results of that effort, including rationalizing areas of
potential
excesses and identifying the utility of overseas installations, should
be
available to inform the BRAC 2005 process.
Q22. What is BRAC?
A22. "BRAC" is an acronym that stands for Base Realignment And
Closure. It
is the process DoD has previously used to reorganize its base
structure tomore efficiently and effectively support our forces,
increase operational
readiness and facilitate new ways of doing business. We anticipate that
BRAC 2005 will build upon processes used in previous rounds.
Q23. How does BRAC work?
A23. The process is governed by law; specifically, The Defense Base
Closure
And Realignment Act of 1990.
The process begins with a threat assessment of the future national
security
environment, followed by the development of a force structure plan and
basing requirements to meet these threats.
DoD then applies published selection criteria to determine which
installations to recommend for realignment and closure. The Secretary
of
Defense will publish a report containing the realignment and closure
recommendations, forwarding supporting documentation to an independent
commission appointed by the president, in consultation with
congressional
leadership.
The commission has the authority to change the Department's
recommendations,
if it determines that a recommendation deviated from the force
structure
plan and/or selection criteria. The commission will hold regional
meetings
to solicit public input prior to making its recommendations. History
has
shown that the use of an independent commission and public meetings
make the
process as open and fair as possible.
The commission forwards its recommendations to the President for
review and
approval, who then forwards the recommendations to Congress.
Congress has 45 legislative days to act on the commission report on an
all-or-none basis. After that time, the commission's realignment and
closure recommendations become law. Implementation must start within
two
years, and actions must be complete within six years.
Q24. What is transformation?
A24. Transformation is shaping the changing nature of military
competition
and cooperation through new combinations of concepts, capabilities,
people
and organizations that exploit our nation's advantages, protect our
asymmetric vulnerabilities, and sustain our strategic position, which
helps
maintain peace and stability in the world.
Q25. Why is DoD transforming?
A25. Over time, the defense strategy calls for the transformation of
the
U.S. defense establishment. Transformation is at the heart of this
strategy.
To transform DoD, we need to change its culture in many important
areas.
Our budgeting, acquisition, personnel, and management systems must be
able
to operate in a world that changes rapidly. Without change, the current
defense program will only become more expensive in the future, and DoD
will
forfeit many of the opportunities available today.
Q26. How is BRAC transformational?
A26. BRAC provides a singular opportunity to reshape our
infrastructure to
optimize military readiness. The 2005 BRAC process will help find
innovative ways to consolidate, realign, or find alternative uses for
current facilities to ensure that the U.S. continues to field the
best-prepared and best-equipped military in the world. BRAC will also
enable the U.S. military to better match facilities to
forces, meet the threats and challenges of a new century, and make the
wisest use of limited defense dollars.
Q27. How many bases and installations will be closed?
A27. It's too early to say, but there are no specific numbers or
"targets."
Using specific selection criteria that emphasize military value, DoD
must
complete a comprehensive review before it can determine which
installations
should be realigned or closed. In 2005, an independent commission will
review the Secretary of Defense's recommendations, hold public
hearings,
visit various sites, and ultimately send its recommendations to the
President.
Q28. How much has been saved through previous BRAC rounds?
A28. The four previous BRAC rounds have eliminated approximately 20
percent
of DoD's capacity that existed in 1988 and, through 2001, produced net
savings of approximately $16.7 Billion, which includes the cost of
environmental clean-up. Recurring savings beyond 2001 are
approximately
$6.6 Billion annually. In independent studies conducted over previous
years, both the General Accounting Office and the Congressional Budget
Office have consistently supported the department's view that
realigning and
closing unneeded military installations produces savings that far
exceed
costs.
Q29. What's the timeline for this BRAC round?
A29. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002
established the following milestones for the 2005 BRAC round: publish
proposed selection criteria for a 30-day comment period by Dec. 31,
2003;
publish final selection criteria by Feb. 16, 2004; submit a report to
congress with the FY 2005 budget justification on the following
points: a
force structure plan, based on an assessment of probable threats to
the
national security over the next 20 years; the probable end strength
levels
and military force units needed to meet those threats; the anticipated
levels of available funding; a comprehensive inventory of military
installations worldwide; a description of infrastructure necessary to
support the force structure; discussion of excess capacity categories;
economic analysis of the effect of realignments and closures to reduce
excess infrastructure; and SECDEF certification of the need for BRAC,
and
that annual net savings would result by 2011.
SECDEF forwards recommendations for realignments and closures to the
BRAC
commission by May 16, 2005; the commission forwards its report on the
recommendations to the President by Sept. 8, 2005. The President will
have
until Sept. 23, 2005 to accept or reject the recommendations in their
entirety. If accepted, Congress will have 45 legislative days to act
on the
recommendations.
Q30. Which bases will be looked at in this round?
A30. All military installations within the continental United States
and
its territories (under the control of the federal government) will be
examined as part of this process. This includes labs, medical,
training,
guard, reserve, air stations, leased facilities, etc.
Q31. Isn't BRAC just another example of budget priorities driving
national
security planning?
A31. Absolutely not. The legislation is quite clear that military
value is
the primary consideration. The Secretary's guidance to the
militarydepartments emphasizes that BRAC 2005 will make a profound
contribution to
transforming the department by bringing our infrastructure in line with
defense strategy.
Q32. How will the commission be selected, and who will serve?
A32. The BRAC legislation specifies the selection process for
commissioners. The President is required to consult with the
congressional
leadership on nominations to serve on the commission.
Q33. How have local communities affected by base closures fared
overall?
A33. Base Realignments And Closures CAUSE near-term social and economic
disruption. However, there are many success stories from previous
closures.
For example, at Charleston Naval Base, S.C., the local community,
assisted
by DoD, was able to create approximately 4,500 new jobs.
Approximately 90
private, state and federal entities are currently reusing the former
naval
base.
Since the closure of Mather Air Force Base, Calif., more than 54
leases have
been generated at the new Mather Field Complex. Its prime location and
one
of the country's longest runways have made it an active air cargo hub
for
California's central valley and the Sacramento region. Additionally,
the
former base now employs nearly 3,700 personnel with its high-technical
businesses, manufacturing operations, educational centers, government
agencies, and recreational facilities.
At the former Fort Devens, Mass., more than 3,000 new jobs have been
generated and 2.7 million square feet of new construction has occurred.
with 68 different employers on site, redevelopment ranges from small
business incubators to the Gillette Corp., which occupies a large
warehouse/distribution center and manufacturing plant.
A base closure can actually be an economic opportunity, especially
when all
elements of a community work together.
Q34. Will local commanders and others in their official capacities be
available to help us in our task forces or other efforts to influence
BRAC
decisions with regard to our base?
A34. DoD officials may attend meetings in a liaison or representational
capacity with state and local officials, or other organizations that
may
seek to develop plans or programs to improve the ability of
installations to
discharge their national security and defense missions. DoD officials
may
not manage or control such organizations or efforts.
In their official capacity, DoD personnel may not participate in the
activities of any organization that has as its purpose, either
directly or
indirectly, insulating DoD bases from closure or realignment. This
guidance
is aimed at ensuring the fairness and rigor of the BRAC process.
Q35. Is the list of closures and realignments on the g2mil.com website
the
official position of the Department Of Defense?
A35. No. It is a privately operated website with no ties to or support
from DoD.
7. TALKING POINTS: 7.1. Both Congress and DoD recognize military value
must be the primary
consideration in reducing or restructuring U.S. military bases.
7.2. The 2005 BRAC process will help find innovative ways to
consolidate,
realign, or find alternative uses for current facilities.
7.3. All military installations will be reviewed, and all
recommendations
will be based on approved, published selection criteria and a future
force
structure plan.
7.4. Through the BRAC process, we will ensure that the United States
continues to field the best prepared and best equipped military in the
world.
7.5. BRAC will enable the U.S. military to match facilities to forces,
meet
the threats and challenges of a new century, and make the wisest use of
limited defense dollars.
7.6. BRAC will facilitate multi-service missions by creating joint
organizational and basing solutions that will not only reduce waste but
maximize military effectiveness.
7.7. Consolidating facilities will save billions, allowing the
department
to focus funds on maintaining and modernizing facilities needed to
better
support our forces, recruit quality personnel, modernize equipment and
infrastructure, and develop the capabilities needed to meet 21st
Century
threats.
7.8 DoD officials -- military and civilian -- will not participate in
any
meetings of organizations with the purpose (express or not) of
insulating an
installation from realignment or closure to ensure the fairness and
rigor of
the BRAC deliberative process.
8. MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION (NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE).
8.1. RELEASE AUTHORITY: OASD(PA), in coordination with DUSD (I&E), is
the
sole releasing authority for information on BRAC 2005 to news media.
Local
commanders and their PAOs are encouraged to respond to questions
within the
scope of this PAG. To protect the integrity of the BRAC 2005 process
and to
ensure that consistent and accurate information is provided, OSD, the
military departments, and participating defense agencies will
designate key
individuals to respond to community and Congressional inquiries.
Unauthorized discussion, dissemination of information or speculation
regarding BRAC matters by DoD personnel and contractors is prohibited.
8.2. COMMUNITY QUERIES. External stakeholders such as communities have
an
extraordinary interest in the BRAC process and, consistent with the
department's need for internal deliberation, should receive timely
access to
data that can be made public as the BRAC analytical process unfolds.
Timely
And consistent information from all DoD elements will minimize
confusion and
foster trust. PAOs may continue to release the same type and amount of
information on their installations as they currently do, but may not
release, in whole or in part, data calls/information requested under
BRAC.
It is important to note that local commanders are not in a position to
evaluate the entire mission requirements and cross-service
implications of
their individual functions as they may affect DoD, and local
commanders are
not in a position to answer questions requiring them to speculate
and/ordiscuss BRAC issues which are subject to internal DoD
deliberation. While
information normally provided to the public may continue to be
provided,
even if it is the subject of a BRAC data call, its relationship to
BRAC is
not releasable.
8.3. PARTICIPATION IN OFFICIAL CAPACITY. DoD personnel may not
participate, in their official capacity, in activities of any
organization
that has as its purpose, either directly or indirectly, insulating
bases
from realignment or closure. This guidance is aimed at ensuring the
fairness and rigor of the BRAC deliberative process. Invitations to
participate in such organizations should be discussed with appropriate
ethics counselors. In a liaison or representational role, DoD
officials may
attend meetings with state and local officials, or other organizations
that
may seek to develop plans or programs to improve the ability of
installations to discharge their national security and defense
missions.
DoD officials may not manage or control such organizations or efforts.
8.3.1. Many influential former officials and retired general/flag
officers
will be involved with many organizations attempting to insulate bases
from
realignment or closure. They are allowed to participate in this manner
and
due to their participation, the organizations are not allowed any
greater or
lesser information/access.
8.4. INFORMATION SOURCES. Public information about the current BRAC
process and past experience with prior BRAC rounds is available
through a
web site, http://www.defenselink.mil/brac/. Contents include the text
of
the current Defense Base Closure Act, the reports of the Secretaries of
Defense and the Defense Base Closure And Realignment Commissions in
prior
BRAC rounds, General Accounting Office reports on the status of bases
realigned and closed in prior rounds, and information on assistance
available to communities with bases that have been realigned or
closed. DoD
personnel are encouraged to refer the media, community
representatives, and
other interested parties to this public web site for further
information
about what has happened in prior rounds and the process for BRAC 2005.
Additional public information related to BRAC 2005 will become
available and
posted to the DoD BRAC website as the process proceeds.
9. OASD/PA POC is Mr. Glenn Flood, cmcl 703-695-6294, DSN 225-6294,
email
email@hidden.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
BRAC 2005: In a report to Congress SECDEF Donald H. Rumsfeld certified
that the military has about 24% of excess base capacity to support the
armed forces. The Army has the most that need to be closed (about
29%), followed by the Air Force (about 24%) and the Navy/USMC at about
21%). His report states that if the 2005 round of base closures
produces a 20% reduction, DOD would see a net savings of about $5
billion by 2011 and reoccurring annual savings of about $8 billion.
The four previous base closure rounds now save our military $6.6
billion dollars each year. Nevertheless, there is a movement to derail
the next round of base closures by convincing people it is cheaper to
keep all bases open and lease land to earn money; thus expanding what
is known as Government Owned Contractor Operated (GOCO) facilities.
This robs local communities of business property taxes and rarely
produces net profits as cozy relationships result in contracts in
which the government still pays for property maintenance. Small
military bases are inefficient to operate since each base usually has
a housing office, equal opportunity office, public affairs, chapel,
library, auto shop, medical clinic, dental clinic, commissary,
exchange, base headquarters, base security, decal office, fitness
center, reception center, swimming pool, child care center, enlisted
club, officer club, teen club, family support center, temporary
lodging, education center, dining hall, maintenance office, golf
course, theater, post office, and various recreational facilities.
Therefore, shifting "tenant" units to larger bases with room for
growth saves a great deal of money and manpower in the long run,
although moving units require money for relocation and some new
construction. Reserve, National Guard, and federal civilian activities
at closed bases can continue as they do elsewhere without a military
landlord. Base closures also allow the elimination of outdated organiz
ations which have been preserved as jobs programs by members of
Congress
The 2005 round will begin in March 2005 when the President, in
consultation with congressional leaders, will appoint the nine-member
base closing commission. Two months later on 16 May, the defense
secretary will submit his list of facilities to be closed. It will
take seven members to add a facility to that list, but just a simple
majority to remove a facility. The President may approve that list and
send it to Congress, or reject it and send it back to the commission.
Neither Congress nor the President can make changes to the list. If he
accepts the list, it becomes law unless Congress votes against it
within 45 days. This has never happened since Congressmen from
districts spared closures think the list is fair.
Army bases currently proposed for realignment or closure in 2005
include:
Carlisle Barracks PA, Detroit Arsenal MI, Fort Belvoir VA, Fort
Buchanan PR, Fort McPherson/Gillem GA, Fort Monmouth NJ, Fort Monroe
VA, Fort Polk LA (to realign), Fort Richardson AK, Fort Sam Houston
TX, Fort Shafter HI, Lima Army Tank Plant OK, Natick Soldier Center
MA, Picatinny Arsenal NJ, Redstone Arsenal AL, Rock Island Arsenal IL,
Sierra Army Depot CA, and Yuma Proving Ground AZ. Arizona
Air Force bases currently proposed for realignment or closure in 2005
include:
Altus AFB OK, Beale AFB CA, Brooks AFB TX, Cannon AFB NM, *Columbus
AFB MS, Ellsworth AFB SD, Goodfellow AFB TX, Grand Forks AFB ND,
Hanscom AFB MA, Kirtland AFB NM, Los Angeles AFB CA, McConnell AFB KS,
Nellis AFB NV (to realign), Seymour Johnson AFB NC (to realign), Shaw
AFB SC, and Vance AFB OK.
Naval bases currently proposed for realignment or closure in 2005
include:
Ingleside Naval Station TX, Naval Postgraduate School CA, Naval Air
Station Meridian MS, Naval Air Engineering Station Lakehurst NJ, Naval
Recreation Station Solomons Island MD, Naval Surface Warfare Center
Crane IN, Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division VA, Navy
Supply Corps School GA, New Orleans Naval Support Activity LA,
Pascagoula Naval Station MS, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard NH, and
Saratoga Springs Naval Support Unit NY.
Naval bases currently proposed for realignment or closure in 2005
include:
Marine Corps Logistics Base Albany GA, Marine Corps Logistics Base
Barstow CA (to realign), Marine Corps Air Station Miramar CA, Marine
Corps Mountain Warfare School CA, Marine Reserve Support Unit, Kansas
City MO, Marine Corps Recruit Depot San Diego CA (realign or close).
For more information about the DOD position concerning BRAC refer to
www.defenselink.mil/brac [Source: NAUS Update 26 MAR 04, S&T Resources
and Program Development, ++]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
REFERENCES
http://www.amc.army.mil/about_amc/pabracguidance.pdf
http://pub2.bravenet.com/forum/170685044/fetch/219104/
www.defenselink.mil/brac
http://tricare.osd.mil/eenews/downloads/RAObulletin033004.doc
http://www.mcia-inc.org/FW Base Closings Just Off-The-
Press.htm
http://www.mdvets.org/Senate_files/brac_list.htm
http://www.defenselink.mil/brac/docs/time03.pdf