|
.
|
MACDILL
AFB IS NOT AT RISK OF CLOSURE DUE TO PATRIOT ACT RESOLUTION |
|
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Summary
The following was extracted from available information from
DoD and other websites. It describes the BRAC Process. The bottom
line is that BRAC is very well insulated from political interference.
I have gone through the process.
The Defense Base Closure and Realignment of 1990 (1990 Base
Closure Act), Public Law 101-510 established the process by
which Department of Defense (DOD) installations would be closed
and/or realigned.
The Department will be able to divest itself of unnecessary
installation infrastructure and use the resultant savings for
improving fighting capabilities and quality of life for military
forces. This will allow the Department to rationalize installation
infrastructure with 21st century national security imperatives.
The BRAC 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 BRAC Act of 1990, as amended, specifies the selection process
for the nine Commissioners, who must be nominated by the President
for Senate confirmation no later than March 15, 2005. In selecting
individuals for nominations for appointments to the Commission,
the President will consult with the Speaker of the House of
Representatives and the majority leader of the Senate concerning
the appointment of two members each, and consult with the minority
leaders of the House of Representatives and the Senate concerning
the appointment of one member each.
The commission has the authority to change the Department's recommendations
if it determines that the Secretary deviated substantially 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. |
| In
BRAC 2005, there is now a statutory requirement that
military value be the primary consideration. The following
are the specific selection criteria approved by DoD
and published in the Federal Register in 2004: |
| |
Military
Value |
|
1.
|
The
current and future mission capabilities and
the impact on operational readiness of the Department
of Defense's total force, including the impact
on joint war fighting, training, and readiness.
|
|
2.
|
The
availability and condition of land,
facilities and associated airspace
(including training areas suitable for maneuver by
ground, naval, or air forces throughout a diversity
of climate and terrain areas and staging areas for
the use of the Armed Forces in homeland defense missions)
at both existing and potential receiving locations. |
|
3.
|
The
ability to accommodate contingency, mobilization,
and future total force requirements at both existing
and potential receiving locations to support operations
and training. |
|
4.
|
The
cost of operations and the manpower implications.
|
|
|
Other
Considerations |
|
5.
|
The
extent and timing of potential costs and
savings, including the number of years, beginning
with the date of completion of the closure or realignment,
for the savings to exceed the costs. |
|
6.
|
The economic impact on existing communities in the
vicinity of military installations. |
|
7.
|
The
ability of both the existing and potential receiving
communities' infrastructure to support forces, missions,
and personnel. |
|
8.
|
The
environmental impact, including the impact of costs
related to potential environmental restoration, waste
management, and environmental compliance activities.
|
All military installations within the United States and
its territories will be examined as part of this process.
The Department will emphasize an analysis of joint functions
and joint use of facilities more so than in previous rounds
to enhance the transformation effort.
Specific common or business oriented support functions will
receive analysis by Joint Cross-Service Groups (JCSG) rather
than within individual Military Departments. The JCSGs are
empowered to make closure and realignment recommendations
for review and approval by the Secretary. During previous
BRAC rounds, JCSGs developed alternatives for consideration
by the Services.
Identify a broad series of options for stationing and supporting
forces and functions to increase efficiency and effectiveness.
Installation commanders 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. However, 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 installations from closure or realignment. This guidance
is aimed at ensuring the fairness and rigor of the BRAC
process. |
|
|
| |
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 binding on the
Department. |
All military installations will be reviewed, and recommendations
will be based on the military value of the facilities and the
structure of the force.
In mid-December 2001 House and Senate negotiators authorized a
new round of military base closings, but delayed any action until
2005.
The Secretary of Defense will submit a force structure plan and
facility inventory, with a certification that proposed closings
were justified by the force structure plan and that they would
produce net savings.
Seven of the nine commission members could vote to add bases to
the Pentagon's proposed closure list, but a simple majority would
suffice to drop bases from the closure plan.
On January 6, 2004, the Department of Defense announced
that it had requested commanders of installations in the United
States, territories and possessions to gather information about
their installations as part of the 2005 round of BRAC
The principal mechanism for implementing the policy in both statues
has been an independent, bipartisan commission. Defense Base Closure
and Realignment Commission, which will be named by March 2005.
By another accounting, the four BRAC rounds achieved 97 base closings
and 55 major realignments. This resulted in net savings to taxpayers
of over $16 billion through 2001, and over $6 billion in additional
savings annually.
submitted by Col. Mike Pheneger (U.S.Army, Ret.) |
|
