Military bases analysis of DOD's 2005 selection process and recommendations for base closures and realignments : report to the congressional committees. PDF Download

Author:
Publisher: DIANE Publishing
ISBN: 1428931597
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 273

Get Book

Book Description
On May 13, 2005, the Secretary of Defense submitted proposed base realignment and closure (BRAC) actions to an independent commission for its review. The Commission must submit its recommendations to the President by September 8, 2005, for his acceptance or rejection in their entirety. Congress has final action to accept or reject these recommendations in their entirety later this year. The law required that GAO issue a report on the Department of Defense's (DoD) recommendations and selection process by July 1, 2005. GAO's objectives for this report were as follows: (1) determine the extent to which DoD's proposals achieved its stated BRAC goals, (2) analyze whether the process for developing recommendations was logical, and (3) identify issues with the recommendations that may warrant further attention. Time constraints limited GAO's ability to examine implementation details of most of the individual recommended actions. DoD had varying success in achieving its 2005 BRAC goals of reducing excess infrastructure and producing savings, furthering transformation, and fostering jointness. While DoD proposed a record number of closures and realignments, exceeding all prior BRAC rounds combined, many proposals focused on reserve bases and relatively few on closing active bases. Projected savings are almost equally large, but most savings are derived from 10 percent of the recommendations. While GAO believes savings would be achieved, overall up-front investment costs of an estimated $24 billion are required, and there are clear limitations associated with DoD's projection of nearly $50 billion in savings over a 20-year period. Much of the projected net annual recurring savings (47 percent) is associated with eliminating jobs currently held by military personnel. However, rather than reducing end-strength levels, DoD indicates the positions are expected to be reassigned to other areas, which may enhance capabilities but also limit dollar savings available for other use7.