[CPEO-IRF] GAO reviews 05 BRAC process

[Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@cpeo.org>]

Analysis of DOD?s 2005 Selection Process and Recommendations for Base
Closures and Realignments
Government Accountability Office (GAO-05-785)
July 1, 2005

DOD had varying success in achieving its 2005 BRAC goals of (1) reducing
excess infrastructure and producing savings, (2) furthering
transformation, and (3) 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 uses. Sizeable savings were projected
from efficiency measures and other actions, but underlying assumptions
have not been validated and could be difficult to track over time. Some
proposals represent efforts to foster jointness and transformation, such
as initial joint training for the Joint Strike Fighter, but progress in
each area varied, with many decisions reflecting consolidations within,
and not across, the military services. In addition, transformation was
often cited as support for proposals, but it was not well defined, and
there was a lack of agreement on various transformation options.

DOD?s process for conducting its analysis was generally logical,
reasoned, and well documented. DOD's process placed strong emphasis on
data, tempered by military judgment, as appropriate. The military
services and seven joint cross-service groups, which focused on common
business- oriented functions, adapted their analytical approaches to the
unique aspects of their respective areas. Yet, they were consistent in
adhering to the use of military value criteria, including new
considerations introduced for this round, such as surge and homeland
defense needs. Data accuracy was enhanced by the required use of
certified data and by efforts of the DOD Inspector General and service
audit agencies in checking the data. 

Time limitations and complexities introduced by DOD in weaving together
an unprecedented 837 closure and realignment actions across the country
into 222 individual recommendations caused GAO to focus more on
evaluating major cross-cutting issues than on implementation issues of
individual recommendations. GAO identified various issues that may
warrant further attention by the Commission. Some apply to a broad range
of recommendations, such as assumptions and inconsistencies in
developing certain cost and savings estimates, lengthy payback periods,
or potential impacts on affected communities. GAO also identified
certain candidate recommendations, including some that were changed by
senior DOD leadership late in the process that may warrant attention.

To download the entire report as a PDF file, go to
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-785.


-- 


Lenny Siegel
Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight
c/o PSC, 278-A Hope St., Mountain View, CA 94041
Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545
Fax: 650/961-8918
<lsiegel@cpeo.org>
http://www.cpeo.org
_______________________________________________
Installation_Reuse_Forum mailing list
Installation_Reuse_Forum@list.cpeo.org
http://www.cpeo.org/mailman/listinfo/installation_reuse_forum