[CPEO-IRF] Air National Guard replacement missions

[Lenny Siegel <lennysiegel@gmail.com>]

Military Base Closures: Management Strategy Needed to Mitigate 
Challenges and Improve Communication to Help Ensure Timely 
Implementation of Air National Guard Recommendations  GAO-07-641  May 
16, 2007  (50 pages)

Summary

The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) recommendations affected 62 
percent of the flying units in the Air National Guard (ANG) with 14 
units losing their flying mission, and others converting from one type 
of aircraft to another, or increasing or decreasing assigned aircraft. 
To implement the recommendations, ANG must relocate hundreds of aircraft 
and retrain or recruit about 15,000 personnel by 2011. In this report, 
GAO addresses the status of efforts to implement the ANG BRAC actions. 
GAO's objectives were to determine (1) the process to provide 
replacement missions to units losing flying missions, (2) the progress 
and challenges in implementing the BRAC actions, and (3) changes to the 
cost and savings estimates. This report, prepared under the Comptroller 
General's authority to conduct evaluations on his own initiative, is one 
in a series of reports related to 2005 BRAC recommendations. GAO 
conducted its work at the Air Force, ANG headquarters, and in 11 states 
affected by BRAC 2005

Through a consultative process that involved key stakeholders, the Air 
Force identified and ANG assigned 30 replacement missions for affected 
units that supported either the future force structure or the National 
Guard goal to maximize flying missions. On the basis of consultation 
with its major commands and the combatant commanders, the Air Force 
developed a prioritized list of potential mission areas for ANG, but let 
ANG, with input from state leadership, decide which missions to assign 
to specific units. ANG assigned affected units 23 missions from the 
prioritized list. ANG also assigned 7 new flying missions to affected 
units on the basis of its leadership goal to have at least 1 flying 
mission per state and to maximize the number of flying missions where 
possible. ANG is making progress in planning to implement the BRAC 
recommendations, but lacks a strategy to address implementation 
challenges. Without such a strategy, several challenges could delay when 
some units are able to perform their new missions. ANG has developed 
programming plans for the BRAC-related actions affecting the ANG and a 
plan to move hundreds of aircraft. However, ANG faces challenges in 
managing the timing and sequencing of many actions required to implement 
BRAC, such as developing manning documents that provide the specific 
skill mixes required, and in ensuring there is sufficient space in Air 
Force schools to accommodate personnel requiring training. For example, 
ANG projects that about 3,000 personnel need to be trained for 
intelligence missions, but the school can currently accommodate only a 
portion of this requirement. ANG has worked with the Air Force to 
develop potential solutions, but these have yet to be fully implemented. 
There may also be delays in obtaining security clearances for personnel 
due to the lengthy clearance process. Further, bridge missions have not 
been identified for some units that will face a gap between old and new 
missions. ANG also faces possible delays in obtaining required funding 
for new equipment, construction, and training. Finally, some ANG units 
believe there has been insufficient communication with ANG headquarters 
about new mission requirements, which impacts their ability to recruit 
and train personnel. GAO's analysis of current Air Force estimates 
indicates that there will be annual recurring costs of $53 million 
rather than estimated $26 million annual recurring savings for the ANG 
related actions. Further, the Air Force is not using BRAC funds for over 
$300 million for military construction, training, and equipment to 
establish replacement missions for units losing their flying mission. 
However, because these costs are not included in the Air Force BRAC 
budget submission, Congress does not have full visibility over 
BRAC-related implementation costs.


For the original summary and links to the full report, go to 
http://www.gao.gov/docdblite/details.php?rptno=GAO-07-641

--


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