BRAC 2005September 14, 2005
BRAC 2005 Process and Strategy
Key ImperativesFurther TransformationRationalize infrastructure to force structureAdjust footprint to maximize capability and efficiencyMaximize Joint UtilizationReduce overheadImprove efficiencyFacilitate joint training and operationsConvert Waste to WarfightingUnnecessary capacity diverts DoD resources
Process TimelineSecDef initiates BRAC 05 Process (establish organization, process, and initial policy (Nov 02)) SecDef Approves and Forwards Recommendations for Realignments and Closures to Commission (May 16, 2005)Commission Process (May 05 - Sep 05)Presidential Review and Approval (Sep 05)Congressional Action (Sep 05 + 45 Legislative Days)NOV 02~DEC 05SecDef BRAC Report and Certifications (Delivered March 23, 2004)Selection Criteria Published (Feb 04)Commissioner Nominations (15 Mar 05) Threat Assessment/Revised Force Structure Plan (15 Mar 05)
SecDefs Kickoff Memo:Analytical ConstructTwo CategoriesService-Unique Functions Analyzed by each Military DepartmentCommon Business Oriented Support FunctionsAnalyzed by Joint Cross Service Groups that include representatives from each Service
BRAC 2005 Leadership
BRAC 05 Process OverviewMilitary Value & Other Data Calls & IssuanceCapacity Data Call Dev & IssuanceCapacity Analysis
Scenario Analysis/COBRARecommen-dations to CommissionAnalytical ApproachMilitaryValueAnalysisKey Aspects of ProcessCAPACITY MILITARY VALUE SCENARIO DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO ANALYSIS
FinalizeRecommen-dations Inventory What Where How Big Usage Surge
Selection Criteria 1 - 4 Whats important How to measure How to weight Rank order
20-Year Force Structure Plan Capacity AnalysisMilitary Value AnalysisTransformational IdeasGuiding principles)Selection Criterion 5 Potential Costs & Savings (COBRA)Criteria 6, 7, 8 Economic, Community, & Environmental Impacts
Army Vision for BRAC 2005DOD Selection CriteriaTitle X ResponsibilitiesDOD Strategic Planning GuidanceThe Army PlanArmy Campaign PlanArmys Focus AreasSenior Leaders MACOM CommandersStrategic Readiness SystemTransformationA campaign quality Joint and Expeditionary Army positioned to provide relevant and ready combat power to Combatant Commanders from a portfolio of installations that projects power, trains, sustains and enhances the readiness and well-being of the Joint Team.
Department of Navy Overarching StrategyContinue to rationalize infrastructure capabilities to eliminate unnecessary excessBalance effectiveness of fleet concentration with AT/FP desire for dispersion/redundancyLeverage opportunities for total force integration and joint basingAccommodate changing operational conceptsFacilitate evolution of force structure and infrastructure organizational alignment
Air Force Strategies - Principle-DrivenMaintain squadrons within operationally efficient proximity to DoD-controlled airspace, ranges, MOAs, and low-level routesOptimize the size -- # of aircraft / crew ratios -- of our squadronsBetter meet needs of the Air Force by maintaining/placing ARC units in locations that best meet the demographic and mission requirements unique to the ARCMobility basing that optimizes proximity to missionEnsure long-range strike bases provide flexible strategic response and strategic force protectionRetain enough capacity to bed down worldwide AF forces Ensure joint basing realignment actions (when compared to the status quo) increase the military value of a function, or decrease the cost for the same military value of that functionIdentify Best of Breed BasesJudge Remaining Bases for Overall Military Utility
JCSG Overarching StrategiesIndustrial - Joint solutions, regionalization, and follow the fleet.Education & Training Joint centers of excellence, private sector reliance, joint combat and undergraduate flight training, preserve Service acculturation. Supply & Storage - Transition from linear to networked processes. Force focused with regionalized distribution. Headquarters & Support - Joint solutions, regionalization, and consolidation of NCR, pay, major HQs, prisons, and leased space.Medical Proficient and jointly trained medical forces ready to deploy. Size treatment facilities to beneficiary population demand. Consolidate, co-locate, and partner with civilian/VA.Technical - Align and consolidate Research, Development, Acquisition, Test, & Evaluation Centers for functional and technical efficiency and synergy.
Combatant Command InvolvementProcess changes from previous roundsShift in role of Joint Cross Service GroupsSolicitation of COCOM inputCJCS has statutory responsibility to consult with and seek advice from Combatant Commanders Chairman and Vice Chairman representation on IEC and ISG, respectively, achieves this consultation roleJoint Staff representation on each JCSGJoint Staff channeled CoCom concerns through scenario review processChairmans concurrence on candidate recommendations included CoCom coordinationEstablished Reading Room
BRAC 2005 Results
SECDEF Recommendations222 Recommendations (CR)842 Installations affected 33 Major closures (>$100M PRV)29 Major realignments (400 or more net reduction in mil/civ personnel)780 Other actions274 Minor realignments (26% leased)506 Minor closures (12% leased)$5.5B Annual Recurring Savings, $48.8B NPVWith overseas: $6.7B Annual Recurring Savings, $64.2B NPVAdjusts the U.S. base structure to receive 47,000 Army personnel returning from overseasRealize two dollars in savings for every dollar spent comparing one-time costs to net present value savings.
Comparing BRAC RoundsNote 1: As of the FY 2006 Presidents Budget (February 2005) through FY 2001.Note 2: Annual recurring savings (ARS) begin in the year following each rounds 6-year implementation period: FY96 for BRAC 88; FY98 for BRAC 91; FY00 for BRAC 93; and FY02 for BRAC 95. These numbers reflect the ARS for each round starting in 2002 and are expressed in FY 05 dollars.Note 3: Does not add due to rounding.
Strategies to OutcomesForce Protection realitiesLeased space (H&SA)Re-deploying force structure/Combining ArmsArmy UA (USA)Relieves stress on the Force+18K additional troops/more MPsLess PCSBetter Guard/Reserve training opportunitiesRecruiting/RetentionCenters of Excellence/ExpertiseWalter Reed National Medical CenterJoint Transportation Management Trng
Optimization of Military ValueSurgeAnnual recurring savings$5.5B SavingsJointness Installation Management (H&SA)TransformationJoint Strike Fighter (E&T)Integration of overseas actionsFort Bliss (USA)Business TransformationSupply Chain management (S&S)Depot Level Reparables (S&S)Technology and Lab consolidationRDAT&E Fixed Wing (TECH)
Results of Commission ReviewAccepted about 65% of DoDs 222 recommendations (discounting minor changes the acceptance rate is 79%)Of the Departments proposed 33 major closures and 29 major realignments, the Commission approved 76 percent and 90 percent respectivelyFinancial changes:
Report and recommendations forwarded to the President on September 8, 2005
($B)DoD SubmissionCommission ResultChangedOne-Time Costs $24.4$22.8($1.6)Annual Recurring Savings$5.5$4.4($1.1)20 Year Net Present Value$48.8$36.5($12.3)
Way ForwardThe Commission submitted recommendations to the President on September 8th. President has until September 23rd to approve or disapprove.Approval President sends to Congress.Disapproval President sends back to the Commission for reconsideration. Commission has until October 20th to resubmit recommendations. President has until November 7th to approve or disapprove. Unless Congress enacts a joint resolution of disapproval before the earlier of 45 days* or adjournment sine die, the Department must close and realign the installations so recommended. The Department must begin implementing the recommendations within 2 years and complete within 6 years.
If Congress adjourns for more than 3 days, the 45 day countdown is suspended.
Index for Brief1-2 - Introduction/Purpose3 -10 Summary of Candidate Recommendations
Index for Brief1-2 - Introduction/Purpose3 -10 Summary of Candidate Recommendations
To give you a flavor of the strategy driven approach to developing scenarios, I have paraphrased the overarching strategies from the JCSGs (with the exception of Intelligence). All of these build on eliminating excess capacity and pursuing concepts that further transformationIt is worth noting, Medical must retain enough in-house capacity to train their military doctors for deployment this impacts their capacity requirementsThese strategies are impacted by how quantitatively we can approach these business areas. Industrial and Supply & Storage are more quantitative while Technical is more qualitative.
This recaps the extent of our recommendations, both the number of recommendations and the number of installations impacted
This slide reflects the major closures and realignments from previous rounds. It is a matter of record in testimony and in the previous SECDEF reports. However, these numbers reflect a major/minor construct no longer used.
This at least gives you a sense of magnitude for this rounds as compared to the last four.
Note 1: As of the FY 2006 Presidents Budget (February 2005) through FY 2001.
Note 2: Annual recurring savings (ARS) begin in the year following each rounds 6-year implementation period: FY96 for BRAC 88; FY98 for BRAC 91; FY00 for BRAC 93; and FY02 for BRAC 95. These numbers reflect the ARS for each round starting in 2002 and are expressed in FY 05 dollars.
Note 3: Does not add due to rounding.
This slide reflects our current themes based on your input from last weeks IEC and our recent meeting with the Secretary of Defense