Jump to content
Washington DC Message Boards

Defense Base Closure

Guest Casey Aden-Wansbury

Recommended Posts

Guest Casey Aden-Wansbury

We are writing to register our deep concern over the Department of Defense’s failure to comply with its statutory obligation to disclose to Congress the information underlying its recent recommendations for military base closures and realignments. The Department’s failure to disclose this information undermines public confidence in the integrity of the Department’s decision-making process that produced these recommendations.


The Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 as amended states expressly that Congress be provided the information required to undertake a substantive review of the Department’s recommendations. To facilitate that review, the Act states clearly that the Department shall disclose to Congress “all information used by the Secretary to prepare the recommendations.” The Department’s failure to disclose this information obstructs Congress’s ability to conduct a review.


The Act also requires the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission to assess the Department’s recommendations and to submit its findings and conclusions to you by September 8, 2005. The Commission could not begin reviewing the Department’s recommendations until the Department released them on May 13, 2005. Following their release, the Commission initiated its own site visits and hearings to gather additional data for its report. The Department’s failure to disclose the supporting information contemporaneously with releasing its recommendations discriminates against the sites of the Commission’s initial visits and hearings and prevents Members of Congress representing those sites from preparing adequately for these visits and hearings.


The Department was put on notice of this disclosure obligation when the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 instituted the current round of base closures and realignments. Accordingly, the Department has no excuse for its ongoing delay in disclosing the information.


The base closure and realignment process is intended to be open and transparent. The integrity of the process depends upon these qualities. The absence of these qualities due to the Department’s failure to disclose information upon which its recommendations are made undermines our confidence in the process and undoubtedly raises concerns within the public at large. We urge you to direct the Department to comply fully and immediately with the disclosure requirements of the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Human

Now this is the beauty about the internet? Less game play.

------------------------------>Several VOLUMES detailing its justifications for closing installations were released Monday.



Now this is where we get to the heart of the Matter.---------------------------------------------->Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Chairwoman Collins of Maine and ranking member Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., represent the two states hit hardest by the base realignment and closure round under way.


If the independent BRAC commission adopts the secretary's recommendations later this summer, the two New England states stand to lose several major installations, including Connecticut's massive New London Submarine Base and Maine's Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.



This is the Conclusion --------------------------------------------------------------------------->Attempts to halt or stall the BRAC are all part of the process, said Ken Beeks " Vice President at Business Executives for National Security", a group that supports base closings.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excerpt taken from American Forces Press Service


Defense officials are preparing to make more data available early next week regarding the Defense Department's base realignment and closure recommendations.

According to senior Pentagon officials, the department will submit the minutes reflecting its deliberative record and the extensive volume of data underpinning its recommendations to the BRAC Commission and Congress.


On May 13, defense officials released a list of the recommended closures and realignments, a summary of the selection process and a justification for each recommendation. To further support the commission and the public's understanding, the department also provided the classified force-structure plan, reports by the military departments and the joint cross-service groups, and other related documents.


At present, the digital database of supplementary data is temporarily classified Secret, but defense officials are working to declassify substantial portions of it.


The department intends to declassify as much of it as possible and to make it available to the public through the BRAC Commission, Acting Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England stated in a letter today to the Senate Armed Services Committee. The full volume of data made available will be substantially greater than was made available in prior BRAC rounds, England noted.


By the evening of May 31, the BRAC Commission, members of Congress and their staff with Secret clearances will have access to the entire digital database accessible on computers in a secure reading room in Crystal City, Arlington, Va., near BRAC Commission offices. A similar secure reading room will be established on Capitol Hill, officials said.


Defense officials will expedite interim Secret clearances as required for commission and congressional staff.


Defense officials plan to complete the security review of the supplemental data by June 4, 2005, and all unclassified portions of the database will be made available to the public through the commission, defense officials said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Guest HotRod

Basically all military bases were awarded points. Each Post, Air Base or facility was graded on a common standard.


For example our Air bases were graded on about 1200 question some multi part, each question involved specific need of the Air Force. Like how many aircraft can refuel, how much fuel can be downloaded, weapons storage capabilities, impact on community...and on and on.


At the end the points were tallied and bases with low point totals were recommended for closure.


I'm guessing since Walter Reed is so close to Navy Med and the VA that it was odd man out. That post/facility can easily be absorbed by other area activities. Plus it's not a great impact to the community.


I just hope the government doesn't give the land away. They usually sell it back to the state for pennies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...