Please direct any OSD-level BRAC questions to Mr. Glenn Flood, 703.695.6294

UNCLAS

PRECEDENCE TO: ROUTINE          DTG: 022118Z MAY 05  (Part 1)
                                        DTG: 022120Z MAY 05  (Part 2)
PRECEDENCE CC: ROUTINE
TYPE: DMS SIGNED/ENCRYPTED
FROM PLA: SECDEF WASHINGTON DC//PA//
FROM D/N: C:US,O:U.S. Government,OU:DoD,OU:OSD,OU:ORGANIZATIONS,
   L:WASHINGTON DC,OU:ASD(PUBLIC AFFAIRS)(uc)
SUBJECT: Public Affairs Guidance on BRAC 2005 - PART 1 of 2 PARTS
TEXT:
UNCLASSIFIED//

Subject:  Public Affairs Guidance on BRAC 2005

1.  References.

1.1.    SECDEF MSG, DTG 312136Z MAR 05, SUBJ:  Supplemental (PAG) - Transformation through Base Realignment And Closure (BRAC 2005). 

1.2.    SECDEF MSG, DTG 052323Z JAN 04, SUBJ:  Supplemental (PAG) - Transformation through Base Realignment And Closure (BRAC 2005).  This message specifically addressed matters related to the BRAC 2005 data call announced on 6 January 2004.

1.3.    SECDEF MSG, DTG 202320Z NOV 03, SUBJ:  Public Affairs Guidance (PAG) - Transformation through Base Realignment And Closure (BRAC 2005)

1.4.    Under Secretary of Defense (AT&L) memo   Policy Memorandum Two BRAC 2005 Military Value Principles

1.5.    Under Secretary of Defense (AT&L) memo   Policy Memorandum One BRAC 2005 Policy, Responsibilities, and Procedures 

1.6.    Secretary of Defense (SECDEF) memo on transformation through BRAC, 15 Nov 02.  This is SECDEF's initial direction on BRAC 2005.

1.7.    Authorizing Legislation; Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 as Amended Through FY05 Authorization Act Sections 2901-2914.

2.  Background and Purpose.  This message provides updated PAG for BRAC 2005, supersedes Refs 1.1 and 1.2, and is active upon the announcement of Secretary of Defense s base closure and realignment recommendations on May 13, 2005.  Additional guidance will be provided as required.

2.1.  The National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2002 authorized DoD to pursue one BRAC round in 2005.  Ref 1.6 initiated the complex analysis and decision process involving virtually all levels of DoD management, from installation through major command and component/agency headquarters to OSD, in which all bases were considered and treated equally.  The independent BRAC Commission will review the SECDEF S realignment and closure recommendations through a public process.  In turn, the Commission s recommendations will be reviewed by the President and Congress.

2.2.  Because of the impact on the Military Departments and local communities, BRAC is a subject of intense interest to all stakeholders.   Realignment and closure decisions of BRAC 2005 will support DoD transformation.  Analytical work and subsequent deliberations must occur free from opinions (internal or external), must be based on certified data and removed from any speculation in order to provide the SECDEF, the BRAC Commission, the President, and Congress with the optimal set of recommendations.

3.  Public Affairs Policy:  Active.  Base realignments and closures may be contentious and controversial for affected internal and external audiences.  Commanders and their public affairs officers must be prepared to respond to questions and objectively and proactively communicate the details of the BRAC process to internal audiences, the public and the media.

3.1.  Media Coverage Information that would be releasable in the normal course of business may continue to be released to the media and requests for informational briefings or tours of base facilities for the  media that would normally be authorized may continue to be granted.    In cases where media requests can be facilitated without base visits by providing B-roll, stills, fact sheets or similar information, Public Affairs Officers may offer these items as an alternate means of granting the media s request.  The BRAC announcement per se does not impose any additional restrictions on media visits to DoD facilities.

3.1.1. Media Coverage in conjunction with elected official visits.  Media events or media coverage of elected officials  visits to bases and installations in connection with BRAC is not authorized.  If elected officials request tours and briefings from installation commands, it must be done within the limits defined in paragraph 3.2., below.  However, press conferences, media availabilities or traveling media are not authorized on installations in connection with such visits.  In certain cases, elected officials may participate in non-political and non-BRAC related events on military installations that may be covered by media (ribbon-cutting, dedications, etc.).  These visits may be supported under certain circumstances but should be coordinated though the appropriate public affairs office. 

3.2.  Media Opportunities.  In cases where on-base opportunities would not be appropriate, as referenced in 3.1.1, local PAOs may suggest appropriate off-base opportunities vs. holding events on DoD property.  Each installation shall ensure that service and DoD restrictions regarding potential media coverage of security and force protection measures at gates or entry points are enforced.  Military personnel may attend Commission public hearings but may not participate in associated media activities.  Exceptions must be approved by MAJCOM/Service level PAO.

3.3.  Community Queries.  Local communities have an extraordinary interest in the BRAC process and, consistent with the Department's need for internal deliberation, will receive access to data made public upon release of the Secretary s recommendations.  Timely and consistent information from all DoD elements will minimize confusion and foster trust.  PAOs may continue to release the same type and amount of information on their installations within current operational security and force protection guidelines. 

3.3.1  Additionally, the BRAC Commission s review is a transparent process.  Data-call information from installations will be made public by the Department when it is turned over to the BRAC Commission not later than May 16.  It will be available on www.defenselink.mil/BRAC as soon as possible.  The volume of data-call information may preclude all of it being available on Defenselink by May 16.  While requests for local data-call information should be referred to the web site, local installations may make data call information available to local communities and media any time after the Secretary has announced his recommendations.

3.3.2  Inquiries received by local commands related to factual information upon which DoD bases were recommended for closure or realignment can be answered to the extent that factual and accurate information is on hand, properly coordinated, and cleared for release by the local command s chain of command as appropriate.  Avoid using personal opinions and/or speculation in discussing BRAC recommendations.  All information in the Secretary's report to the BRAC Commission and supporting documents should be considered  cleared.

3.3.3.  It is important to note that local commanders are not in a position to evaluate the entire mission requirements and cross-service implications of their individual functions as they may affect DoD.  Even though local commanders are well versed in the merits of their installation, they are not in a position to assess other installations or the Department s total needs.  As such, local commanders are not in a position to answer questions requiring them to speculate on the senior-level deliberation that resulted in specific recommendations.  These queries should be referred to the appropriate public affairs office.   

3.4. Internal communications.   DoD leadership recognizes that commanders, commanding officers and command spokespersons must support DoD s recommendations and the concerns of the local employees and communities.  The importance of maintaining open lines of communication among all concerned cannot be overemphasized.  Commanders can and should remind people of the overall goals and worldwide requirements during the BRAC process while avoiding speculation about what went into the decision process in Washington.

3.4.1.  Following past BRAC announcements, some affected commanders arranged town-hall style meetings (e.g.  All Hands Calls  or departmental  Commander s Calls ) to internally brief command personnel and their families regarding the announcement (without media).  This interaction is highly encouraged.  The agendas must be coordinated with the installation Human Resources staff to insure that, when necessary, the appropriate labor organization is provided the opportunity to be present.  Commanders are encouraged to brief the BRAC process and emphasize that DoD recommendations will not be implemented until after hearings and review by the BRAC Commission (including local visits by two commission members to adversely affected facilities), approval by the President, and finally approval by Congress in the November 2005 timeframe.  The defenselink.mil/BRAC website also will contain links to Personnel & Readiness information important for military members and civilian employees and their families and contractors.

3.5.  Participation In Official Capacity.  DoD personnel may not participate in activities of any organization that has as its stated purpose insulating bases from realignment or closure.  This guidance is aimed at ensuring the fairness and rigor of the BRAC deliberative process.  Invitations to participate in such organizations should be discussed with appropriate ethics counselors.  In a liaison or representational role, DoD officials may attend meetings with state and local officials, or other organizations that may seek to develop plans or programs to improve the ability of installations to discharge their national security and defense missions.  DoD officials may not manage or control such organizations or efforts.

3.5.1. Interaction with BRAC Commission.  DoD personnel may receive requests, based on their professional position, to participate in BRAC Commission hearings and should be prepared to support such requests.  Prepared testimony for hearings should be cleared through the chain of command up through Service and OSD congressional affairs channels, as appropriate.  Likewise, PAOs should be prepared to support requests from the BRAC commission for base tours, press conferences, briefs or other information. 

3.5.2.  Previous Commissions asked installation commanders to support their site visits.  As such, installation commanders should be prepared to support visits by Commissioners to their facility and to host informational briefings or tours of base facilities.  There are no restrictions on providing normally releasable information.

3.5.3.  Previous Commissions held public hearings at facilities that were not located on military installations to ensure unrestricted public access and maximum public input.  For these public events, base commanders were not tasked with logistical support. The Commission (helped by the local government) set these up themselves (at school auditoriums or other public places).  As such, Commanders should not have a role nor should they be a conduit for public input.

3.6.  Many influential former officials and retired general/flag officers will be involved with organizations attempting to protect bases from realignment or closure.  Consistent with applicable ethics laws and regulations, they are allowed to participate in this manner and regardless of their participation, the organizations are not allowed any greater or lesser information/access than the general public.

3.7. Tenant organizations or commands may be affected by BRAC recommendations, particularly those commands with high numbers of civilian employees, and can therefore expect public and/or media interest.  Inquiries may overlap between the tenant command and host command.  Close coordination between commanding officers and public affairs officers of tenant commands and the hosting installation is critical to ensure message alignment.

4.  Key Themes, Messages and Talking Points. 

4.1.  Key Themes and Messages.  Themes/Messages and Talking Points will be updated when the Secretary s recommendations are made public.

4.1.1.  Primary Theme and Message.  The purpose of the SECDEF s recommendations is to make the most efficient and effective use of all the Department s resources; to improve operational efficiency; to save taxpayer dollars; to advance transformation and enhance the combat effectiveness of our military forces.

4.1.2.  Supporting Themes and Messages. 

4.1.2.1. Enabling Transformation BRAC matches infrastructure to the needs of the future force, providing a foundation of transformation.

4.1.2.2. Meeting the Needs of the Future Force--Facilitate the transformation of the Department by melding like operations of separate services; accommodate a redeploying force structure; anticipate tomorrow s uncertainties by providing surge capacity in operations, training and logistics.

4.1.2.3. Enhancing Combat Effectiveness examine and implement opportunities for greater joint activity and improving joint operations by co-locating and combining training, technology, laboratory, depot maintenance and supply chain management operations of the separate services.  The Secretary of Defense established Joint Cross Service groups to review common business-oriented functions across the Department.  These functions include Education and Training; Industrial; Intelligence; Headquarters and Support; Supply and Storage; Technical, and Medical.  These groups were composed of members from each of the Military Departments, the Joint Staff, and the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

4.1.2.4. Reducing Cost of Our Base Structure Eliminate unnecessary infrastructure resulting in recurring annual savings that can be converted from waste to war-fighting resources.

4.1.2.5. Ensuring an Impartial BRAC Process the 2005 BRAC process was designed and is being executed impartially and objectively to ensure that the outcome can be trusted to advance transformation, combat effectiveness and the efficient use of the taxpayer s money.

4.2.  Key Talking Points:  (By changing the verb tense, the following talking points can be used both before and after the Secretary releases his recommendations.)

4.2.1.  Military value was the primary consideration in assessing all military bases.  Because of the diversity of functions the Services and the Joint Cross Service Groups adopted individual approaches to military value.  The Navy s need for linear feet of pier space, for example, cannot be equated to the Air Force s value of flying training space or to an industrial depot s need for square footage of maintenance space.

4.2.2.  The 2005 BRAC process will help find innovative ways to consolidate, realign, or find alternative uses for current facilities.  (Examples will be provided after the Department s recommendations are provided to the BRAC Commission.)

4.2.3.  The functions and value of all military installations were reviewed, and all recommendations were based on legally mandated selection criteria and a 20-year force structure plan.

4.2.4.  The BRAC 2005 process will ensure that the United States continues to have the best-trained and equipped military in the world.

4.2.5.  BRAC 2005 will enable the U.S. military to match facilities to forces, meet the threats and challenges of a new century, and make the wisest use of limited defense dollars.  (Examples will be provided after the Department s recommendations are provided to the BRAC Commission.)

4.2.6.  BRAC 2005 will facilitate multi-service missions by creating joint organizational and basing solutions that will not only reduce waste but maximize military effectiveness.  (Examples will be provided after the Department s recommendations are provided to the BRAC Commission.)

4.2.7.  Consolidating facilities will save billions of dollars, allowing the department to focus funds on maintaining and modernizing facilities needed to better support our forces, recruit quality personnel, modernize equipment and infrastructure, and develop the capabilities needed to meet 21st Century threats.

4.2.8.  The Department fully appreciates the fact that the implementation of BRAC actions, which will not be finalized until November 2005 at the earliest, can be a difficult transition for affected military and civilian personnel and their families, and communities and businesses near affected bases.  DoD will do everything it can to make the transition as smooth as possible.  Affected personnel and communities will be specifically briefed on programs that are available to them when BRAC actions are implemented.  Information is currently available for interested personnel and communities at the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel & Readiness web site at www.defenselink.mil/BRAC. 

5.  Contingency and Public Statements.

5.1.  Contingency Statement.  Not applicable at this time.

5.2. Public Statement.  By changing the verb tense, the following statement may be used both before and after the Secretary sends his recommendations to the BRAC Commission.  Updated statements will be made available when the recommendations are released:

"The Department of Defense has completed its BRAC 2005 process and the Secretary of Defense has forwarded his recommendations to the independent BRAC Commission.  The Department used BRAC to achieve several goals:  eliminate excess infrastructure; reshape our military; pursue jointness; optimize military readiness; and realize significant savings in support of transforming the Department of Defense.  These recommendations eliminate excess physical capacity that has been diverting scarce resources from Defense capability.  BRAC 2005 recommendations are part of the critical foundation of transforming the Department s infrastructure to meet emerging missions and revised Defense strategies.  BRAC 2005 has allowed the Department to reconfigure its current infrastructure into one in which operational capacity maximizes both war-fighting capability and efficiency through joint organizational and basing solutions that will facilitate multi-service missions, reduce excess capacity, save money, and redirect resources to modernize equipment and infrastructure and develop the capabilities to meet 21st century threats. 

5.2.1.  Copies of Department officials  public statements made at the press briefing will be made available when the statements are delivered.  Until then, PAOs public statements must be within the confines of this guidance.

6.  Questions and Answers.  Q s and A s are not for response to query only.  Authorized spokespersons/commanders can speak to the issue of BRAC as long as they are within the scope of this document.

6.1.  General.   

Q1. What is BRAC?
A1. "BRAC" is an acronym that stands for Base Realignment and Closure.  It is the congressionally authorized process DoD has previously used to reorganize its base structure to more efficiently and effectively support our forces, increase operational readiness and facilitate new ways of doing business.  (The original legislation actually states that the title of the process is Base Closure and Realignment.) 

Q2. How does BRAC work?
A2. The process began with a threat assessment of the future national security environment, followed by the development of a force structure plan and basing requirements to meet these threats.  DoD then applied legally mandated selection criteria to determine which installations to recommend for realignment and closure.  The Secretary of Defense will publish a report containing his realignment and closure recommendations, forwarding supporting documentation to the independent commission. 

Q3. Will local commanders and others in their official capacities be available to help task forces or other efforts to influence BRAC decisions with regard to our base?
A3. DoD personnel may not participate in activities of any organization that has as its purpose, either directly or indirectly, insulating bases from realignment or closure.  This guidance is aimed at ensuring the fairness and rigor of the BRAC deliberative process.  Invitations to participate in such organizations should be discussed with appropriate ethics counselors.  DoD officials may attend meetings in a liaison or representational capacity with state and local officials, or other organizations that may seek to develop plans or programs to improve the ability of installations to discharge their national security and defense missions.  DoD officials may not manage or control such organizations or efforts.  (See paragraph 3.5 for additional clarification.)

Q4. Where do funds come from to perform the BRAC analysis/evaluations?
A4. The BRAC analysis was performed within available resources, specifically, Operations and Maintenance (O&M) funds. 

Q5. Will near-term future new force-structure changes be incorporated into the BRAC 2005 process?
A5. Yes.  The statute requires that recommendations be based on a 20-year force structure plan that begins with 2005.

Q6. What impact do the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) and the BRAC process have on one another? 
A6. The previous Quadrennial Defense Review informed the BRAC process. 

Q7. How was "jointness" assessed during BRAC 2005?
A7. The Joint Cross Service Groups reviewed common business oriented functions performed across the Department.  The Services reviewed their own operations, looking across the Department for joint solutions wherever that provided benefit.  Further, the leadership structure of BRAC 2005, as established by the Secretary of Defense, was joint at every level.  (See the answer to question 19, above)

Q8. Are there any specific priorities for BRAC 2005?
A8. In his November 15, 2002, memorandum, the SECDEF established the goals and priorities for the 2005 BRAC round.  A primary objective of BRAC 2005, in addition to realigning our base structure to meet evolving force structure, is to examine and implement opportunities for greater jointness.  To reinforce the idea that we should be looking across traditional lines to examine the potential for jointness, the Secretary established an internal BRAC 2005 decision-making body that is joint at every level. 

Q9. How will the realignment of military forces and bases overseas impact BRAC 2005 efforts?
A9. On March 20, 2003, the Secretary directed the development of a comprehensive and integrated presence and basing strategy looking out 10 years.  Results of that effort, including rationalizing areas of potential excesses and identifying the utility of overseas installations informed the BRAC 2005 process.

Q10. The Secretary of Defense has placed emphasis on transforming the Department of Defense.  What is transformation?
A10. Transformation is shaping the changing nature of military competition and cooperation through new combinations of concepts, capabilities, people and organizations that exploit our nation's advantages, protect our asymmetric vulnerabilities, and sustain our strategic position, which helps maintain peace and stability in the world.

Q11. Why is DoD transforming?
A11. Over time, the defense strategy calls for the transformation of the U.S. defense establishment. Transformation is at the heart of this strategy.  To transform DoD, we need to change its culture in many important areas.  Our budgeting, acquisition, personnel, and management systems must be able to operate in a world that changes rapidly.  Without change, the current defense program will only become more expensive in the future, and DoD will forfeit many of the opportunities available today.

Q12. How is BRAC transformational?
A12. BRAC provides a singular opportunity to reshape our infrastructure to optimize military readiness.  The 2005 BRAC process will help find innovative ways to consolidate, realign, or find alternative uses for current facilities to ensure that the U.S. continues to field the best-prepared and best-equipped military in the world.  BRAC 2005 will also enable the U.S. military to better match facilities to forces, meet the threats and challenges of a new century, and make the wisest use of limited defense dollars.

Q13. How much excess capacity does the DoD currently have?
A13. In March 2004, the Department reported to the Congress that as much as 24 percent of its aggregate installation capacity could be excess using an analysis that considered the ratios of forces to bases before and after the previous BRAC rounds.  This was similar to a 1998 report in which the Department reported to Congress that approximately 23 percent of its capacity in the aggregate could be considered excess.  However, neither of these estimates were used as targets for the BRAC 2005 analysis.  More importantly, as military value was the primary consideration, there were no capacity reduction targets of any kind established for BRAC 2005.  Specific capacity indicators depend on the function being analyzed (pier space, aircraft apron space, warehouse square footage, etc.,).

Q14. The SECDEF and other officials have said several times over the last couple of years that the Department has 20-25 percent excess capacity.  How much capacity are you recommending be closed in this round of BRAC?
A14. See answer to question 13 for background.   The materials accompanying the release of the Secretary s recommendations will include metrics that will quantify the results, in the aggregate.

Q15. If a base is selected for closure/realignment, will DoD continue to fund/complete ongoing MILCON?
A15. Yes, we will complete construction where cost effective (that is, the cost to terminate exceeds the savings) and/or where an unfinished structure would present an unreasonable impediment to reuse.

6.2. Key Groups and People. 

Q16. What is the BRAC Commission?
A16. The commission is an independent body responsible for reviewing the Secretary s recommendations for BRAC 2005.  The Base Closure and Realignment Act specified the selection process for commissioners.  The President was required to consult with the congressional leadership on nominations to serve on the commission.

Q17. Who was selected as the Chairman of the BRAC 2005 Commission?
A17. Anthony J. Principi has been appointed to serve as the Chairman of the Commission.  Secretary Principi has had a distinguished career in the public and private sectors and recently served as the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.  He is a 1967 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis, Md., saw active duty aboard the destroyer USS Joseph P. Kennedy, and later commanded a River Patrol Unit in Vietnam's Mekong Delta. Mr. Principi earned his law degree from Seton Hall University in 1975 and was assigned to the Navy's Judge Advocate General Corps in San Diego, Calif.  In 1980, he was transferred to Washington as a legislative counsel for the Department of the Navy.

Q18. Who are the members of the BRAC 2005 Commission?
A18. On April 1, 2005 President George W. Bush used his recess-appointment power to approve the nominations of eight individuals to be Members of the Defense Base Realignment and Closure Commission:

James H. Bilbray of Nevada, Philip Coyle of California, Admiral Harold W. Gehman, Jr., USN (Ret.) of Virginia, James V. Hansen of Utah, General James T. Hill, USA (Ret.) of Florida. General Lloyd Warren Newton, USAF (Ret.) of Connecticut, Samuel Knox Skinner of Illinois, and Brigadier General Sue Ellen Turner, USAF (Ret.) of Texas.

Q19.  Who is James H. Bilbray?
A19.  Former Congressman Bilbray was a member of the Foreign Affairs, Armed Services and Intelligence Committees.  He served in the U.S. Army Reserve from 1955 to 1963.

Q20.  Who is Philip Coyle?
A20.  Mr. Coyle is a Senior Advisor to the Center for Defense Information.  He served as Assistant Secretary of Defense and Director of Operational Test and Evaluation at the Department of Defense.

Q21.  Who is Admiral Harold W. Gehman, Jr., USN (Ret.)?
A21.  Admiral Gehman served on active duty in the U.S. Navy for over 35 years.  His last assignment was as NATO's Supreme Allied Commander, Atlantic and as the Commander in Chief of the U.S. Joint Forces Command.

Q22.  Who is James V. Hansen?
A22.  Former Congressman Hansen was a member of the Armed Services Committee.  He served in the U.S. Navy from 1951 to 1955.

Q23.  Who is General James T. Hill, USA (Ret.)?
A23.  General Hill served in the U.S. Army for 36 years.  His last assignment was as Combatant Commander of the U.S. Southern Command.

Q24.  Who is General Lloyd Warren Newton, USA (Ret.)?
A24. General Newton served in the U.S. Air Force for 34 years.  His last assignment was as the Commander of Air Education and Training Command.

Q25.  Who is Samuel Knox Skinner?
A25.  Mr. Skinner served as Chief of Staff and as Secretary of Transportation for President George H. W. Bush.  He served in the U.S. Army Reserve from 1960 to 1968.

Q26.  Who is Brigadier General Sue Ellen Turner, USAF (Ret.)?
A26.  General Turner is a member of the American Battle Monuments Commission. She served in the U.S. Air Force for 30 years, most recently as the director of nursing services in the Office of the Air Force Surgeon General at Bolling Air Force Base.

Q27.  What authority does the commission have?
A27.  The commission has the authority to change the Department's recommendations, if it determines that the Secretary deviated substantially from the force structure plan and/or selection criteria.  The commission will hold regional meetings to solicit public input prior to making its recommendations.  History has shown that the use of an independent commission and public meetings make the process as open and fair as possible. 

Q28.  What happens to the commission s recommendations?
A28.  The commission forwards its recommendations to the President for review and approval, who then forwards the recommendations to Congress.  Congress has 45 legislative days to act on the commission report on an all-or-none basis.  After that time, the commission's realignment and closure recommendations become law.  Implementation must start within two years, and actions must be complete within six years.  (See Q23 for more details.)

Q29.  Who has oversight of the BRAC process within DoD?
A29.  The Infrastructure Executive Council (IEC), chaired by the Deputy Secretary, and composed of the secretaries of the Military Departments and their chiefs of services, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics) (USD(AT&L)) has policy making and oversight authority for the entire BRAC 2005. 

Q30.  Who will assess the joint use aspect of BRAC 2005?
A30.  The Infrastructure Steering Group (ISG), chaired by the USD(AT&L) oversees joint cross-service analyses of common business oriented functions and ensure the integration of that process with the Military Department and defense agency specific analyses of all other functions.  The Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Military Department assistant secretaries for installations and environment, the service vice chiefs, and the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations & Environment) (DUSD(I&E)) form the ISG. There are seven joint cross service groups as described in section 4.1.2.3.

Q31. How can communities get involved in BRAC to enhance their support to the base population/mission and their prospects during the BRAC 2005 round?

A31. The Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission will solicit community input once it has received the Secretary of Defense's base closure and realignment recommendations.  The BRAC Commission can be contacted at 703-699-2950.  Their address is BRAC Commission, 2521 South Clark Street, Suite 600, Arlington, VA 22202.  The BRAC Commission expects to have a web page on line by May 16.

Q32. If a base is approved for closure or realignment, how long will the process take?
A32. Under the BRAC statute, actions to close or realign a base must be initiated within two years of the date the President transmits the BRAC Commission's recommendations report to Congress, and must be completed within six years of that same date.

Q33. How were communities impacted by base closure in past BRAC rounds?
A33. Most communities affected by closure and realignment decisions in the last four rounds of BRAC have successfully transitioned to productive economic development.   We are committed to working with BRAC 05 communities to duplicate that success when BRAC recommendations are approved.  DoD s Office of Economic Adjustment is chartered to assist local communities with planning for the reuse of closing and realigning installations and in that capacity will provide individual community assistance. Examples of past success can be found on the DoD Office of Economic Adjustment web site that can be accessed through the www.defenselink.mil/brac.  

Q34. If the final decision is to close or realign the base, with whom will the community leaders work in the transition of the base from its current mission to civilian use?
A34. Each Military Department will have a central point of contact for each closing activity to assist in coordinating the involvement of the various organizations.  It is the Military Department s role, in consultation with local communities, to make decisions on how the base property will be conveyed to new owners.  Additionally, the DoD s Office of Economic Adjustment is chartered to assist local communities with planning for the reuse of closing and realigning installations and in that capacity will provide individual community assistance.

Q35. How will the property be disposed of or sold?
A35. The BRAC statute provides the Military Departments with a variety of authorities for disposing of property at closed or realigned military installations.  In consultation with the local community, the Military Department will select the most effective combination of transfer methods to return the property to productive use and ensure equitable return for DoD and the taxpayers.  Property conveyance authorities include public sales, negotiated sales to public entities, public benefit conveyances, economic development conveyances at cost or no cost, and conveyances for conservation purposes or to entities that will perform environmental cleanup.  Some property may also be transferred to other federal agencies for continued use for Government purposes. 

Q36.  How will you decide reuse of the base?
A36.  The Department of Defense does not decide the reuse of former military installations.  The local community prepares a redevelopment plan through its designated Local Redevelopment Authority (LRA) for federal surplus property.  This redevelopment plan will designate future land uses.  The Military Departments will then make property disposal decisions, giving deference to the LRA s Redevelopment Plan.

Q37. Our base has some environmental contamination.  Will DOD clean it up?
A37.  DoD is responsible for ensuring that all known contamination is addressed in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local environmental laws and regulations.   In some cases, DoD may choose to perform the required cleanup itself before the property is transferred. In others, DoD may arrange to have the work undertaken by the new owner as part of the real estate transaction.  In either case, there will be oversight and enforcement by environmental regulators to ensure that the cleanup is protective of human health and the environment.  Also, there are a number of safeguards to ensure that the cleanup is indeed completed.  These safeguards include the possible purchase of private sector environmental insurance by the new owners of the property and provisions in the laws requiring DoD to ensure the cleanup of any contamination discovered only after the transfer of the property.

Q38. During the time cleanup is taking place -- several years in many cases -- will the base property be vacant and unused until all the cleanup is completed?
A38.  DoD s environmental cleanup program has progressed significantly.  Environmental cleanup is complete or near completion at many sites and the nature and extent of contamination is well defined at remaining locations.  Consequently, DoD believes that a much greater percentage of the property comprising this round of closures will be ready to be conveyed by the time the military missions at the base cease.  If additional cleanup is required, DoD now has available to it legal authorities that were not available at the outset of the process in prior BRAC rounds.  These authorities enable DoD to convey property to new owners in its existing condition so long as the property is suitable as is for the near-term use the new owners intend to make of it. This allows cleanup and redevelopment of the property to occur concurrently.  This option can often save time and money, and facilitates rapid economic redevelopment by allowing the new owners to put the property into productive use immediately. The Military Departments can also consider leasing if that would benefit redevelopment without delaying conveyance.

Q39. Now that SECDEF has forwarded his list of recommendations, what s the next step in the BRAC process?
A39. See timeline in question 51.

Q40. If a base or facility is among the DoD recommendations, does that mean that it will definitely be closed/realigned?  How will communities learn when that will occur?
A40. The DoD recommendations must be approved by the BRAC Commission, the President and the Congress before they can be implemented. 

Q41. If my base/installation is NOT on the list, can the BRAC commission recommend it for closure or realignment?
A41.  Yes.  The statute addresses three different options:  additions to the recommendations, expansions of the recommendations, and removal from the recommendations. This is a change from previous rounds.

Option 1 - Additions:  In accordance with the statute, the Commission may not add a new facility unless:
The Commission provides the SECDEF with at least a 15-day period, before making the change, in which to submit an explanation of the reasons why the installation was not included on the closure or realignment list by the Secretary.

The decision to add the installation for Commission consideration is supported by at least seven of the nine members of the Commission.

The Commission shall invite the SECDEF to testify at a public hearing (or a closed hearing if classified information is involved), on any proposed change by the Commission to the SECDEF s recommendation.

Option 2 - Expansions:  To expand one of the SECDEF s realignment recommendations requires:

        At least two members of the Commission must visit the installation before the date of the transmittal of the report to the President.

        The decision to make the change is supported by seven of the nine Commissioners.

Option 3 - Removals:  To remove one of the SECDEF s recommendations requires:
        A majority vote of the Commission.

Q42. What percentage of SECDEF recommendations have become approved closure/realignment actions?
A42. Historically, the BRAC Commissions have accepted 85 percent of the Department s recommendations.

Q43.  What is DoD s relationship with the BRAC Commission?  Can military personnel attend commission hearings in a personal/official capacity?  What if I m a civilian?
A43.  The BRAC Commission is an independent body with members appointed by the President of the United States in consultation with the Congress.  The Department of Defense provides logistic support to the Commission but has no other formal relationship with the Commission.  Anyone may attend the Commission s public hearings.

Q44. There are a number of civilians on my facility who may lose their jobs if the recommendations are approved, who is responsible for taking care of them?
A44. The Department will do everything it can to make the transition as smooth as possible and there are a number of programs available for military members and civilian employees and their families and contractors that will help do that.  All DoD personnel are encouraged to visit www.defenselink.mil/BRAC for links to the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness discussion of those programs.  Additionally, the Department will have a dedicated BRAC website:  http://www.defenselink.mil/brac/, which will hyper link to defenselink.mil/BRAC.  This new website will provide information to inform employees, managers, and human resource specialists about various transition assistance programs and services.  Information on the www.bractransition.com website will include a "What's New" section; a link to a transition assistance video for employees outlining various transition programs; an employee brochure providing information on the reduction in force process, job placement programs, separation incentives, and employee benefits and entitlements; a "Frequently Asked Questions" section concerning all transition assistance programs; links to military department BRAC websites; links to the Civilian Personnel Management Service Civilian Assistance and Reemployment (CARE) website; and links to pertinent job search websites such as Office of Personnel Management's USAJobs and Department of Labor's CareerOneStop.  The www.bractransition.com website will be available by May 13, 2005.  Additionally, this website will be continually updated during the BRAC process.

Q45. What happens if Congress passes a joint resolution disapproving the Commissions recommendations?
A45. The President has the option of vetoing the resolution and if he does, Congress has the option of overriding the veto.  If the President does not veto the resolution or if Congress overrides that veto, the BRAC round in 2005 would end there and there would be no closures or realignments.  However, this would adversely affect military transformation and joint collaboration and training, which would still have to be addressed by DoD and the Congress.

Q46. Can the public provide comment on the list of recommendations?  If so, where and when?
A46.  Yes, through the BRAC Commission.  (See answer to question 31, for phone number and address.)

Q47. What does it mean that the recommendations were based on certified data?
A47. The BRAC statute requires that DoD personnel certify to the best of their knowledge and belief that information provided to the Secretary of Defense or the 2005 Commission concerning the realignment or closure of a military installation is accurate and complete.  DoD components and the Joint Cross Service Groups established procedures, internal control plans, and designated personnel to make these certifications.  

Q48.  What role did the Joint Cross Service Groups play in this round of BRAC?
A48.  The Secretary of Defense established Joint Cross Service groups to review common business-oriented functions across the Department.  These functions included: Education and Training; Industrial; Intelligence; Headquarters and Support; Supply and Storage; Technical, and Medical.  These groups were composed of members from each of the Military Departments, the Joint Staff, and the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

Q49 What do you think about the BRAC list?
A49. (Personnel outside the BRAC process are not in a position to evaluate the entire DoD cross-service mission requirements or to speculate on analysis.)  We are confident in the fact that the BRAC process is impartial, giving priority consideration to military value based on and the recommendations from installations using certified factual data and the 20-year force structure plan.  DoD leadership will continue to support the formal BRAC process as necessary through its completion and the recommendations will ultimately advance transformation, combat effectiveness and the efficient use of taxpayers' money. 

Q50. Don't you think XXX base (a base on BRAC list) is militarily important? How will you get along without it?
A50. BRAC 2005 gave priority consideration to military value, to include advancing the transformation of our forces, enhancing their combat effectiveness, and reducing overall costs for military infrastructure.  All bases were considered against their peers with the emphasis on enhancing the military value of the end state.  BRAC 2005 will allow DoD to realign our base structure to transform and to meet post-Cold War force structure. 

Q51. What events are upcoming in the BRAC 2005 process?
A51. There are several significant events taking place throughout the remainder of 2005.  The following is a general timeline of significant events.

May 16, 2005:  Not later than this date, the SECDEF must publish in the Federal Register and transmit to the Congressional Defense Committees and the Commission, a list of the military installations that the SECDEF recommends for closure or realignment.

July 1, 2005:  Not later than this date, the Comptroller General shall transmit to the Congressional Defense Committees, a report containing a detailed analysis of the SECDEF s recommendations and selection process.

September 8, 2005:  Not later than this date, the Commission must transmit to the President  a report containing its findings and conclusions based on a review and analysis of the SECDEF s recommendations.

September 23, 2005: Not later than this date, the President shall transmit to the Commission and to the Congress,  a report containing the President s approval or disapproval of the Commission s recommendations.   If the President approves the recommendations, the recommendations are binding 45  legislative  days after Presidential transmission or adjournment, unless Congress enacts joint resolution of disapproval.

October 20, 2005:  If the President disapproves the Commission's initial recommendations, the Commission must submit revised recommendations to the President not later than this date. 

Nov 7, 2005:  President s Approval or Disapproval of Revised Recommendations.  The President must approve the revised recommendations and transmit approval to Congress by this date or the process ends.  The recommendations become binding 45  legislative  days after Presidential transmission or adjournment, unless Congress enacts a joint resolution of disapproval.

April 15, 2006:  Commission terminates.

6.3.  Past BRAC Rounds.

Q52.  What were the closure results of the last four rounds of BRAC (88, 91, 93 AND 95) from the total available to the number selected for BRAC action?
A52.  The four prior rounds of BRAC resulted in recommendations to close 97 out of 495 major domestic installations.  BRAC 88 - closed 16 major installations; BRAC 91 - closed 26 major installations; BRAC 93 - closed 28 major installations; and BRAC 95 - closed 27 major installations.

Q53.  How much has been saved through previous BRAC rounds?
A53.  The four previous BRAC rounds have eliminated approximately 20 percent of DoD's capacity that existed in 1988 and, through 2001, produced net savings of approximately $17.7 billion, which includes the cost of environmental cleanup.  Recurring savings beyond 2001 are approximately $7 billion annually.  In independent studies conducted over previous years, both the Government Accountability Office and the Congressional Budget Office have consistently supported the department's view that realigning and closing unneeded military installations produces savings that far exceed costs.

Q54.  How have local communities affected by base closures fared overall?
A54.  Base Realignments and Closures cause near-term social and economic disruption.  However, there are many success stories from previous closures. A base closure can actually be an economic opportunity, especially when all elements of a community work together.  While each closure or realignment has different consequences and/or results, some recent examples include:

(1) Charleston Naval Base, S.C. -- The local community, assisted by DoD, was able to create approximately 4,500 new jobs.  Approximately 90 private, state and federal entities are currently reusing the former naval base. 

(2) Pease Air Force Base, New Hampshire   More than 185 operating tenants currently established at the Pease International Tradeport (PIT).  The PIT has been designated a Foreign Free Trade Zone by the U.S. Department of Commerce, and has developed an air cargo access capability via an 11,300 foot runway.  There is in excess of 3,800,000 square feet of new, or newly renovated space, that has supported the creation of over 5,000 jobs, in bio technology (Lonza Biotechnics), education (Southern New Hampshire University), in addition to a wide variety (Pan Am, Marriott, Redhook Brewery) of retail and professional service availability day-to-day.

(3) Fort Devens, Mass. -- More than 3,000 new jobs have been generated and 2.7 million square feet of new construction has occurred. With 68 different employers on site, redevelopment ranges from small business incubators to the Gillette Corp., which occupies a large warehouse/distribution center and manufacturing plant. 

Q55.  Is the historical information available to the general public?
A55.  The Office of the Secretary of Defense maintains the documentation used by the previous BRAC Commissions.  While much of the information is maintained on DoD websites, the actual records are located at 1745 Jefferson Davis Highway, Crystal Square 4, Suite 105, Arlington, VA.  The information is open to the public; however, due to security requirements for building access, we ask that individuals call the office, (703) 607-3207, before arriving to ensure a government representative is present.  There is a copier available. 

Q56.  How could BRAC proceed without an Integrated Global Presence and Basing Strategy (IGPBS) decision?  How was BRAC coordinated with the Overseas Basing Study?  Weren t IGPBS and BRAC 2005 being considered in a  stove piped  manner?
A56.  BRAC, of course, only applies to our military facilities in the United States.  As we transform the Department, we didn t think it made much sense to look just at our domestic facilities so we coupled the BRAC process with our Global Force Posture Review, which in essence is a BRAC process for our internationally based forces.  The result is the relocation of troops to the United States from abroad and several other related changes made domestically to ensure unit cohesion, as well as realignment for the twenty-first century.  (Dollar amounts will be available when the Secretary s recommendations are announced.)

Q57. What is the Cost of Base Realignment Actions (COBRA)?
A57.  COBRA is an economic analysis model that estimates the costs and savings associated with a proposed base closure or realignment.  COBRA is not designed to produce budget estimates, but rather to provide a consistent and auditable method of evaluating and comparing different courses of action over a period of 20 years.  COBRA s key outputs are Net Present Value, the Payback Year, and the Payback Period for a course of action.  Each Service and the JCSG s used COBRA to evaluate the courses of action.

Q58. How does COBRA 05 differ from COBRA 95?
A58.  COBRA 05 validated and updated several cost algorithms (e.g., sustainment costs).  It added more installation specific data rather than national averages, added functions to calculate costs associated with privatization initiatives and standardized data among the Services, OSD and the JCSGs.  These enhancements are responsive to the GAO findings from BRAC 95.

Q59.  How are base cleanup costs factored into the cost and savings estimates for this BRAC round?
A59.  DoD policy guidance has historically stipulated that environmental restoration costs were not to be factored into analyses of costs and savings when examining potential installations for realignment and closure, since DoD was obligated to restore contaminated sites on military installations regardless of whether or not they were closed. 

Q60.  How is BRAC 2005 different from past rounds?
A60.  BRAC 05 is dramatically different from previous rounds.  Because we are on our 5th round of BRAC, the nature of the excess capacity has changed. Most of the excess capacity today is more fragmented, and often in the form of underused facilities.  This suggests that savings can be achieved by sharing facilities to a greater extent.  Excess capacity is defined as underused or unused facilities an/or infrastructure.  Today, greater emphasis is being placed on reshaping the Department as opposed to simple cost cutting.  There also is greater emphasis on  jointness--selecting the appropriate organizations from two or more services to share facilities in the right location can significantly improve combat effectiveness while reducing costs.  It also generates a more powerful military through appropriate basing.  Jointness at every level will play a much greater role in this round of BRAC.

Q61. Have you considered the impact on retirees and veterans if you close base facilities such as commissaries and BX s?
A61. Yes, of course.  Morale and welfare are key ingredients in readiness.  We would prefer not to inconvenience anyone.  BRAC is hard.  The process is hard, but necessary.  There is no escaping the fact that we have more infrastructure than we need to support the nation s defense force in the 21st century.  We must be organized and arranged as efficiently as we can be to get the highest and best use out of our defense force. 

7.  Miscellaneous Information.

7.1. Command Relationships. 

7.1.1. OASD(PA) has developed this BRAC 2005 PAG in coordination with Service PAOs and DUSD (I&E).  Local commanders and their PAOs are encouraged to respond to questions within the scope of this PAG.  Questions that cannot be answered within the scope of this guidance will be taken without comment and forwarded with proposed answers to OASD(PA).

7.1.2. To protect the integrity of the BRAC 2005 process and to ensure that consistent and accurate information is provided, OSD, the military departments, and participating defense agencies will respond to community and Congressional inquiries with information that has been approved for public release.  Unauthorized discussion, dissemination of information or speculation regarding BRAC matters by DoD personnel and contractors is prohibited.

7.1.3.  The Office of Economic Adjustment is Department of Defense's primary source for assisting communities that are adversely impacted by Defense program changes, including base closures or realignments, base expansions, and contract or program cancellations. To assist affected communities, OEA manages and directs the Defense Economic Adjustment Program, and coordinates the involvement of other Federal Agencies.  The OEA has its own public affairs clearance channels and Command and Base PAOs are not tasked with clearance responsibilities for OEA issuances and statements.  The OEA is encouraged to coordinate all public utterances with the Base PAO.

7.2. Media Information Centers.  Not applicable.

7.3. DoD National Media Pool.  Not applicable.

7.4. Internal Media and Audiovisual Coverage.  It is imperative that commanders and PAOs at all levels maximize internal communications opportunities to keep personnel informed about the BRAC 2005 process.  OASD/PA will support this effort through utilization of The Pentagon Channel (on line at  www.pentagonchannel.mil), the Department of Defense web link (www.defenselink.mil/BRAC) and the American Forces Press Service. 

7.5. Online Information Sources.  Public information about the current BRAC process and past experience with prior BRAC rounds is available through several key DoD web sites

7.5.1.  The primary BRAC 2005 website is located at www.defenselink.mil/brac.    Contents include the text of the current Defense Base Closure Act, the reports of the Secretaries of Defense and the Defense Base Closure And Realignment Commissions in prior BRAC rounds, Government Accountability Office reports on the status of bases realigned and closed in prior rounds, and information on assistance available to communities with bases that have been realigned or closed.  DoD personnel are encouraged to refer the media, community representatives, and other interested parties to this public web site for further information about what has happened in prior rounds and the process for BRAC 2005.  Additional public information related to BRAC 2005 will become available and posted to the website as the process proceeds. 

7.5.2.  An important website is maintained by DoD s Office of Economic Adjustment, or DoD OEA.  That site is located at http://www.oea.gov/oeaweb.nsf/Home?OpenForm.  This site is particularly useful for local communities.   The site also will be available through www.defenselink.mil/brac. 

8.  Points of Contact.  Please note that this information is not intended for media referrals.  Individuals needing to refer a member of the media to the following organizations shall contact the POC first, and determine the recommended public/media contact information.  OASD/PA POC is Mr. Glenn Flood, cmcl 703-695-6294, DSN 225-6294, email glenn.flood@osd.mil ; Army Public Affairs POC is LTC Barry Johnson, 703.693.6475, barry.johnson@hqda.army.mil,  Navy Public Affairs POC is LT Christine Ventresca, 703.697.5342.  email christine.ventresca@navy.mil ; Air Force Public Affairs POC is Ms. Shirley Curry, 703.693.9091, Shirley.curry@pentagon.af.mil ; Marine Corps Public Affairs POC is Major Nathaniel Fahy, 703.614.6092, FahyNG@hq.usmc.mil; National Guard POC, Mr. Dan Allen, 703-607-2632, Dan.allen@ngb.ang.af.mil .

===============================================================
ORIGINAL TO RECIPIENTS:
C:US,O:U.S. GOVERNMENT,OU:DOD,OU:OSD,OU:ADDRESS LISTS,CN:AL 8777(UC)
   [AIG 8777]
C:US,O:U.S. GOVERNMENT,OU:DOD,OU:AUTODIN PLAS,OU:CE-CS,OU:CHINFO
   WASHINGTON DC
   [CHINFO WASHINGTON DC]
No DN
   [SAF WASHINGTON DC//PA//]
C:US,O:U.S. GOVERNMENT,OU:DOD,OU:AF,OU:ORGANIZATIONS,L:PENTAGON
   WASHINGTON DC,OU:SAF(UC),OU:PA(UC),OU:PAI(UC)
   [SAF WASHINGTON DC//PAI//]
C:US,O:U.S. GOVERNMENT,OU:DOD,OU:AF,OU:ORGANIZATIONS,L:PENTAGON
   WASHINGTON DC,OU:SAF(UC),OU:PA(UC),OU:PAM(UC)
   [SAF WASHINGTON DC//PAM//]
C:US,O:U.S. GOVERNMENT,OU:DOD,OU:AF,OU:ORGANIZATIONS,L:PENTAGON
   WASHINGTON DC,OU:SAF(UC),OU:PA(UC),OU:PAR(UC)
   [SAF WASHINGTON DC//PAR//]
C:US,O:U.S. GOVERNMENT,OU:DOD,OU:ARMY,OU:ORGANIZATIONS,L:CONUS,
   L:WASHINGTON DC,OU:DA HQDA SECRETARIAT(UC),OU:CHIEF OF PUBLIC
   AFFAIRS(UC)
   [DA WASHINGTON DC//SAPA//]
C:US,O:U.S. GOVERNMENT,OU:DOD,OU:ARMY,OU:ORGANIZATIONS,L:CONUS,
   L:WASHINGTON DC,OU:DA HQDA SECRETARIAT(UC),OU:CHIEF OF PUBLIC
   AFFAIRS(UC),OU:CMD INFO DIV(UC)
   [DA WASHINGTON DC//SAPA-CID//]
C:US,O:U.S. GOVERNMENT,OU:DOD,OU:ARMY,OU:ORGANIZATIONS,L:CONUS,
   L:WASHINGTON DC,OU:DA HQDA SECRETARIAT(UC),OU:CHIEF OF PUBLIC
   AFFAIRS(UC),OU:PLANS DIV(UC)
   [DA WASHINGTON DC//SAPA-PLAN//]
C:US,O:U.S. GOVERNMENT,OU:DOD,OU:OSD,OU:ORGANIZATIONS,L:WASHINGTON
   DC,OU:ASD(PUBLIC AFFAIRS)(UC)
   [SECDEF WASHINGTON DC//PA//]
C:US,O:U.S. GOVERNMENT,OU:DOD,OU:OSD,OU:ORGANIZATIONS,L:WASHINGTON
   DC,OU:ASD(PUBLIC AFFAIRS)(UC),OU:DOD PRESS OFFICE(UC)
   [SECDEF WASHINGTON DC//PA-PO//]
PROFILED DISSEMINEES:
DMSFORMAY@PTSC.PENTAGON.MIL (CC)
DMS.PA.V3@OSD.MIL (TO)
DA ID: 1760170
MTSID: c=US;a=DMS;p=GOV+DMS+NIPR;l=AVTAYZ05-050502212057Z-15213
SIGNED BY: /C=US/O=U.S. Government/OU=DoD/OU=OSD/OU=ORGANIZATIONS/
   L=WASHINGTON DC/OU=ASD(PUBLIC AFFAIRS)(uc) ***
   VALIDATED ***
ENCRYPTED BY: /C=US/O=U.S. Government/OU=DoD/OU=OSD/OU=ADDRESS
   LISTS/CN=AL 8777(uc) *** VALIDATED ***
MESSAGE TYPE: OTHERORG
OTHER TO RECIPIENTS:
AIG 8777 @ AL 8777(uc)
CNO WASHINGTON DC
DIA WASHINGTON DC

UNCLAS

Classification:  UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

Classification:  UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE