To ensure that the selection criteria were  consistently applied, the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD)  established a common analytical framework to be used by the three  military departments and the seven joint cross-service groups. Each  service and group adapted this framework, in varying degrees, to its  individual activities and functions in evaluating facilities and functions and  identifying closure and realignment options. DOD Developed a Generally Logical and Reasoned Process for Making BRAC Decisions

DOD’s decision-making process for evaluating its facilities and studying  potential recommendations was generally logical, well documented, and  reasoned, although there were delays in making the supporting data  available to the Commission and to the public after the Secretary  announced his proposed recommendations on May 13, 2005. It must be noted, however, that while the process largely followed the  sequential process, initial difficulties associated with obtaining complete  and accurate data in a timely manner added to overlap and varying  degrees of concurrency between data collection efforts and other steps in  the process. For example, all of the  groups used the DOD-approved Cost of Base Realignment Actions  (COBRA) model to calculate costs, savings, and return on investment for  BRAC scenarios and, ultimately, for the final 222 BRAC recommendations. As required by  BRAC legislation, DOD certified the data used in the selection process and  based its recommendations on the congressional specified selection  criteria, its 20-year force structure plan, and gave priority consideration to  the military value criteria. Issues Related to DOD’s Recommendations

We identified issues regarding various DOD’s recommendations that may  warrant further attention by the BRAC Commission. Other issues are  further discussed in our July 1, 2005, report on the 2005 BRAC process. Issues Related to Projected Savings

DOD projects that its proposed recommendations will produce nearly $50  billion in 20-year net present value savings, with net annual recurring  savings of about $5.5 billion. Military Personnel Savings

Much of the projected net annual recurring savings (47 percent) is  associated with eliminating positions currently held by military personnel;  but end-strength levels will not be reduced as DOD indicates the positions  are expected to be reassigned to other areas. However, the expected  efficiency gains from these recommendations are based on assumptions  that are subject to some uncertainty and have not been validated. Significant Challenges Ahead for Implementing BRAC Recommendations

While we realize that the BRAC Commission is charged with reviewing  DOD’s proposed list of recommended BRAC actions and submitting its  own list to the President by September 8, 2005, there are significant  challenges ahead for implementing BRAC recommendations which I  would like to bring to the Commission’s attention—challenges that will  likely affect how successful this BRAC round could be viewed historically. These challenges include the need for (1) transition planning to minimize  the impact of the loss of specialized human capital skills in implementing  recommended actions on ongoing defense operations; (2) mechanisms to  monitor implementation, including the tracking and periodic updating of  savings that DOD expects from implementing BRAC recommendations; (3)  plans to address and adequately fund environmental restoration of  unneeded property in order to expedite property transfer and put property  to productive reuse; and (4) assistance for both losing and gaining  communities affected by the BRAC recommendations. With respect to  savings estimates, we believe it is also critical that the department devise a  mechanism to track and periodically update its savings estimates from the  final recommendations in order to provide not only Congress but the  public with a full accounting of the dollars saved through the BRAC  process. These costs  include transition assistance, planning grants, and other assistance made  available to communities by DOD and other federal agencies. As previously discussed, the number of bases  in the 2005 BRAC round that will gain several thousand personnel from the  recommended actions could increase pressure for federal assistance to  mitigate the impact on community infrastructure, such as schools and  roads, with the potential for more costs than in the prior rounds.
Why GAO Did This Study

On May 13, 2005, the Department of Defense (DOD) submitted 222 base realignment and closure (BRAC) recommendations, involving an unprecedented 837 BRAC actions, to the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission for its review. DOD expects the proposals, if approved, would generate net annual recurring savings of about $5.5 billion beginning in fiscal year 2012 and net savings of nearly $50 billion over a 20-year period, despite an expected cost of over $24 billion to implement the recommendations. The Commission is charged with reviewing these proposals and submitting its own list to the President by September 8, 2005. The Commission requested GAO to provide testimony before the Commission summarizing the results of its report, issued on July 1, 2005, on the 2005 BRAC process. This statement presents GAO views on (1)whether DOD's selection process in developing BRAC actions was logical and reasoned, (2) selected issues regarding the recommendations, and (3) certain challenges associated with implementing the BRAC recommendations, if approved.

What GAO Found

DOD established and generally followed a logical and reasoned process for assessing its bases and considering potential BRAC actions. The process was organized in a largely sequential manner with an emphasis on ensuring that reliable data were obtained and used, with special audit assistance from military service audit agencies and the DOD Inspector General. Despite some overlap in data collection and other phases of the process, the three military departments and seven joint cross-service groups generally followed the sequential BRAC process to evaluate facilities and functions, and identify recommendations in their respective areas. DOD's analytical process also addressed requirements of the BRAC legislation regarding the certification of data, basing its analysis on its 20-year force structure plan and emphasizing use of military value criteria as a primary basis for decision making--including consideration of such facets as homeland defense and surge capabilities--which the Congress added for emphasis in 2005. GAO did, however, identify a number of issues with the proposed recommendations that may warrant attention by the BRAC Commission. For example, while GAO believes savings could be achieved from DOD's proposals, there are certain limitations associated with the magnitude of the savings projected by DOD. About 47 percent, or $2.5 billion of DOD's projected net annual recurring savings is associated with eliminating jobs currently held by military personnel. However, rather than reducing end-strength, DOD indicates the positions are expected to be reassigned to other areas, which may enhance capabilities but also reduce or eliminate dollar savings available for other uses. Sizeable savings are also projected from efficiency measures and other actions related to a variety of recommendations, but underlying assumptions have not been validated and may be difficult to track and achieve over time. GAO also identified many recommendations requiring far longer periods of time for savings to offset the costs associated with implementing the recommendations than was typical in the 1995 BRAC round, raising questions about the cost/benefit ratio of selected recommendations. There are significant implementation challenges that lie ahead, to the extent proposed recommendations are approved, which could have a bearing on the ultimate savings realized and overall success of the BRAC round. They include the need for (1) transition planning to minimize the adverse impacts on operations, including steps to mitigate the potential loss of specialized human capital skills; (2) mechanisms to monitor implementation of recommendations in line with approved actions, along with mechanisms to ensure the tracking and periodic updating of savings that DOD expects from implementing the recommendations; (3) plans to address and adequately fund environmental restoration of unneeded property in order to expedite property transfer and put property to productive reuse; and (4) assistance for both losing and gaining communities affected by BRAC recommendations, including costs to DOD and other federal agencies.