On the basis of the force structure  plan, the infrastructure inventory and the economic analysis, the Secretary  was required to certify whether the need existed for further closures and  realignments and, if so, that an additional round would result in annual net  savings for each military department, beginning not later than 2011. The legislation also stipulated that if the certifications  were provided in DOD’s report to Congress, we were to evaluate the force  structure plan, infrastructure inventory, and the final selection criteria,  and the need for an additional BRAC round. DOD’s Report Generally Addressed All of the Legislatively Required Information

DOD’s report to Congress generally addressed all of the requirements in  section 2912 of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as  amended, and separately complied with the requirements in section 2913  for adopting selection criteria to guide BRAC decision making. Worldwide Installation Inventory, Force Structure Plan, and Selection Criteria

While DOD’s worldwide military installation inventory, 20-year force  structure plan, and selection criteria are all important in setting a  framework for the BRAC process, the latter two figure prominently in  guiding BRAC analyses for the 2005 round. The full  analytical sufficiency of the criteria will best be assessed through their  application, as DOD completes its data collection and analysis for the  2005 round. The unclassified report  provides more of a macro-level focus (e.g., number of Army divisions)  reflecting limited changes across the military services, even though the  services have a number of initiatives under way that could affect force  structure and infrastructure requirements, and which will need to be  considered by DOD as it performs its 2005 round analyses. Observations on Other Key BRAC-Related Issues Included in DOD’s Report

Other BRAC-related issues included in DOD’s report—excess  infrastructure capacity, estimated savings for the 2005 round, and the  economic impact of prior BRAC actions on communities—are of  widespread interest to Congress and the public and important to DOD’s  certification regarding the need for a BRAC round. DOD Analysis Indicates Excess Infrastructure Capacity Exists

While DOD’s analysis of its infrastructure capacity for the 2004 report,  which was completed outside the 2005 BRAC process, gives some  indication of excess capacity across certain functional areas through fiscal  year 2009, the methodology for that analysis has some limitations that  could cause the results to be either overstated or understated, and raises  questions about use of the methodology to project a total amount of  excess capacity across DOD. Extent of Savings from 2005 Round Are Unknown but Could Be Achieved by 2011

DOD’s financial data would suggest that, assuming conditions similar to  those of the 1993 and 1995 rounds, the net annual savings for each of the  military departments for the 2005 round could be achieved by 2011, as  certified by the Secretary in DOD’s report. While we believe that the potential exists for significant savings to  result from the 2005 BRAC round, it is difficult to conclusively project the  expected magnitude of the savings because there simply are too many  unknowns, such as the specific timing of individual closure or realignment  actions and the extent to which DOD’s efforts to maximize joint utilization  and further its transformation efforts, would impact savings. Conclusion

While we found no basis to question the Secretary’s certification of the  need for an additional BRAC round, we identified some limitations with  the department’s assessment of excess capacity, completed outside the  BRAC process, to meet the 2004 reporting requirement. While clear  limitations exist in DOD’s assessment of excess capacity, it does  nonetheless point to some areas that warrant additional analysis—and the  current BRAC process is an appropriate forum for doing so. Today’s security environment is evolving, as are force structure  requirements along with technology advancements, and defense  transformation efforts. DOD Responsiveness to Legislative Requirements

We evaluated DOD’s responsiveness to the legislative reporting  requirements by comparing individual requirements as presented in the  legislation with DOD’s presentation of information in its report and final  selection criteria.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Defense Base Realignment and Closure Act of 1990, as amended, required the Department of Defense (DOD) to address several base realignment and closure (BRAC) issues in 2004 for the 2005 BRAC round to proceed. The requirements included reporting on a 20-year force structure plan, an inventory of military installations, and separately adopting selection criteria for the upcoming round. The legislation also required DOD to certify whether an additional BRAC round was needed, and, if so, that annual net savings would be realized not later than fiscal year 2011. If the certifications were provided, GAO was required to evaluate DOD's submissions and report to Congress. DOD reported on March 23, 2004, and provided the certifications. In this report GAO evaluates (1) DOD's responsiveness to legislative requirements; (2) the force structure plan, infrastructure inventory, and selection criteria; (3) other key issues included in DOD's report; and (4) DOD's certification regarding the need for an additional BRAC round.

What GAO Found

DOD's report to Congress generally addressed all legislative reporting requirements in section 2912 of the Defense Base Realignment and Closure Act of 1990, as amended, and separately complied with requirements under Section 2913 in adopting selection criteria to guide BRAC decision making. The degree of coverage on some reporting requirements was limited to avoid prejudging the ongoing analytical process for the 2005 round. As directed, GAO analyzed DOD's worldwide installation inventory, force structure plan, and selection criteria. While all three are important in setting a framework for the BRAC process, the latter two figure prominently in guiding DOD's analyses for the 2005 round. The unclassified portion of the 20-year force structure plan, extending through 2009, provides a macro-level focus (e.g., number of Army divisions), and reflects limited changes across the military services, even though the services have initiatives under way that could affect future force structure and infrastructure requirements. Today's security environment is evolving, as are force structure requirements along with technology advancements, and defense transformation efforts. The department must consider these factors in its BRAC analyses with appropriate allowances for future uncertainties. DOD's selection criteria closely parallel criteria used in previous rounds, while incorporating the provisions required by legislation authorizing the 2005 round. The analytical sufficiency of the criteria will best be assessed through their application in the ongoing BRAC process. GAO addressed other BRAC-related issues such as excess defense infrastructure capacity and BRAC savings because of their importance to DOD's certification of need for the 2005 BRAC round. DOD's excess capacity analysis, completed for the 2004 report, has some limitations that could result in either overstating or understating excess capacity across various functional areas, and make it difficult to project a total amount of excess capacity across DOD. While the analysis gives some indications of excess capacity within the department, the issue warrants a more complete assessment in the BRAC process. That process will also consider joint base use with the potential for better identifying excess capacity. DOD's historical financial data suggest that, assuming conditions similar to those in the 1993 and 1995 rounds, each of the military departments could achieve annual net savings by 2011, as stipulated by the mandate. While the potential exists for substantial savings from the upcoming round, it is difficult to conclusively project the expected magnitude of the savings because there are too many unknowns at this time. Additionally, improvements are needed in DOD's accounting for savings after BRAC decisions are made. GAO found no basis to question DOD's certification of the need for an additional BRAC round. While clear limitations exist in DOD's assessment of excess capacity, it does point to some areas that warrant additional analysis-and the current BRAC process is an appropriate forum for doing so.