Sec. 2. Findings and purpose
612 words·~3 min read·
/bill/115/hr/753/ih/section-2·A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
Congress makes the following findings: The Department of Defense has requested legislation to authorize a new round of base realignments and closures
(BRAC)as part of each budget request since fiscal year 2013. The Department of Defense request for a new BRAC round is based on the Department’s analysis that— there is infrastructure capacity excess to military requirements; and the funds required to sustain this excess infrastructure capacity could be better spent on other national security priorities. In testimony before the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives on March 22, 2016, Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter stated that we need to stop spending so much money to hold on to bases we don’t need and that we have more bases in more places than we need . According to an April 2016 infrastructure capacity analysis conducted by the Department of Defense using projected fiscal year 2019 force structure levels, overall the Department has approximately 22-percent excess capacity, of which approximately 33 percent is excess Army capacity, 7 percent is excess Navy capacity, 32 percent is excess Air Force capacity, and 12 percent is excess capacity of the Defense Logistics Agency. In a time when the Department of Defense is facing significant budget pressures, the Department is being required to expend valuable resources to maintain infrastructure capacity in excess of Department requirements instead of investing these valuable resources in meeting urgent readiness and training requirements or other priorities within the Department. While the Department of Defense has already undertaken a number of initiatives to reduce the Department’s overseas infrastructure footprint, including the European Infrastructure Consolidation review and the relocation and consolidation of military facilities in Japan and the Republic of Korea, the Department’s ability to take similar actions regarding military installation inside the United States is extremely limited without specific authorization from Congress. In testimony before the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives on March 22, 2016, John Conger, who was performing the duties of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations and Environment, testified that by reducing excess infrastructure capacity by only 5 percent, the Department of Defense expected it could realize $2 billion a year in annual recurring savings. A 5-percent reduction in excess infrastructure can be managed in a strategic and cost-effective manner while ensuring appropriate infrastructure capacity remains for potential growth in military force structure or future contingency needs of the Department of Defense. While concerns have been raised about the costs and schedule associated with the 2005 BRAC round, the majority of the recommendations of that round were focused on transformation and realignment rather than efficiency and closure. As such, congressional authorization for the next BRAC round must include additional oversight and controls on costs and provide sufficient guidance and authority to ensure that the Department of Defense focuses on recommendations that result in efficiencies and financial savings for the Department. Furthermore, congressional authorization must ensure that the process for developing recommendations to consolidate, close, or realign military installations is independent, impartial, and transparent. In a time when the Department of Defense needs to reduce excess infrastructure capacity and realize efficiencies in its real property inventory, this Act provides the most transparent means to do so while also affording an independent commission, Congress, and community groups a significant voice and role in the process. The purpose of this Act is to provide a fair and transparent process that will allow the Department of Defense— to consolidate, close, or realign military installations within the United States; and as a result of such consolidation, closure, and realignment, to realize efficiencies and savings that can be reinvested into critical military readiness and modernization initiatives.