- FHL Home » About FHL » BRAC Information
General BRAC FAQ
- Q1.Why does the government want to close some bases and realign others?
- A1. In 1998, the Pentagon performed a study that found that the military has 20 percent to 25 percent more infrastructure – installation capacity – than it needs. Defense officials believe they can save about $7 billion a year by consolidating operations. They also want a chance to reorganize for new and anticipated national security needs, particularly after the 2001 terrorist attacks.
- Q2. Has this happened before?
- A2. The government closed or realigned about 450 installations in 1988, 1991, 1993 and 1995. Ninety-seven of the bases closed and 55 of those realigned were major domestic bases.
- Q3.How long does it take an installation to close?
- A3. Under the BRAC law, actions to close or realign a base must be initiated with two years of the date president transmits the BRAC Commission's recommendations report to Congress, and must be completed within six years of that same date.
- Q4.What is BRAC?
- A4. "BRAC" is an acronym that stands for base realignment and closure. It is the 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. We anticipate that BRAC 2005 will build upon processes used in previous rounds.
- Q5.Does DoD maintain a list of bases it wants to close?
- A5. No, the department does not maintain a list of bases it wants to close. The BRAC analytical process will not result in departmental closure and realignment recommendations until May 2005.
- Q6.How will the government decide what bases to close?
- A6. The Defense Department has posted a list of its criteria online. Go to www.defenselink.mil/brac and click on the link to 2005 base realignment and closure selection criteria. The most important criterion is military value – a base's current and future mission capabilities, its condition, ability to accommodate future needs and cost of operations. A base's ability to serve as a staging area for homeland defense missions also is considered.
- Q7.How does BRAC work?
- A7. The process is governed by law; specifically, the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990.
The process begins 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 applies published selection criteria to determine which installations to recommend for realignment and closure. The Secretary of Defense will publish a report containing the realignment and closure recommendations, forwarding supporting documentation to an independent commission appointed by the president, in consultation with congressional leadership.
The commission has the authority to change the department's recommendations, if it determines that a recommendation deviated 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.
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.
- Q8.What’s the schedule for deciding which bases to close or realign?
- A8. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld will recommend closures and other changes to a Base Realignment and Closure Commission by May 16.
Commission members will visit bases recommended for closure and hold public hears. Then they will vote on whether to accept, reject or change the recommendations. Past BRAC Commissions approved about 85 percent of the Pentagon's list.
- Q9.Which states have been hardest hit by previous closures?
- A9. Twenty-eight states and Guam have had major base closures. The hardest hit: California has lost 24; Texas, seven; Pennsylvania, six; Illinois and New York, five each; and Florida, Indiana, Maryland and Virginia, four each.
The 22 states that did not lose a major base in previous rounds: Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.
- Q10.Are there any specific priorities for BRAC 2005?
- A10. In his November 15, 2002, memorandum, the Secretary of Defense 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 our post-cold war 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.
- Q11. How many bases and installations will be closed?
- A11. It's too early to say, but there are no specific numbers or "targets." Using specific selection criteria that emphasize military value, DoD must complete a comprehensive review before it can determine which installations should be realigned or closed. In 2005, an independent commission will review the Secretary of Defense's recommendations, hold public hearings, visit various sites, and ultimately send its recommendations to the President.
- Q12. What’s the timeline for this BRAC round?
- A12. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 established the following milestones for the 2005 BRAC round: publish proposed selection criteria for a 30-day comment period by Dec. 31, 2003, publish final selection criteria by Feb. 16, 2004; submit a report to Congress with the FY 2005 budget justification on the following points: a force structure plan, based on an assessment of probable threats to the national security over the next 20 years; the probable end strength levels and military force units needed to meet those threats; the anticipated levels of available funding; a comprehensive inventory of military installations worldwide; a description of infrastructure necessary to support the force structure; discussion of excess capacity categories; economic analysis of the effect of realignments and closures to reduce excess infrastructure; and Secretary of Defense certification of the need for BRAC, and that annual net savings would result by 2011.
The Secretary of Defense forwards recommendations for realignments and closures to the BRAC Commission by May 16, 2005; the Commission forwards its report on the recommendations to the President by Sept. 8, 2005. The President will have until Sept. 23, 2005 to accept or reject the recommendations in their entirety. If accepted, Congress will have 45 legislative days to act on the recommendations.
- Q13. Which bases will be looked at in this round?
- A13. All military installations within the continental United States and its territories (under the control of the federal government) will be examined as part of this process. This includes labs, medical, training, Guard, Reserve, air stations, leased facilities, etc.
- Q14. Isn’t BRAC just another example of budget priorities driving national security planning?
- A14. Absolutely not. The legislation is quite clear that military value is the primary consideration. The secretary's guidance to the military departments emphasizes that BRAC 2005 will make a profound contribution to transforming the department by bringing our infrastructure in line with defense strategy.
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.
In their official capacity, DOD personnel may not participate in the activities of any organization that has as its purpose, either directly or indirectly, insulating DOD bases from closure or realignment. This guidance is aimed at ensuring the fairness and rigor of the BRAC process.
- Q15. Is the list of closures and realignments on the g2mil.com website the official position of the Department of Defense?
- A15. No. It is a privately operated web site with no ties to or support from DOD.
- Q16. Will encroachment issues at military bases factor into the decision-making process?
- A16. In accordance with the requirements of the BRAC statute, the department will base all of its recommendations upon approved selection criteria that reflect military value as the primary consideration. The law further requires that the selection criteria address the ability of both existing and potential receiving communities' infrastructure to support forces, missions and personnel. To the extent that encroachment limits an installation in fulfilling its mission requirements, it will be factored into military value. The proposed selection criteria were published in the Federal Register in February 2004.
- Q17. How much excess capacity does the DoD currently have?
- A17. The March 2004 DoD report required by section 2912 of the Defense Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended through the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 estimates that the department possesses, in aggregate, 24 percent excess installation capacity. Moreover, in preparing the list of realignment and closure recommendations in May 2005, the department will conduct a thorough review of its existing infrastructure in accordance with the law and DoD BRAC 2005 guiding procedures, ensuring that all military installations are treated equally and evaluated on their continuing military value.
BRAC 2005 Timeline, Process, Sequence of Events
- Q1. What is the timeline of events for BRAC 2005?
- A1. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 established the following milestones for BRAC 2005:
- NOVEMBER 15, 2002; The Secretary of Defense memorandum, subject: Transformation Through Base Realignment and Closure.
- APRIL 16, 2003: The Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology & Logistics) published a memorandum, subject: Transformation Through Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC 2005) Policy memorandum one policy, responsibilities, and procedures.
- DECEMBER 23, 2003; DOD published proposed selection criteria for a 30-day comments period (comments were due by 28 January 2004).
- January 6, 2004; DoD announced an initial data call to installations commanders.
- MARCH 23, 2004; DoD submitted report entitled report required by Section 2912 of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended through the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003.
- OCTOBER 14, 2004; The Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology & Logistics) published a memorandum, subject: Policy Memorandum Two BRAC 2005 Military Value.
- JANUARY 4, 2005; The Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology & Logistics) published a memorandum, subject: 2005 Base Closure and Realignment Selection Criteria.
- MARCH 15, 2005; The President submitted the names of his nominations to the BRAC 2005 Commission to Congress.
- Q2. What events are upcoming in the BRAC 2005 process?
- A2. There are several significant events taking place throughout the remainder of 2005.
- By MAY 16, 2005; The Secretary of Defense will forward the recommendations for closure and realignment to the independent BRAC Commission, at which time the information will be available to the public.
- By SEPTEMBER 8, 2005; The BRAC Commission must forward its report to the President.
- By SEPTEMBER 23, 2005; The President will accept or reject the recommendations on an all or nothing basis and forward the recommendations to Congress.
- Once the President forwards the recommendations to Congress, Congress will have 45 legislative days to enact a joint resolution rejecting all the recommendations or they become binding on the department.
- Q1. What is transformation?
- A1. 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.
- Q2. Why is DoD transforming?
- A2. 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.
- Q3. How is BRAC transformational?
- A3. 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 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.
- Q1. How will the Commission be selected, and who will serve?
- A1. The BRAC legislation specifies the selection process for commissioners. The President is required to consult with the Congressional leadership on nominations to serve on the commission.
- Q2. What is the BRAC 2005 Commission?
- A2. The BRAC Commission is an independent commission; responsible for reviewing the secretary's recommendations for BRAC 2005. BRAC legislation specified the selection process for commissioners. The President was required to consult with the congressional leadership on nominations to serve on the BRAC Commission.
- Q3. Who was selected as the Chairman of the BRAC 2005 Commission?
- A3. Anthony J. Principi has been nominated by the President 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.
- Q4. Who are the members of the BRAC 2005 Commission?
- A4. On March 15th, 2005 President George W. Bush announced the nomination 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. Lieutenant General Claude M. Kicklighter, USA (ret.) of Georgia, Samuel Knox Skinner of Illinois, and Brigadier General Sue Ellen Turner, USAF (ret.) of Texas.
- Q5. Who is James H. Bilbray?
- A5. 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
- Q6. Who is Philip Coyle?
- A6. 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.
- Q7. Who is Admiral Harold W. Gehman, Jr. USN (Ret)?
- A7. 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, U.S. Joint Forces Command.
- Q8. Who is James V. Hansen?
- A8. Former Congressman Hansen was a member of the Armed Services Committee. He served in the U.S. Navy from 1951 to 1955.
- Q9. Who is General James T. Hill, USA (Ret)?
- A9. General Hill served in the U.S. Army for 36 years. His last assignment was as Combatant Commander of the U.S Southern Command.
- Q10. Who is Lieutenant General Claude M. Kicklighter, USA (Ret)?
- A10. General Kicklighter is the Assistant Secretary for Policy and Planning at the Department of Veterans Affairs. He served in the U.S. Army for nearly 36 years.
- Q11. Who is Samuel Knox Skinner?
- A11. 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.
- Q12. Who is Brigadier General Sue Ellen Turner, USAF (Ret)?
- A12. General Turner is a member of the American Battle Monuments Commission. She served in the US 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.
- Q13. What authority does the commission have?
- A13. The commission has the authority to change the department's recommendations, if it determines that a recommendation deviated 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.
- Q14. What happens to the commission’s recommendations?
- A14. 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.
- Q15. Who has oversight of the BRAC process within DoD?
- A15. 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 body for the entire BRAC 2005.
- Q1. How have local communities affected by BRAC fared overall?
- A1. Base realignments and closures cause near-term social and economic disruption. However, there are many success stories from previous closures.
- For example, at Charleston Naval Base, SC, 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.
- Since the closure of Mather Air Force Base, Calif., more than 54 leases have been generated at the new Mather Field complex. Its prime location and one of the country's longest runways have made it an active air cargo hub for California's central valley and the Sacramento region. Additionally, the former base now employs nearly 3,700 personnel with its high-technical businesses, manufacturing operations, educational centers, government agencies, and recreational facilities.
- At the former Fort Devens, MA, 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.
- Q2. A base closure can actually be an economic opportunity, especially when all elements of a community work together.
- A2. Should communities perceive military construction (MILCON) as an indicator of whether their installations will be realigned or closed?
The presence or absence of funding for military construction is not an indication of military service intentions or future recommendations to the SecDef under BRAC. The department funds its military construction based on its current highest priority requirements recognizing that it may make investments in installations that re ultimately selected for closure or realignment.
- Q3. How can communities get involved in BRAC to enhance their support to the base population/mission and their prospects during the BRAC 2005 round?
- A3. 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 in May 2005.
- Q4. If the final decision is to close or realign the base, with whom will community leaders work in the transition of the base from its current mission to civilian use?
- A4. Although an enormously complex undertaking, involving the Department of Defense, other federal agencies, and state and local governments, each military department will have a central point of contact at the closing activity to assist in coordinating the involvement of the various organizations. Additionally, DoD's Office of Economic Adjustment (OEA) 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.
- Q1. How will property be disposed of or sold?
- A1. The BRAC statute provides the department with a variety of mechanisms for disposing of property at closed or realigned military installations. While we cannot speculate on which mechanism might be used at any given installation, in previous rounds of BRAC, federal real property was made available by public benefit conveyances for airport, education, and homeless assistance; federal transfers to native American tribes; economic development conveyances to local redevelopment authorities; and public sales, just to name a few.
- Q2. How will you decide reuse of the base?
- A2. The Department of Defense does not decide the reuse of former military installations. Once the property is declared surplus to the needs of the federal government, it is the job of the local community, through its designated local redevelopment authority, to plan for the reuse of the surplus property.
- Q1. What comment do you have for communities impacted by closure?
- A1. Communities affected by closure and realignment decisions in the last four rounds of bract have successfully transitioned to productive economic development. We are committed to working with BRAC 05 communities to duplicate that success.
- Q1. Where do funds come from to perform the BRAC analysis/evaluations?
- A1. BRAC analysis and evaluations are performed within available resources. They are currently funded by operations and maintenance (O&M) funds.
- Q2. How much has been saved through previous BRAC rounds?
- A2. 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 $16.7 billion, which includes the cost of environmental clean-up. Recurring savings beyond 2001 are approximately $6.6 billion annually. In independent studies conducted over previous years, both the General Accountability Office (GAQ) and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) have consistently supported the department's view that realigning and closing unnedded military installations produces savings that far exceed costs.
- Q1. Will environmental costs be factors in recommending an installation or base for realignment or closure?
- A1. In accordance with the requirements of the BRAC statute, the department will base all its recommendations upon approved selection criteria that reflect military value as the primary consideration. The law further requires that the selection criteria address the impact of costs related to environmental restoration as well as waste management and environmental compliance.
- Q2. 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?
- A2. In previous rounds, from the time of the base's selection for closure, several options were available for property to be used until it was disposed so that communities could begin using base facilities promptly and economic redevelopment could occur. Consistent with public health and safety, once a contractual arrangement was in place, property could be leased or, in certain circumstances, deeded while the property was being environmentally prepared for transfer.
- Q3. Our Base has some environmental contamination. Will the DoD clean it up?
- A3. DoD has a continuing obligation to perform environmental cleanup at all of its installations, regardless of whether a base is identified for closure or realignment.
- Q1. Will near-term future new force-structure changes be incorporated into the BRAC 2005 process?
- A1. Where the BRAC timeline can accommodate operational imperatives, new force structure bed downs will be incorporated in the BRAC process. Using the BRAC process offers the opportunity to make the most efficient and effective use of the capacity and capabilities of the department.
- Q2. How will “jointness” be assessed during BRAC 2005?
- A2. The BRAC law requires that closure and realignment recommendations be based on published selection criteria that must make military value the primary consideration. The law further provides that military value must include impacts on joint war fighting, readiness and training.
- Q3. Why was IGPBS incorporated into BRAC analysis?
- A3. BRAC provided the opportunity to review the stationing of Army force structure in a holistic manner, merging the analysis of basing decisions for units returning from overseas, modularity and existing force structure already in the Continental United States (CONUS) to achieve an integrated and optimal solution.
The SecDef, in his IGPBS decisions, identified the units returning from overseas; this information was incorporated into the analysis of our installation portfolio to generate the best basing decisions to support training and deployment for army combat units and their support structure.
- Q4. What units were identified as returning from overseas?
- A4. From Europe: most First Infantry Division and First Armored Division units will return to Continental United States (CONUS) during the BRAC window and will be included in BRAC recommendations. The modular and theater support structures are evolving. Some IGPBS units will return from Outside Continental United States (OCONUS) and others may be inactivated.
From Korea: final decisions and the timing on most of the units in Korea are not complete. We are also still discussing these with the host nation. However, we have already announced the return of one brigade of the second infantry division. It is currently in Iraq and will return to the United States later this summer, which places the move prior to the BRAC window.
- Q5. Where will these units go?
- A5. The optimum location for IGPBS, modularity and the force structure will be determined through BRAC analysis.
- Moves of units within the BRAC window will be the subject of BRAC recommendations.
- Moves prior to BRAC will be reviewed and finalized but will not be the subject of BRAC recommendations unless additional moves are recommended during the BRAC period.
- Q6. By using BRAC to base both units returning from overseas under IGPBS and new modular units, are you not usurping Congress’ perogative to review these basing decisions?
- A6. The Army's vision for BRAC is to generate a "campaign quality joint and expeditionary Army positioned to provide relevant and ready combat power to combatant commanders from a portfolio of installations that projects power, trains, sustains and enhances the readiness and well-being of the joint team.
To best accomplish this, we needed to take a holistic view of our force structure basing, including units returning from overseas and modular units. We are looking for:
- Opportunities for joint basing, training and deployment
- Synergy between combat and combat support forces
- The best possible support facilities for soldiers and their families, to include housing, schools, medical and other support.
To ensure this holistic view, initial basing of modular units in advance of BRAC analysis was considered temporary, pending this BRAC review.
Congress will have the opportunity to review the BRAC recommendations, once the SecDef's list of recommendations is announced.
- Q7. Who will assess the joint use aspect of BRAC 2005?
- A7. The Infrastructure Steering Group (ISG), chaired by the USD(AT&L) will oversee 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 joints 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)) will form the ISG.
Brigade Combat Teams (BCT)
- Q1. You indicated the basing of BCT’s was temporary pending BRAC analysis and final basing decisions. Are you including basing decisions for BCT units in your BRAC recommendations?
- A1. The BRAC recommendations will indicate which installations are recommended for closure or realignment, and which units should be moved as part of those actions.
- If the decision is made to not move a unit from its current location, that decision will not be reflected in the list of recommendations, but will be discussed in the deliberative materials which will accompany the BRAC report.
- Synergy between combat and combat support forces
- Even if the decision is made to not move units again, this analysis was important, as it enabled us to review unit basing holistically - integrating the impact of modular units with IGPBS and the current force structure to achieve the best possible basing portfolio.
It was appropriate to not commit the units permanently to their initial pre-BRAC locations, in effect "BRAC-proofing" installations, until this holistic analysis was complete.
Past BRAC Rounds
- Q1. What were the closure results of the last four BRAC rounds (88,91,93 and 95) from the total available to the number selected for BRAC action?
- A1. 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.
- Q2. How much has been saved through previous BRAC rounds?
- A2. 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 $16.7 billion, which includes the cost of environmental clean-up. Recurring savings beyond 2001 are approximately $6.6 billion annually. In independent studies conducted over previous years, both the general accounting 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.
- Q3. Is the historical information available to the general public?
- A3. The Office of the Secretary of Defense maintains the documentation used by the previous BRAC Commissions. While a lot 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, 703-602-3207, before arriving to ensure a government representative is present. There is a copier available.