DoD Base Realignment
And Closure - 2005
By Gerry J. Gilmore
American Forces Press Service
DENVER, June 8, 2005 Redevelopment efforts have created more than
115,000 new jobs nationwide in communities affected by the last
four base realignment and closure actions, a senior Defense
Department official said here this week.
Those employment gains account for "nearly 90 percent of the
civilian jobs that were lost" as the result of BRAC rounds
conducted in 1988, 1991, 1993, and 1995, said Patrick J. O'Brien,
director of DoD's Office of Economic Adjustment.
It takes hard work for communities to rebound from BRAC actions,
O'Brien told attendees at the National Association of
Installation Developers and Association of Defense Communities
annual conference. O'Brien pointed out that OEA and other federal
agencies, such as the Department of Labor, stand ready to assist
redevelopment efforts of BRAC-affected communities.
O'Brien urged state and local community representatives with
military bases identified for closure or realignment under the
recently released 2005 BRAC list to "get to know the DoD team" of
military and civilian officials who work BRAC issues.
But DoD can't do everything by itself, O'Brien pointed out,
noting myriad other federal agencies and programs offer community
planning and redevelopment assistance for BRAC-impacted communities.
"Take advantage of those programs; learn what they are," O'Brien
advised.
He said the key to redevelopment success for communities affected
by BRAC actions is early planning and consensus on what types of
development will be undertaken on former military property.
However, O'Brien also asked communities to pace themselves,
because the BRAC process is long and arduous.
It's not necessary that communities "reinvent the wheel" when
considering redevelopment options, O'Brien said, noting many
BRAC success stories are available to analyze. O'Brien
recommended that state and local community leaders obtain a copy
of the OEA-produced booklet titled, "Responding to Change:
Communities and BRAC." This booklet, he said, contains scores of
examples of BRAC success stories, including points of contact.
The BRAC 2005 list of proposed base closings and realignments
released by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld in May requires
review by the BRAC commission, the Congress and the president,
with a final approved listing expected sometime this fall.
Yet, whatever form the final list takes, O'Brien said, DoD stands
by to assist affected communities.
Through nearly two decades of BRAC actions the Office of Economic
Adjustment has an effective history "of being capable and
responsible in assisting communities respond to these challenges,"
O'Brien said. And as BRAC 2005 nears, DoD will carry on that
legacy of assistance to affected communities, he added.
"We want to understand what your needs are; we want to be
responsive to those needs," he concluded.
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, May 13, 2005 The Defense Department has recommended closing
33 major bases and realigning 29 others as part of a comprehensive
reshaping of the military infrastructure through the base realignment
and closure process.
Michael Wynne, defense undersecretary for acquisition, technology and
logistics, announced Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's closure and
realignment recommendations at a Pentagon news conference today.
The recommendations now go to the BRAC Commission chaired by former
Veterans Affairs Secretary Anthony J. Principi. The commission will
start hearings on the specific recommendations May 16.
If adopted, the recommendations would give DoD a net savings of almost
$50 billion over 20 years, officials said. Annual savings are pegged at
$5.5 billion a year after that.
Fourteen major Army bases are recommended for closure, including Forts
Gillem and McPherson in Atlanta; Fort Monroe, Va.; Fort Monmouth, N.J.;
and the Lone Star Army Ammunition Plant and Red River Army Depot in Texas.
Nine major Navy bases will close, including Submarine Base, New London,
Conn.; Willow Grove Naval Air Station, Pa.; Portsmouth Naval Shipyard,
Maine; Naval Station Pascagoula, Miss.; and Naval Air Station Atlanta.
Ten major Air Force installations are closing, including Ellsworth Air
Force Base, S.D.; Onizuka Air Force Station, Calif.; Cannon Air Force
Base, N.M.; Otis Air National Guard Base, Mass.; and Brooks City Base,
Texas.
DoD defines major realignments as installations losing at least 400
people. The five major Army realignments are Walter Reed Army Medical
Center in Washington; the Rock Island Arsenal, Ill.; Fort Knox, Ky.;
and Fort Eustis, Va.; and the Army Reserve Personnel Center in St.
Louis.
Eleven Navy realignments include Naval Station Great Lakes, Ill.;
Naval Station San Diego; and naval air stations in Brunswick, Maine,
Corpus Christi, Texas, and Pensacola, Fla. The Marine Corps Logistics
Base in Barstow, Calif., also will realign, as will the naval medical
centers in Portsmouth, Va., and San Diego.
Ten major Air Force realignments include Eielson and Elmendorf Air
Force bases, both in Alaska; Maxwell Air Force Base, Ala.; Lackland
and Sheppard Air Force bases, Texas; and McChord Air Force Base, Wash.
DoD agencies in leased spaces throughout the National Capital Area and
Defense Finance and Accounting Service offices in Cleveland and in
Arlington, Va., face major realignment actions as well.
Forty-nine installations are gaining more than 400 personnel. The Army
made provision for units reassigned from Europe and the Pacific. The
major gainers in the Army are Fort Belvoir, Va.; Fort Jackson, S.C.;
Fort Sam Houston, Texas; Fort Sill, Okla.; Fort Benning, Ga.; and Fort
Bragg, N.C.
Navy gainers include Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Fla.; Naval
Station Norfolk, Va.; Naval Station Newport, R.I.; Marine Corps
Logistics Base Quantico, Va.; and Naval Station Bremerton, Wash.
Air Force gainers include Little Rock Air Force Base, Ark.; Peterson
Air Force Base, Colo.; Scott Air Force Base, Ill.; Andrews Air Force
Base, Md.; and Shaw Air Force Base, S.C.
The bases themselves are only part of the story. This BRAC process had
seven joint cross-service groups to examine common business processes
in education and training; headquarters and support; technical;
industrial; supply and storage; intelligence; and medical.
Wynne said jointness - services working together -- was key to
creating military value, and military value was the most important
consideration as the BRAC process progressed.
"These joint cross-service groups were key to making this jointness
a reality in this process," Wynne said. "They each were chaired by a
senior executive or flag officer, with representation from each of
the military services, from the Joint Staff and from the relevant
defense agencies involved."
More than half of the future annual savings $2.9 billion of the
estimated $5.5 billion is generated from the joint cross-service
groups, officials said.
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, May 17, 2005 The Defense Department's base realignment and
closure recommendations are now in the hands of the nine-member
commission that will make the final decisions.
The Base Realignment and Closure Commission takes its independent role
very seriously, said the BRAC chairman, and he vowed an "open and
transparent" process.
Anthony Principi, the commission chairman, said closure and realignment
decisions are tough. "These decisions will impact the lives of a great
many Americans," he said during an interview. "By going out and
visiting bases, by talking to community leaders, we can be that
independent check."
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld turned the list of recommendations
over to the commission May 13. He recommended closing 33 major bases
and realigning 29 other major bases. DoD officials said that with 318
major bases, this BRAC round would close about 10 percent of the
stateside bases in DoD.
Rumsfeld's recommendations are based on the military value of
installations measured against a force-structure plan for the next 20
years.
"This is going to be the most difficult (BRAC) round because it is very
complex," the former Department of Veterans Affairs secretary said.
"There are changes being made at one installation that impact many other
installations. It's kind of like a daisy chain. We need to be careful if
we make a decision contrary to the secretary of defense recommendation
that will have an impact on several other locations, (and we) need to
look at that carefully."
Principi stressed he wants all deliberations to be "open and transparent"
and does not want the process to become politicized. "I want to ensure
that decisions are based upon the criteria set out in the law and the
force-structure plan, and not because of some political consideration,"
he said.
The BRAC commission will judge the recommendations using the same
criteria that DoD officials used, the most important being military value.
But there are other criteria, Principi said, and those include economic
and environmental impacts on communities.
The commission chairman said he thinks his panel needs to look at the
changes recommended to the National Guard and Reserve infrastructure. "I
think that will have a major, major impact on the reserves and the Guard,
and we need to look at that carefully," he said.
He said he believes this BRAC round has much more emphasis on the reserve
components than previous rounds. "Obviously, this is a concern," he said.
"We're a nation at war, the Guard and reserves are playing a more prominent
role than ever before, certainly (more important than) when I was in uniform.
And now we're going to be closing a significant number of bases, and people
are going to have to travel greater distances to undertake their weekend
drills."
He said this might be easy to travel if the affected person is a pilot. But
the men and women who generate the missions -- the crew chiefs, loadmasters,
refuelers and weapons specialists -- are "going to have a tough time"
getting to their new assignments.
He admitted that many in the Guard and reserves travel good distances to
serve. Still, "if you grew up in that community and we're saying you have to
drive 300 or 400 miles or fly even longer distances, that's going to have an
impact on retention."
Principi went through a similar process as Veterans Affairs secretary. He
changed the VA infrastructure to meet changes in demographics and health-
care delivery of the 21st century. He said he learned firsthand the upheaval
that takes place when a military base that has served the nation half a
century or longer is closed.
"I'm very sensitive to it," he said. "That's not to say it's more important
than national security. National security always has to have the highest
priority. But we always must be mindful of economic impact."
Principi said the commissioners understand the need to transform the
military. "The ability to engage in joint readiness operations and
warfighting and capability is a move in the right direction," he said.
He added that he agrees with Rumsfeld's work to make the military "more
efficient, effective, mobile and flexible."
By Gerry J. Gilmore
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, May 17, 2005 Air Force recommendations provided to the 2005
Base Realignment and Closure Commission will reorganize that service,
making it more capable to address threats to national security, the Air
Force's top civilian told commission members here today.
"We have presented to you a bold program that will reshape the Air Force,
improving our ability to defend the nation and doing so with a smaller,
more efficient, effective and less-costly base infrastructure," Acting
Air Force Secretary Michael L. Dominguez told commission Chairman Anthony
J. Principi during a public hearing.
Dominguez, who was accompanied by Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. John P.
Jumper and other senior officials, said the Air Force's BRAC
recommendations would affect 115 of the 154 installations that were
evaluated.
The Air Force has been reshaping itself into a leaner and more capable
force since the end of the Cold War, Dominguez noted to committee members.
"And, we will become yet still smaller," Dominguez predicted, noting that
technological advancements are providing more military punch while
enabling the service to reduce its overall size.
For example, the Air Force deployed more than 1,000 B-17 Flying Fortress
bombers "to drop 9,000 bombs to destroy one target" during World War II,
Dominguez pointed out. Today, he noted, one modern B-2 Spirit bomber "can
engage 80 targets with 80 bombs in all weather with greatly increased
accuracy."
New aircraft slated to enter the Air Force inventory in the near future
will be even more combat capable, Dominguez noted, and "will fly longer"
between downtimes for scheduled maintenance.
The Air Force wants to consolidate, close or realign those installations
that don't fit into the Air Expeditionary Force concept, Dominguez noted.
The AEF, he explained, "draws small, predefined pieces from different
Air Force units and fashions those pieces into provisional, or
expeditionary, squadrons and wings" that are deployed for overseas combat
missions. The stateside bases would perform their normal operations while
maintaining a high state of readiness to support wartime contingencies,
he added.
The AEF concept also serves the needs of joint warfighters, Dominguez
explained, noting its modularity "allows us to package our forces into
combat units tailored specifically to the needs of the combatant
commanders."
The Air Force's BRAC recommendations recognize the need to defend the
American homeland from threats presented by terrorists or other potential
enemies, Dominguez noted. Therefore his service's recommendations
"preserve the air sovereignty alert mission," he said.
Dominguez said the Air Force values the partnership between its active,
Guard and Reserve pilots and crewmembers, noting its BRAC recommendations
will position the reserve components "for leading roles in a variety of
emerging, in-demand, warfighting missions."
And, the fact the United States remains engaged in a global war against
terrorism "makes this base realignment and closure an imperative,"
Dominguez said.
The Air Force recommends 10 base closures and 62 realignments, Jumper
reported, noting the proposals "will 'right size' our force." As a result,
he noted, Air Force fighter units will be reconfigured and upsized to 18
to 24 aircraft per squadron.
Air Force units will also be "placed in higher military-value settings"
and located "closer to appropriate ranges for operational missions,"
Jumper noted.
The estimated net savings envisioned for the Air Force as a result of
recommended base closure and realignment actions totals more than $14
billion over 20 years, Jumper reported.
The Air Force arrived at its BRAC recommendations after making some "tough
decisions," Jumper acknowledged to committee members.
However, "the important gains in war fighting effectiveness and the savings
that we will be able to reinvest in combat capability outweigh those
concerns," he said.
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, May 18, 2005 The U.S. Army looks on the base realignment and
closure process as a chance to reshape the total force, Army Secretary
Francis Harvey told the BRAC commission today.
Harvey and Army Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Schoomaker spoke of how the
process allows the Army to continue efforts to transform the force.
Military value was at the heart of all Army BRAC recommendations, the
leaders said, with the realization that soldiers will be working more and
more with members of other services. "The Army has aggressively undertaken
a comprehensive effort to develop a force that is more expeditionary,
joint, deployable, flexible and adaptive," Francis said. The BRAC
recommendations will allow the service to transform from a Cold War force
to one ready to confront the threats of the 21st century, he added.
Harvey said the Army worked to "streamline" the service to better meet
current and future threats. It also wanted to eliminate infrastructure no
longer needed. Complicating the Army decision was providing bases for
thousands of soldiers and their families returning from overseas as part
of the changing DoD global footprint.
The service examined 97 major installations and ranked them according to
the criteria in the BRAC law, the officials explained. Military value was
the most important criterion, they said.
Overall, the Defense Department recommends closing 15 Army installations
and seven leased sites. It also recommends closing 176 Army Reserve
installations and 211 Army National Guard facilities. The Guard sites can
close only with the approval of state governors.
The department also recommends creating seven training centers of
excellence, seven joint technical and research facilities and four joint
material and logistics facilities.
The service looked at more than 4,000 Army Reserve and Army National
Guard facilities. Harvey said state adjutants general and Army Reserve
Regional Readiness commanders participated in the analyses. "The military
value criteria was used to identify existing or new installations in the
same demographic area that provide enhanced homeland defense, training
and mobilization capabilities," Harvey said. "The Army sought to create
multi-component facilities - National Guard, Army Reserve and active Army
- and multi-service, joint facilities to enhance mission accomplishment."
Harvey said the Army's recommendations went to Defense Secretary Donald H.
Rumsfeld in broad categories. The first category realigned active duty
operational forces including those returning from overseas. Second, the
service worked to realign or close reserve component installations to
transform command and control functions and force structure. The proposal
also creates Armed Forces Reserve Centers.
The third priority was to close or realign installations to consolidate
headquarters and create joint installations.
The fourth priority realigned installations to create joint or service
training centers of excellence. The fifth priority was aimed at
transforming service logistics.
Finally, the service proposed realigning the Defense research, development,
testing and evaluation organizations to create joint centers of excellence.
Harvey stressed the BRAC is inextricably linked to the Army's push to
create a "modular force" based on brigades rather than divisions.
By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, May 17, 2005 The secretary of the Navy said today he's "confident"
that base closures and realignments recommended for the sea service are "more
than sufficient to fully support the future Navy and Marine Corps force
structure."
Gordon R. England, who also serves as acting deputy secretary of defense, told
members of the Base Realignment and Closure Commission that the world, the
country and the Navy have changed. In response, he said, the Navy must adapt
its infrastructure to better meet this new environment.
That involves transforming the military so it's ready to meet current and
future threats and demands eliminating excess infrastructure and consolidating
operations, England told the commission.
To support this effort, the Defense Department has recommended closing nine
major Navy bases and 46 smaller installations and realigning eight major Navy
bases.
The recommended changes were based on saving defense dollars so they can be
invested where they're needed and developing bases to support military
readiness for the future, Anne Davis, deputy assistant secretary of the Navy,
told the committee members.
The Navy's share of the BRAC recommendations, once implemented, would save
$1.5 billion a year.
Adm. Vern Clark, chief of naval operations, and Gen. Michael Hagee,
commandant of the Marine Corps, joined England in supporting the BRAC
proposals.
Clark told committee members he's never seen a previous BRAC process that
focused so closely on joint operations. He said he is impressed by the
concrete, objective analysis that went into formulating the recommendations.
Hagee said the proposed changes eliminate excess infrastructure but preserve
critical ground and air training areas needed to support military readiness.
The proposals also promote joint use of military training sites to maximize
their effectiveness.
The decision-making behind the BRAC recommendations "has been a very
difficult process for the department," England told the commission,
particularly in light of the potential impact on communities that have shown
strong support for their local bases.
The process involved "very, very difficult choices," Clark agreed, He
specifically mentioned the recommendation to close Naval Submarine Base New
London, in Connecticut, as the Navy reduces its attack submarine fleet.
Clark said the Navy has established strong relationships with many of the
affected communities but had to face current circumstances and long-term
requirements.
"We have too much structure," he told the commission. "In order for us to
have the Navy that we need to have in the future, we have got to redirect
resources to the recapitalization process."
BRAC decisions have to be long-term to accomplish their objectives, he said.
"It's not about where I want to be next year. This question is, 'Where do I
want to be in 20 years?'" he said.
The 2005 BRAC recommendations, he said, represent "the direction to get us
where we think we need to be 20 years from now."
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, May 13, 2005 "We train joint, we fight joint, we might as
well live joint," is how Charles S. Abell summarizes the Defense
Department's recommendations to the Base Realignment and Closure
Commission.
Abell, principal deputy to the undersecretary for personnel and
readiness, chaired the joint cross-service group working on training
and education issues in developing DoD's recommendations.
"Our mission was to look through the department and across the services
and search for better ways to do business," Abell said in an interview
today. "We specifically were looking at fresh ways and different
approaches to training and education."
The joint groups worked closely together and with the services. The
recommendations of the groups received as much weight as those of the
services, said Pentagon officials.
Abell's group included leaders of all the services and the Joint Staff.
One example of the type of recommendation Abell said his group worked
toward involves the Joint Strike Fighter. When the aircraft reaches
the inventory, the services will do training jointly at Eglin Air Force
Base, Fla. "We wanted to make sure the Navy wouldn't do training at a
naval air station, the Air Force at an air base and the Marines at a
Marine Corps air station," Abell said. All training will be at Eglin,
and that will pay off later as the pilots fly together in operations,
he said.
Another example involves combining air defense artillery and field
artillery. The ADA school at Fort Bliss, Texas, will move to Fort Sill,
Okla., and combine with the Artillery School. The new Net Fires School
will train Army and Marine Corps personnel.
The same will happen at Fort Benning, Ga., when the Armor School - which
trains soldiers and Marines - moves in.
Other Joint Centers of Excellence will be established at Fort Lee, Va.,
for joint service culinary training and at Fort Jackson, S.C., for
chaplains and chaplains' assistants.
More details about the joint cross-service groups will be available in
the coming days.
BRAC Timeline:
May 16, 2005
DoD will publicly release the "BRAC list" which will
include the bases recommended for closure/realignment,
the justification for each closure/realignment, and
the proposed relocation of the closed bases’ current
activities.Over the course of the next four months,
members of the BRAC Commission will visit each base
recommended forclosure and public hearings will be
held. This will allow each community/state the
opportunity to provide the Commission with additional
information before it makes its final decisions. After
the public hearings, the Commission will vote either
to accept, reject, or change the recommendation of
each base on the BRAC list. A vote of 5 of the 9
members is required to remove a base from the list. A
vote of 7 of the 9 is required to add a base to the list.
September 8, 2005
Commission publicly releases its report with findings on
the final BRAC list and sends to President.
September 23, 2005
President approves or disapproves "but cannot change"
the list. If President disapproves, a memo will be sent
to the Commission detailing reasons for disapproval and
Commission must send revised recommendations to the
President by Oct. 20, 2005.
November 7, 2005
President sends approved list to Congress. If
President still disapproves, the BRAC process ends.
List and recommendations become binding unless Congress
45 legislative days later enacts a joint resolution of
disapproval which would terminate the base closure
process.
NEWS RELEASE from the United States Department of Defense
May 13, 2005
Fact Sheet Medical BRAC Recommendations for the National Capital Region
The 2005 BRAC recommendations afford this department the opportunity to transform
and improve how medical care will be delivered to the department's 9.1 million
beneficiaries in the 21st Century.
BRAC 2005 medical recommendations include a number of realignments and
consolidations of military medical activities and facilities. These initiatives
follow the overall BRAC rationale and goals. In all instances, improving access to
care for beneficiaries was a priority consideration; other considerations included
military value, quality of care, and opportunities for efficiency through joint
organizational solutions.
Military Health System activities evaluated in the BRAC 2005 process
included patient care facilities, education and training activities, and research,
development and acquisition activities; in all, 234 military medical activities
were evaluated.
_The Realignment_
Establish the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center (WRNMMC) at
Bethesda, Md., as a 300-bed Medical Center with the full range of intensive and
complex specialty and subspecialty medical services, including specialized
facilities for the most seriously war injured. This facility will serve as the U.
S. military's worldwide tertiary referral center for casualty and beneficiary care.
Construct a large Community Hospital at Fort Belvoir, Va., a 165-bed
facility jointly staffed facility focused on family and community medicine,
especially to serve the large number of military beneficiaries in the southern-most
areas of the National Capital Region.
Convert the 89th Medical Group at Andrews Air Force Base to a clinic
with ambulatory surgery capability and realign some staff to the new WRNMMC and new
Fort Belvoir Community Hospital.
Realign Walter Reed Army Medical Center, D.C., by assigning management,
clinical, and training activities to the new WRNMMC and the new community hospital
at Fort Belvoir. Research and Development activities will relocate and form
Centers of Excellence at Fort Sam Houston, Tex., Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md., or
Fort Detrick, Md.
Realign the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology by moving the DNA
registry and the Medical Examiners functions to Dover Air Force Base, Dover, Del.;
the technician training functions to Fort Sam Houston, Tex.; the museum to WRNMMC,
and outsource non-military essential pathology activities.
Maintain existing military outpatient capabilities at Fort Myer,
Bolling Air Force Base, the Pentagon and other military clinics in the surrounding
NCR.
The substantial construction required for this recommendation will
result in major investments in new facilities occurring after 2008.
_Why?_
These realignment actions for the NCR create a single world class,
jointly staffed medical center complex for support of the troops and their families.
They will improve the use of military infrastructure by fully utilizing
newly constructed inpatient capacity at Bethesda, while better serving our
beneficiary population with a new community hospital at Fort Belvoir. The Walter
Reed Army Medical Center was opened in 1977 with a designed capacity of 1200 beds.
The Bethesda National Naval Medical Center was opened in 1980 with a designed
capacity of 450 beds and rehabilitated in 1995. Andrews was opened in 1958 with a
design capacity 250 beds. Today these facilities use each day, on average, only a
fraction of their available beds; 189 (Walter Reed), 113 (Bethesda) and 33
(Andrews).
These realignment actions afford better placement of healthcare
delivery capabilities in the National Capital Region. Demographics show that the
beneficiary population has been moving into Northern Virginia for the past several
years - straining the capabilities of the current DeWitt Army Community Hospital.
The creation of a new, jointly staffed, state-of-the-art community hospital at Fort
Belvoir delivers enhanced services to the Northern Virginia military community.
Investing and modernizing key military infrastructure will enhance the
quality, effectiveness and efficiency of the Military Health System. This
realignment of healthcare is estimated to cost $988 million, and will provide the
DoD with an enduring annual savings of approximately $100 million with an estimated
savings of $301 million above the implementation costs over the next 20 years.
_Advantages_
The amount of healthcare provided through military facilities in the
National Capital Region will remain the same, with markedly improved access for our
beneficiaries, particularly in the growing Northern Virginia area.
Joint staffing of these hospitals will bring together the very best
expertise found in Army, Navy, and Air Force medicine to better serve our military
men and women, especially those returning from the field critically ill or injured.
We will combine two facilities operating at less than full capacity
into one fully utilized, world-class military healthcare complex.
This move also allows us to better leverage both the training
capabilities resident in the Uniformed Service University of the Health Sciences on
the same campus and the research leadership of the National Institutes of Health
immediately across the street to offer a unique and fully integrated military
platform for healthcare, education, and research.
This action will enhance the seamless care we've seen delivered from
jointly staffed facilities in Iraq through the jointly staffed Landstuhl Regional
Medical Center in Germany to the United States.
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, May 13, 2005 Defense officials have used the base realignment
and closure process to transform the way military medicine operates.
Medical facilities will become more joint, they will consolidate where
patients reside and they will become state-of-the-art. "We want to rival
Johns Hopkins or the Mayo Clinics," said Dr. William Winkenwerder Jr.,
assistant defense secretary for health affairs.
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld delivered his recommendations for
base realignment and closure to the BRAC Commission today. The medical
recommendations are part of this process.
The recommendations mean changes to military medicine in the nation's
capital and San Antonio, as well as changes in many other military
health facilities in the United States.
The major recommendation would establish the Walter Reed National
Military Medical Center on the grounds of the Bethesda Naval Hospital
in Maryland. It also will create a brand-new 165-bed community hospital
at Fort Belvoir, Va. If approved, this will cost around $1 billion,
said Dr. (Lt. Gen.) George P. Taylor, Air Force surgeon general, who
headed the joint cross-service group that worked on DoD's medical BRAC
recommendations.
Army, Navy and Air Force medical personnel will staff both facilities.
The current hospitals - Walter Reed Army Medical Center and Bethesda -
are separated by just seven miles. They are the primary receiving
hospitals for casualties from Iraq and Afghanistan. "We believe the
best way to do this is to place the facility on the Bethesda campus,"
Taylor said.
In addition to housing the Walter Reed National Medical Center, the
Bethesda campus will keep the Uniformed Services University of the
Health Sciences. The National Institutes of Health is also right
across the street from the Bethesda facility. "The facility is able
to accommodate the in-patient activities at this location," Taylor
said.
Part of this recommendation would close the Army's Walter Reed
campus in Washington, D.C., and Malcolm Grow Hospital at Andrews
Air Force Base, Md., would close its in-patient facilities and
become a large same-day surgery center.
"We know these types of joint medical facilities work," Taylor said.
"We have two of them today: Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in
Germany has been staffed by Army and Air Force for more than 10
years. If you go to Balad Hospital in Balad (Iraq), it is Army and
Air Force run."
Changes would take place in San Antonio also. The two big medical
platforms there are Brooke Army Medical Center at Fort Sam Houston
and the 59th Medical Wing's Wilford Hall Medical Center at Lackland
Air Force Base. Plans call for medical care to center at Brooke. It
will become the San Antonio Regional Medical Center, and will be a
jointly staffed, 425-bed center. At Lackland, BRAC recommends
building a world-class outpatient and ambulatory surgery center. The
trauma center at Lackland will close, and Brooke will expand to
handle the need.
San Antonio also will become the hub for training enlisted medical
technicians of all services. Currently, the Army trains at Sam
Houston, but the Air Force trains medics at Sheppard Air Force Base,
Texas, and sailors train at Great Lakes, Ill., San Diego, and
Portsmouth, Va. "All enlisted specialty training would be done at
Fort Sam Houston," Taylor said. The approximate student load would
be about 4,500.
Aaerospace medicine research will move from Brooks City Base (the
one-time Brooks Air Force Base) to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base,
Ohio. The Navy's Aeromedical Research Lab will move from Pensacola,
Fla., to Wright-Patterson also.
The recommendations create six new centers of excellence for
biomedical research, and all are joint. Assets will come from Navy,
Air Force and Army locations to these new centers. They are: the
Joint Center of Excellence in Battlefield Health and Trauma at the
Brooke Regional Medical Center, the Joint Center of Excellence in
Infectious Disease Research at the Forest Glen Complex in Maryland,
the Joint Center of Excellence for Aerospace Medicine Research at
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, the Joint Center of Excellence in
Regulated Medical Product Development and Acquisition at Fort
Detrick, Md., the Joint Center of Excellence in Biomedical Defense
Research at Fort Detrick, and the Joint Center of Excellence in
Chemical, Biological Defense Research, Development and Acquisition
at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md.
Overall, the recommendations will cost $2.4 billion to build new
facilities and capabilities. Once in place, the services will save
$400 million per year, officials said.
The joint cross-service group, new in this round of BRAC, was able
to make recommendations to the secretary. In past BRAC rounds,
joint groups merely advised service leaders.
"It is my view that the group put together a very thoughtful, very
comprehensive plan for improving military health care," said
Winkenwerder. "It is a plan that allows us to invest in, and
modernize key flagship facilities and at the same time, it will
allow the military health system to be more efficient."
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, May 12, 2005 - Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's recommendations
to the Base Realignment and Closure Commission would cut excess military
infrastructure between 5 and 11 percent, Rumsfeld said during a Pentagon news
conference today.
"The department is recommending fewer major base closures than had earlier been
anticipated, due in part to the return of tens of thousands of troops through our
global posture review, and also due to decisions to reduce lease space by moving
activities from lease space into owned facilities," Rumsfeld said.
But more than simply eliminating infrastructure, the BRAC round will allow the
U.S. military to reorder itself to face the new threats of the 21st century, the
secretary said.
"In 1961, President Kennedy took office and found a U.S. defense establishment
that was still largely arranged to re-fight World War II," Rumsfeld said. "He
ordered an extensive consolidation of bases to meet the challenges of the Cold
War."
DoD finds itself in the same situation. The department is using the BRAC round
to change an infrastructure more attuned to the Cold War to meet "the new demands
of war against extremists and other evolving 21st century challenges," Rumsfeld
said.
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, said
that BRAC gives the military the opportunity "to increase our combat efficiency
and effectiveness, and return our forces to the deployable force structure,
thereby reducing stress on the force."
Many BRAC recommendations will ease stress on servicemembers by allowing the
military to provide modern, world-class facilities and more efficient and joint
organizations, the chairman said.
The secretary's recommendations go to the BRAC Commission on May 13. The
commission will examine the recommendations and make its independent judgment on
each. The commission will present its list to President Bush in September. The
president may approve or disapprove the list in total. If he approves it, it will
go to Congress. Congress has 45 days to disapprove the list. If it does not, the
list becomes law.
The secretary emphasized that the prime factor in each BRAC recommendation is an
assessment of an installation's underlying military value. "In a time of war,
whenever we can find ways to increase support for military needs to help the
warfighters, we should do no less," he said.
Previous BRAC rounds - in 1988, 1991, 1993 and 1995 - eliminated 21 percent of
excess U.S. military infrastructure, and reallocated many billions of dollars to
pressing military needs. "This year's recommendation ... should result in some
$5.5 billion in recurring annual savings, a net savings of $48.8 billion over
20 years," Rumsfeld said.
"When combined with the proposed changes to U.S. global posture, that projected
20-year net-savings increases from $48.8 billion to $64.2 billion, or some $6.7
billion per year."
The BRAC process began more than two years ago. Senior civilian and military
leaders looked at how to close and realign current infrastructure to maximize
warfighting capability.
"We had three objectives when we did that: continuing the progress we have made
in transforming our force, including how we integrate our reserve component into
the total force, and preparing them for the 21st century; and how we posture our
forces globally to be more flexible and agile," Myers said, adding, "Second,
configuring our infrastructure to enhance joint warfighting, facilitate joint
training and improve efficiency and, finally, converting unneeded capacity into
warfighting capability."
Both Rumsfeld and Myers thanked the many civilian and military personnel who
worked on the process.
Officials said base closings and realignments are hard on the communities
affected by the changes. Rumsfeld pledged to help the communities and workers
that will be displaced by the process. "The department will take great care to
work with these communities, with the respect that they have earned, and the
government stands ready with economic assistance," he said.
Archives
|
All Material © 2001-2009
Intellectual Property
Charles E. Geck III
Founder/Owner/Publisher
GlobalSpecialOperations.com (TM)
All Rights Reserved
|
perations
