DISREGARD RESTRICTION HEADER AND FOOTER - 2005 Base Closure and Realignment Selection Criteria, USD Memo to IEC-ISG-JCSG, 4 Jan 0

United States. Department of Defense.

UNT (University of North Texas) Digital Library

THE UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE3010 DEFENSE PENTAGONWASHINGTON. DC 20301-3010ACQUISITION,TECHNOLOGYAND LOGISTICSJAN 4Z.J05MEMORANDUM FOR INFRASTRUCTURE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL MEMBERSINFRASTRUCTURE STEERING GROUP MEMBERSJOINT CROSS-SERVICE GROUP CHAIRMANSubject: 2005 Base Closure and Realignment Selection CriteriaThe Ronald Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005,Public Law 108-375, amended the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990,Public Law 101-510, to specify the selection criteria. Specifically, the amendmentrevised the criteria previously published by the Secretary of Defense by adding the word"surge" to criterion three. The amendment also revised the wording, but not the meaning,of criteria one and seven, to avoid the use of the possessive.The Department shall use the attached 2005 Base Closure and Realignment(BRAC) Selection Criteria, along with the force-structure plan and infrastructureinventory, to make recommendations for the closure or realignment of militaryinstallations inside the United States, as defined in the base closure statute. This directionsupersedes any previous direction regarding selection criteria for the BRAC 2005process. The 2005 BRAC Commission will also use these criteria in their review of theDepartment of Defense's final recommendations.11W. WynneUSI:YI(Acquisition, Technology & Logistics)Chairman, Infrastructure Steering GroupAttachment:As statedDCN: 8973Final Selection CriteriaDepartment of Defense Base Closure and RealignmentIn selecting military installations for closure or realignment, the Department ofDefense, giving priority consideration tot military value (the first four criteria below),will consider:Military ValueThe current and future mission capabilities and the impact on operational readiness ofthe total force of the Department of Defense, including the impact on jointwarfighting, training, and readiness.2.The availability and condition of land, facilities, and associated ~irspace (includingtraining areas suitable for maneuver by ground, naval, or air forces throughout adiversity of climate and terrain areas and staging areas for the use of the ArmedForces in homeland defense missions) at both existing and potential receivinglocations.3. The ability to accommodate contingency, mobilization, surge, and future total forcerequirements at both existing and potential receiving locations to support operationsand training.4. The cost of operations and the manpower implications.Other Considerations5 The extent and timing of potential costs and savings, including the number of years,beginning with the date of completion of the closure or realignment, for the savings toexceed the costs.6. The economic impact on existing communities in the vicinity of military installations.7, The ability of the infrastructure of both the existing and potential receivingcommunities to support forces, missions, and personnel.8. The environmental impact, including the impact of costs related to potential environ-mental restoration, waste management, and environmental compliance activities.DCN: 8973

2005 BRAC Commission

https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc23926/m2/1/high_res_d/BRAC-2005_08973.pdf

2005 BRAC Commission

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UNT (University of North Texas) Digital Library