Base Realignment and Closure

Base Realignment and Closure
Name	Base Realignment and Closure
Formed	1988
Jurisdiction	United States Department of Defense
Headquarters	The Pentagon

Base Realignment and Closure. It is a process by which the United States Department of Defense consolidates, realigns, or closes its domestic military installations to achieve cost savings and improve operational efficiency. The process is designed to be independent of direct political influence, with recommendations developed by an independent commission and presented to the President of the United States and the United States Congress for approval. Since its inception, it has led to the closure of hundreds of facilities, significantly reshaping the United States military's domestic footprint and generating substantial debate regarding its economic and strategic consequences.

History and legislative background

The modern process was formally established by the Defense Authorization Amendments and Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1988, sponsored by Representative Dick Armey. This legislation was a congressional response to the political difficulties of closing military bases, which were often protected by powerful legislators. The initial 1988 round was followed by more comprehensive legislation, the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, which established the framework for the major closure rounds of the 1990s. These laws were enacted in the context of the post-Cold War drawdown, following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, when a significant reduction in force structure was anticipated. Earlier, less systematic efforts at consolidation, such as those following World War II and the Vietnam War, were often ad-hoc and highly politicized.

Process and criteria

The process follows a strict, sequential procedure designed to minimize political interference. First, the Secretary of Defense establishes selection criteria, which historically have included military value, return on investment, and impacts on communities. The Joint Chiefs of Staff and the military services then analyze installations and provide recommendations to the Secretary. The Secretary's final list is submitted to an independent, presidentially-appointed commission, known as the Base Realignment and Closure Commission. This commission, comprising private citizens, holds public hearings, visits sites, and can modify the list before sending its final recommendations to the President of the United States. The President must then approve or reject the entire package without alteration; if approved, it goes to the United States Congress, which can only block it with a joint resolution.

Major rounds and implementation

Five major rounds were conducted: 1988, 1991, 1993, 1995, and 2005. The 2005 round was notable for its emphasis on massive realignment and joint basing rather than outright closure, part of the broader Transformation of the United States Army and similar initiatives within the United States Navy and United States Air Force. Major closures from these rounds included Naval Air Station Alameda in California, Fort Monmouth in New Jersey, and the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard. The implementation of these decisions, managed by the Office of the Secretary of Defense and local redevelopment authorities, often spans decades, involving environmental cleanup, property transfer, and community planning.

Economic and community impacts

The impacts on host communities have been profound and varied. While the closure of a major installation like Chanute Air Force Base in Illinois or Pease Air Force Base in New Hampshire can cause immediate job loss and economic decline, many communities have successfully redeveloped properties. Examples include the conversion of the former Austin Army Aviation Support Facility into Austin-Bergstrom International Airport and the redevelopment of March Air Force Base into a joint-use civilian-military facility and industrial park. The Department of Defense provides some assistance through programs like the Office of Economic Adjustment.

Controversies and political challenges

The process has been consistently controversial. Critics, including many members of the United States Senate and United States House of Representatives, argue that it can devastate local economies and that savings are often overestimated. The 2005 round faced particular scrutiny over the cost and logic of creating large joint bases, such as Joint Base Lewis-McChord. Legal challenges have arisen, such as those surrounding the transfer of operations from Naval Station Newport and the closure of the Walter Reed Army Medical Center, which became a public relations crisis for the Army Medical Department. The inherent tension between military efficiency and congressional representation remains a central political challenge.

Current status and future outlook

As of the 2020s, no new round has been authorized since 2005, despite repeated requests from the Department of Defense and several Secretary of Defense officials, including Ash Carter and Lloyd Austin. The Government Accountability Office regularly reports on the execution and savings of previous rounds. Future prospects are uncertain, with debates focused on the need to address aging infrastructure, strategic competition with China and Russia, and the high cost of maintaining excess capacity. Any future action would require new authorization from the United States Congress, where political resistance remains significant.

Category:United States Department of Defense Category:United States federal defense legislation