Defense Officials Generally Pleased with Base Closure Process

WASHINGTON, March 16, 2011 — Defense Depart­ment offi­cials are gen­er­al­ly pleased with the progress of the 2005 Base Realign­ment and Clo­sure process as it moves toward its final months, an offi­cial involved in the effort said.
The 2005 BRAC law has over 200 rec­om­men­da­tions affect­ing over 800 loca­tions and some 125,000 peo­ple. It is one of the largest realign­ments in the department’s his­to­ry, and its pur­pose was dif­fer­ent from those that went before, said Peter Potochney, direc­tor of the Pentagon’s bas­ing direc­torate.

Unlike ear­li­er clo­sures and realign­ments, the push in the 2005 process was for the depart­ment foot­print to make more sense, Potochney said. “It was to use BRAC as a change agent,” he explained. “The 2005 [process] was more about restruc­tur­ing than it was about trim­ming excess capac­i­ty.”

The 2005 law called for the depart­ment to look 20 years into the future and con­fig­ure instal­la­tions and capa­bil­i­ties to sup­port that force.

“The biggest dif­fer­ence in this BRAC was we set up these joint groups that looked across ser­vice lines and were empow­ered to make rec­om­men­da­tions,” he said. These rec­om­men­da­tions received the same weight and atten­tion that ser­vice rec­om­men­da­tions received.

The ques­tions became whether func­tions aligned cor­rect­ly and how orga­ni­za­tions should be based to encour­age open com­mu­ni­ca­tion, effi­cien­cies and syn­er­gy. “It made for a much more com­pli­cat­ed back­ground,” Potochney said dur­ing a recent inter­view.

It was one thing, for exam­ple, to man­age a pro­gram get­ting rid of excess capa­bil­i­ties or infra­struc­ture, but some­thing quite dif­fer­ent to mix and match orga­ni­za­tions from dif­fer­ent ser­vices with the assort­ed cul­tures, require­ments and meth­ods of doing busi­ness.

The sup­port func­tions in the mil­i­tary par­tic­u­lar­ly lend them­selves to the process. Defense research labs, mil­i­tary med­ical care, logis­tics and indus­tri­al facil­i­ties were among those con­sol­i­dat­ed. “A lab that looks at guns, for instance,” Potochney said. “Are they sim­i­lar across the ser­vices or not? Would you need sep­a­rate ser­vice labs, or not?” All this has to be accom­plished with­out vio­lat­ing the Title 10 author­i­ty the ser­vices main­tain to “man, train and equip” the forces.

The fact that the nation is at war com­pli­cat­ed imple­men­ta­tion of the BRAC, if not the BRAC selec­tion, Potochney said. “We were very care­ful to ensure we did­n’t vio­late any warfight­ing equi­ties,” he said.

The pace of these realign­ments is dif­fer­ent also. The ear­li­er realign­ments and clo­sures “peaked out some­where around year three,” Potochney said. “This round peaked clos­er to the sixth year, and that push­es us up against the dead­line,” which is Sept. 15.

Func­tions are the oper­a­tive word in the base realign­ment process, he said. “If an old orga­ni­za­tion had 10 peo­ple doing some­thing -– say trav­el –- and at the new site there is con­sol­i­da­tion and there may be some effi­cien­cies there and you made need only eight peo­ple, so be it,” he said. “It’s the func­tion being trans­ferred, not just the peo­ple.” Potochney said he thinks the process will meet its dead­line. “A lot of [the realign­ments] are already done, a lot of them are fin­ish­ing now, and then there is a hand­ful -– five or six -– that are bump­ing up against the dead­line,” he said.

A good exam­ple of the lat­ter is the Wal­ter Reed Nation­al Mil­i­tary Med­ical Cen­ter at Bethes­da, Md. “We think there is enough time to do it,” he said. “But if a tor­na­do came through tomor­row and blew the build­ing down, would we move med­ical care just because the BRAC rec­om­men­da­tion says it? I don’t think we would jeop­ar­dize our med­ical care. I don’t have a crys­tal ball, but I am rea­son­ably sure we will make it. But we’re watch­ing it because it is extreme­ly com­plex.”

Joint bas­ing is anoth­er out­growth of the process. The Defense Depart­ment now has 12 joint bases that tru­ly are merg­ers, with all the facil­i­ties and infra­struc­ture per­son­nel becom­ing parts of the new orga­ni­za­tion, Potochney said. The process does not say how the mis­sions will be accom­plished, only that they will be, he not­ed, and those involved must meld pro­ce­dures from dif­fer­ent ser­vices to make the process work. Offi­cials expect these merg­ers will save mon­ey, he added, and are giv­ing the orga­ni­za­tions time to oper­ate togeth­er and then will look for effi­cien­cies.

BRAC is extra­or­di­nar­i­ly hard because it direct­ly affects peo­ples’ lives, Potochney said. But look­ing at it broad­ly, “this BRAC will set us up to be ready for the 21st cen­tu­ry,” he said.

“It sounds like a cliché, but this is real­ly going to posi­tion us for years and years to come. Painful? Yes. But also nec­es­sary.”

Source:
U.S. Depart­ment of Defense
Office of the Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of Defense (Pub­lic Affairs)

More news and arti­cles can be found on Face­book and Twit­ter.

Fol­low GlobalDefence.net on Face­book and/or on Twit­ter

Team GlobDef

Team GlobDef

Seit 2001 ist GlobalDefence.net im Internet unterwegs, um mit eigenen Analysen, interessanten Kooperationen und umfassenden Informationen für einen spannenden Überblick der Weltlage zu sorgen. GlobalDefenc.net war dabei die erste deutschsprachige Internetseite, die mit dem Schwerpunkt Sicherheitspolitik außerhalb von Hochschulen oder Instituten aufgetreten ist.

Alle Beiträge ansehen von Team GlobDef →