By Stephen D. Niles (Washington, D.C.)

Originally published 3rd Quarter, 2005

From August 24, 2005, through August 27, 2005, the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission held a final vote on the recommendations of the Department of Defense (DoD) to close or realign various military installations throughout the country. The Commission’s votes on these matters will likely have a substantial impact, economic and otherwise, on many communities throughout the country. The Commission’s decisions will also provide a number of significant development opportunities for interested parties.

The Commission’s vote included, among other things, a vote to close the following major base facilities:

  • Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, D.C., moving most of its mission to a new Walter Reed National Medical Center that would be constructed in nearby Bethesda, MD, current site of the National Naval Medical Center

  • Fort Monmouth, NJ

  • Fort Gillem, GA

  • Fort McPherson, GA

  • Fort Monroe, VA

  • U.S. Army Garrison, Selfridge, MI

  • Almost 400 Navy Reserve, Army Reserve and National Guard facilities including, among others, Otis Air National Guard Base, MA; and Willow Grove Naval Air Station, PA (and creating joint centers)

  • Naval Station Pascagoula, MS

  • Naval Air Station Atlanta, GA

  • Naval Station Ingleside, TX

  • Naval Air Station Corpus Christi, TX

  • Brooks City-Base, TX

  • Wilford Hall Medical Center, Lackland Air Force Base, TX, consolidating medical operations for the region at a new San Antonio Regional Medical Center at nearby Fort Sam Houston

  • Onizuka Air Force Station, CA

  • Galena Airport Forward Operation Location, AK

The Commission’s list of base closures and realignments was presented to the President in early September, 2005. The President must accept the Commission’s decisions, reject them in their entirety or send them back to the Commission for revisions. If the list is approved by the President, and Congress fails to pass a joint resolution thereafter rejecting the list, it will become law.

The Commission also voted, after much debate, to keep open the following bases, among others:

  • Submarine Base, New London, CT

  • Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, ME

  • Hawthorne Army Depot, NV

  • Defense Language Institute, Monterey, CA

  • Ellsworth Air Force Base, SD

The Commission also voted on other matters, including to:

  • wait until March 31, 2006, before deciding whether to close Oceana Naval Air Station, VA, in order to give local and state authorities time to make proposed changes to limit residential encroachment on the base

  • move thousands of defense jobs from leased space in Northern Virginia to Fort Belvoir, VA; Marine Corps Base Quantico, VA; and Fort Meade, MD

  • move thousands of DoD personnel to Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD

  • realign, rather than close, Red River Army Depot, TX

  • keep open the Navy Broadway Complex, San Diego, CA, subject to satisfaction of certain conditions

  • consolidate 26 Defense Finance and Accounting Service offices into five offices located in Limestone, ME; Rome, NY; Columbus, OH; Indianapolis, IN; and Alexandria, VA

  • block the move of active-component combat aircraft from Eielson Air Force Base, AK
  • order a study of the practicality of converting a chemical weapons incinerator to incinerate conventional munitions before deciding whether to close Deseret Chemical Depot, UT

  • stop the move of about 1,000 jobs to Hanscom Air Force Base, MA

The Base Redevelopment and Realignment Manual

Additionally, in August, 2005, DoD issued its proposed rule, entitled "Revitalizing Base Closure Communities and Addressing Impacts of Realignment," for the purpose of establishing certain policies and assigning certain responsibilities relating to the closure and realignment of installations during the 2005 BRAC round. The proposed rule also authorizes DoD’s publication of a "Base Redevelopment and Realignment Manual." (This manual was referred to as the "Base Reuse Implementation Manual" (BRIM) in prior BRAC rounds.)

The manual, which DoD officials now indicate should be published by the end of 2005, will provide a detailed explanation of the DoD procedures that will be followed to implement the 2005 BRAC round. While the proposed rule is relatively brief, it provides a few insights with respect to DoD’s thinking for the 2005 BRAC round. Just as a few examples, the proposed rule:

  • discusses the role and responsibilities of local redevelopment authorities (also known as LRAs) in the 2005 BRAC round

  • recognizes the statutory preference for DoD to obtain the fair market value for properties transferred by means of economic development conveyances (EDCs)

  • indicates that "no cost" EDCs will be available under certain very limited circumstances

  • reiterates the statutory purpose of job creation for EDCs

  • expressly adopts the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisition (published by the Appraisal Institute in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Justice) for purposes of preparing estimates of fair market value for EDCs

  • emphasizes that leasing property to non-federal entities is only intended to secure final disposition of the real property

  • addresses, without providing much detail, certain environmental issues relating to (1) indemnification under Section 330 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993; (2) decontamination of potentially explosive materials; (3) the National Environmental Policy Act; and (4) historic preservation

Mr. Niles would like to thank Richard Green, a legal clerk in the Washington, D.C. office of Holland & Knight, for his assistance with this BRAC summary.

The content of this article does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on in that way. Specific advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.