INSIGHTi
Confederate Names and Military Installations
Updated June 16, 2020
On June 8, 2020, an Army spokesperson made a statement that the Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and
the Secretary of the Army Ryan D. McCarthy are “open to a bi-partisan discussion” on renaming the
Army's 10 instal ations named after Confederate leaders. This statement follows the Commandant of the
Marine Corps Gen. David Berger’s message (MARADMIN 331/20) on June 5, 2020, instructing
commanders to “identify and remove” displays of the Confederate battle flag on Marine bases. Gen.
Berger's order was signed following a House Armed Services subcommittee hearing on February 11
regarding the rise of white supremacy in the ranks. A 2019 Military Times survey found that “36 percent
of troops who responded have seen evidence of white supremacist and racist ideologies in the military, a
significant rise from the year before, when only 22 percent reported the same in the 2018 poll.” In
addition to some Department of Defense (DOD) officials, certain Members of Congress have expressed
interest in renaming military instal ations named after Confederate leaders. There is also interest in the
DOD’s selection and approval process for naming military instal ations.
U.S. Military Bases Named in Honor of Confederate Military Leaders
There are 10 major military instal ations named after Confederate Civil War commanders located in the
former states of the Confederacy. These instal ations are al owned by the U.S. Army. They are: Fort
Rucker (after Col. Edmund W. Rucker, who was given the honorary title of “General”) in Alabama; Fort
Benning (Brig. Gen. Henry L. Benning) and Fort Gordon (Maj. Gen. John Brown Gordon) in Georgia;
Camp Beauregard (Gen. Pierre Gustave Toutant “P.G.T.” Beauregard) and Fort Polk (Gen. Leonidas Polk)
in Louisiana; Fort Bragg (Gen. Braxton Bragg) in North Carolina; Fort Hood (Lt. Gen. John Bel Hood)
in Texas; and Fort A.P. Hil (Lt. Gen. Ambrose Powel “A.P.” Hil ), Fort Lee (Gen. Robert E. Lee) and
Fort Pickett (Maj. Gen. George Edward Pickett) in Virginia.
According to the Army Center of Military History, Camp Beauregard and Forts Benning, Bragg, Gordon , and Lee were al
established during World War I. The other forts (Hil , Hood, Pickett, Polk, and Rucker) were established in the 1940s. The
U.S. Army Center website has a brief history on the process for Naming Army Instal ations.
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN10756
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress
Congressional Research Service
2
Source: Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), Whose Heritage? Public Symbols of the Confederacy, updated February 1, 2019.
Naming Policy by Military Service
Currently, DOD does not have a department-wide review process to evaluate the naming of military
instal ations. Each military service has its own naming criteria and approval process summarized below.
Army
In general, the naming of Army instal ations is the responsibility of the Assistant Secretary of Army for
Manpower and Reserve Affairs (ASA (M&RA)), However, the Secretary of the Army retains final
approval authority for the Army Memorial Program—a program that oversees the naming of al Army real
property. For the Army, the naming of a U.S. Army instal ation after a deceased individual is considered a
memorialization, while naming an instal ation after a living individual is termed a dedication. The Army
maintains separate criteria for memorialization and dedication of Army real property. The regulation that
sets these criteria is Army Regulation (AR) 1-33, The Army Memorial Program (October 2018). In
addition to dedicating and memorializing instal ations after people, the Army can also name an
instal ation after an event. AR 1-33 provides a separate set of criteria for this “naming” and is defined as
“the non-permanent naming of Army real property after famous battles and events.”
Navy
OPNAV INSTRUCTION 5030.12H (October 2017) explains the U.S. Navy’s policy and procedures for
the naming of streets, facilities and structures. According to this instruction, “names selected should honor
deceased members of the Navy.” It may also be appropriate to honor deceased persons other than Navy
personnel who have made significant contributions to the benefit of the Navy. This instruction is
applicable to naming a structure or building that is identified by a real property unique identifier or a
street. Naming designations of internal portions of buildings or spaces can be assigned at the discretion of
the local instal ation commander. The spokesman for the Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Mike Gilday
announced on June 9, that Adm. Gilday directed his staff to draft an order that wil ban the Confederate
battle flag from al public spaces and work areas on Navy bases, ships, subs, and aircraft.
Marine Corps
The Manual for the Marine Corps Historical Program addresses the Commemorative Naming Program
and specifies that “property may be named for individuals highly regarded within the Marine Corps
and/or local communities. Names of deceased Marines, or members of other military organizations who
died while serving with or in support of Marine Corps units, wil be considered first.” A Marine Corps
Instal ations Command Policy Letter 3-15 offers guidance for Marine Corps Instal ations Command.
Congressional Research Service
3
Air Force
Air Force Manual 36-2806, Awards and Memorialization Program (2019), sets Air Force policy
for the Air Force’s memorialization program. The manual states “The memorialization program
is designed to provide enduring honor and tribute to living and deceased military members and
civilians with records of outstanding and honorable service through the naming of Air Force
instal ations, streets, buildings, and interior spaces of buildings.” Chapter 4 of the manual
provides naming criteria and approval authorities for Air Force instal ations, and states: “When
naming an Air Force instal ation ensure only the most deserving individuals are selected for
memorialization. Selections should bring honor to the Air Force and reflect the goodwil of the
local community.”
Author Information
Barbara Salazar Torreon
Senior Research Librarian
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
IN10756 · VERSION 6 · UPDATED