{
  "id": "RL30440",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "RL30440",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 105491,
      "date": "2001-06-07",
      "retrieved": "2016-05-24T20:23:55.862941",
      "title": "Military Base Closures: Estimates of Costs and Savings",
      "summary": "Approximately 13 years ago, in December 1988, the first military base closure commission\nrecommended the closing and realignment of 145 U.S. domestic bases and facilities. This action was\nthe consequence of the Department of Defense's broad reevaluation of its mission in conjunction\nwith the weakening and ultimate collapse of the Soviet Union. There was little need, according to\nthe Pentagon, to continue to retain the vast Cold War-era infrastructure. Funds saved from closing\ndown underutilized bases, DOD further noted, could be used to enhance development of new\nweapons and improved readiness. \n  The 1988 round of infrastructure reductions was followed by three additional rounds in 1991,\n1993, and 1995. Since then, no further rounds of base closures and realignments have been\nauthorized by Congress, despite repeated requests from the Department of Defense in recent years\nfor two additional rounds. The reasons for congressional resistance are two-fold. First, there is\nconcern over a likely backlash from constituents living in or near military installations. Second,\nmany Members of Congress remain wary about a repetition of the perceived political intrusion by\nthe Clinton Administration that occurred in regard to the 1995 recommendations to close Kelly and\nMcClellan air force bases.\n  The four base closure and realignment (BRAC) commissions recommended, individually, a\ntotal of 534 actions to close, realign, or otherwise affect specific bases, facilities, and activities. In\nDecember 1998, the General Accounting Office reported that the four BRAC commissions generated\n499 recommendations, but that in its final tally \"only 451 of these ultimately required action,\nprimarily because 48 were changed in some manner by recommendations of a later commission.\" \n  The closing of all 451 BRAC installations (major, minor and \"other\") from the four rounds is\nexpected to be completed by the end of FY2001, as originally scheduled. The disposing of all the\nclosed property, however is expected to take many more years. The Pentagon's current estimate of\nthe percentage reduction in base structure as a result of the first four rounds is 21%. This figure is\nused as support for additional infrastructure reductions, since other key indicators, such as the\ndefense budget and the force structure (personnel and units) have declined 40% and 36%,\nrespectively.\n  In terms of costs and savings associated with the first four rounds of closures and realignments,\na DOD report (April 1998) estimated a net total savings of about $14 billion through FY2001. It\nprojected that net annual savings, thereafter, would be in the vicinity of $5.6 to $5.7 billion. As for\nthe two new rounds currently being sought, the Pentagon has estimated an annual savings of about\n$3 billion after they are implemented.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/RL30440",
          "sha1": "d0d7c670d401a6544cbc905586d433d39e8a2c33",
          "filename": "files/20010607_RL30440_d0d7c670d401a6544cbc905586d433d39e8a2c33.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL30440",
          "sha1": "2c6b9ff8416868c7104a5a6bec67f3721a7610c1",
          "filename": "files/20010607_RL30440_2c6b9ff8416868c7104a5a6bec67f3721a7610c1.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    },
    {
      "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
      "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1547/",
      "id": "RL30440 2001-03-07",
      "date": "2001-03-07",
      "retrieved": "2005-06-11T01:54:45",
      "title": "Military Base Closures: Where Do We Stand?",
      "summary": null,
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORT",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "filename": "files/20010307_RL30440_cdb180e7535522b2fd210be6b1a8984375a0a3f9.pdf"
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20010307_RL30440_cdb180e7535522b2fd210be6b1a8984375a0a3f9.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": [
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Defense economics",
          "name": "Defense economics"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Military base closures",
          "name": "Military base closures"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
      "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1131/",
      "id": "RL30440 2000-02-18",
      "date": "2000-02-18",
      "retrieved": "2005-06-11T01:54:31",
      "title": "Military Base Closures: Where Do We Stand?",
      "summary": null,
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORT",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "filename": "files/20000218_RL30440_74889a1638f65db13dd56fb6c4b7a46cd9b55a42.pdf"
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20000218_RL30440_74889a1638f65db13dd56fb6c4b7a46cd9b55a42.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": [
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Defense economics",
          "name": "Defense economics"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Military base closures",
          "name": "Military base closures"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "topics": []
}