Meeting the BRAC Challenge In Army Planning : Meeting the BRAC Challenge In Army Planning Federal Planning Division APA 19 April 2006 Jerry.C.Zekert, CEMP-DA, (202) 761-7525, email: Jerry.C.Zekert @ hq02.usace.army.mil


Purpose of Presentation: Purpose of Presentation Provide an overview of current BRAC Re-stationing effort facing the Army Provide overview of Army programatic Planning support efforts. Installation approach to supporting BRAC Take A ways


Army Transforming Over Time: Army Transforming Over Time FRONTIER ARMY ARMY OF EXPANSION COLD WAR ARMY WARFIGHTING ARMY IN THE “WAR TO END ALL WARS” WARFIGHTING ARMY WW II & Korea HEMISPHERIC DEFENSE (ISOLATIONISM) CONSTABULARY MISSION ?


Interim Facilities for ACIP Stationing: Tokyo/Yokohama Akizuki/Kure Zama/Sagamihara Okinawa PACIFIC Ft Campbell Ft Stewart Ft Bragg Fort Lewis Ft Carson Ft Bliss Ft Polk Ft Hood Fort Richardson Fort Wainwright Ft Riley UEx/SUA Ft Drum Schofield Barracks Ft Knox Ft Benning HAAF Hot seating units in swing space due to deployments. Need MILCON to happen before peace. Betting on MILCON placement to beat stationings Funding for interim facilities expected 06. Interim facilities in place. Awaiting MILCON replacement. LEGEND Interim solution not yet finalized – stationing decisions not final. Ft Lee Ft Eustis Ft Sill Ft Irwin Ft Riley CAB Fort Lewis Over $1.3BM invested and 4,000 relocatable buildings acquired FY04/05/06 25,500 “new” soldiers stationed. Interim Facilities for ACIP Stationing


Echelons Above Brigades et al Impactsi.e. Costs of Force Structure changes and stationing occurring FY06-08: Tokyo/Yokohama Akizuki/Kure Zama/Sagamihara Okinawa Ft Drum - $80M Ft Sill - $10M Ft Bliss - $38M Ft Hood - $5M Ft Polk - $7M Ft Irwin - $1.6M Ft Benning - $24.5M Schofield Barracks - $93M Fort Wainwright - $30.5M Fort Richardson - $28M PACIFIC Ft Leonard Wood - $42M Ft Carson $25M Fort Lewis - $72M Ft Riley - $32M Ft Knox - $50M Ft Campbell - $7M Notes: Hunter Army Airfield - $20M Ft Stewart - $10M Ft Bragg - $30M FY06 – FY08 23,500 more “new” soldiers Rough cost = $700M Scope/cost being developed Fully funded & executing LEGEND Full funding expected by 2nd Quarter 06 Funding expected by end FY06 Full funding expected 1st Quarter 06. Ft Leavenworth - $3.5M Ft Sam Houston - $25.1M Echelons Above Brigades et al Impacts i.e. Costs of Force Structure changes and stationing occurring FY06-08


MILCON requirements for Operational Army(Modular Bdes & MFAB): Tokyo/Yokohama Akizuki/Kure Zama/Sagamihara Okinawa PACIFIC Ft Campbell - $700M Ft Stewart/HAAF - $512M Ft Bragg - $437M Fort Lewis - $2,332 Ft Carson $1,042M Ft Sill - $55M Ft Bliss - $1,696M Ft Polk - $7M Ft Hood - $205M Fort Richardson - $547M Fort Wainwright - $548M Ft Riley Total - $1,026M Ft Drum - $1,015M Schofield Barracks - $1,778M Ft Knox - $270M Ft Benning - $41M MCA estimate = $10,261M 65,500 “new” soldiers by end 2011 Ft Irwin - $TBD Requirements are based on detailed, “boots on the ground” assessment. $7.2M invested in Requirement Analysis and Planning Charrettes contracts. Updated 15 March 06. DGL Ft Lee - $607M Ft Leavenworth $39M Ft Leonard Wood $281M MILCON requirements for Operational Army (Modular Bdes & MFAB)


BRAC & the Institutional Army Net Gain / Loss by Installation: Tokyo/Yokohama Akizuki/Kure Zama/Sagamihara Okinawa PACIFIC Aberdeen $877M/2176pn Ft Belvoir $2189M/11,858pn Ft Leavenworth $129M/203pn Ft Meade $102M/5361pn Ft Lee $1,424M/7344pn Ft Eustis $137M/98pn Picatinny $47.7M/693pn Ft Bragg / Pope AFB $249M/4325pn Ft Sam Houston $1,709M/9364pn Redstone $90M/1655pn Ft Knox $500M/-944pn Ft Campbell -351pn Rock Island -1263pn Net loss Net gain: 1 to 1000 Net gain: 1001 to 5,000 Net gain: greater than 5,000 Ft Sill $543M/3602pn Ft Jackson $66M/615pn Ft Benning $1,203M/9839pn Ft Leonard Wood $123M/-87pn West Point $120M/264pn Office/Light Industrial Academic LEGEND Detroit Arsenal –$107M/647pn 59,800 “new” people $4,841.9M = TABS Estimate $12M = Actual cost to execute BRAC & the Institutional Army Net Gain / Loss by Installation


Net Change of AMF, IGPBS, BRAC: Tokyo/Yokohama Akizuki/Kure Zama/Sagamihara Okinawa PACIFIC Aberdeen + 2,176 Ft Belvoir + 11,858 Ft Leavenworth +203 Ft Meade + 5,361 Ft Lee + 8,375 Ft Eustis 1,168 Picatinny +693 Ft Bragg / Pope AFB + 8,291 Ft Sam Houston +9399 Redstone + 1,655 Ft Knox +1,541 Ft Campbell +4,619 Rock Island -1,263 Net loss Net gain: 1 to 1000 Net gain: 1001 to 5,000 Net gain: greater than 5,000 Ft Sill + 3,334 Ft Rucker + 1,888 Ft Jackson + 615 Ft Benning + 10,156 Ft Leonard Wood +1,665 West Point +264 LEGEND Detroit Arsenal - 647 142,000 people restationing Ft Stewart + 1,921 Hunter Army Airfield + 2,041 Fort Drum +4,142 Ft Irwin +1,292 Ft Polk + 1,006 Ft Wainwright +2,001 Ft Lewis +9,038 Ft Bliss +18,602 Ft Carson +9,638 Ft Richardson +3,652 Ft Riley +9,300 Schofield Bks +3,098 Ft Hood + 6,315 Ft Huachuca -336 Net Change of AMF, IGPBS, BRAC


BRAC Closures: Tokyo/Yokohama Akizuki/Kure Zama/Sagamihara Okinawa PACIFIC Umatilla Chemical Depot Riverbank AAP Deseret Chemical Depot Kansas AAP Lone Star AAP Newport Chemical Depot USAG Selfridge Fort Monroe Fort McPherson Fort Gillem Mississippi AAP Fort Monmouth HEAVY INDUSTRIAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL Legend: 14 Installations, 9k buildings, 48.8 MSF, 256k Acres BRAC Closures


BRAC/AMF/IGPBS Charettes: BRAC/AMF/IGPBS Charettes Mandated to solve immediate planning/programming requirements Focused on immediate/short-term needs, but urgently affects long-term development BRAC/AMC/IGPBS Charettes accomplish the following activities: Force Structure Review… Requirements Analysis & Validation… Site Investigations / Land Use… Site Layout and Planning… Preparation of DD Form 1391s…


BRAC/AMF/IGPBS Charettes: BRAC/AMF/IGPBS Charettes BRAC/AMF/IGPBS Charettes take about 1 month to complete ACSIM/IMA has directed Centralized Management of Charette Effort. USACE Installation Support Center- Huntsville leads this Effort with support from geographic Districts Current ACSIM focus (BRAC05 initiatives): Service Schools (ARMOR/ORDNANCE/ADA/TRANS) Select units (HRC/HQ FORSCOM/HQ USARC) Echelons Above Brigade (EAB) Fort Knox is now Priority 1


Army Real Property Master Planning: Army Real Property Master Planning Planning Charettes focused ONLY in short term needs


Army Real Property Master Planning: Army Real Property Master Planning


Lessons Learned: Planning comprehensiveness: Lessons Learned: Planning comprehensiveness Planning Principles Vision Goals Planning Considerations Planning Goals Sustainability Critical Infrastructure Protection Effective Land Use Flexible Development- Changing Missions ..planning principles Presenting the process To Base Leaders to Solve Today’s and tomorrows legacy Gets Commands buy-in Helps manage Change`


Q&A: Q&A


Points of Contact:: Points of Contact: Sean Ebersold Ecology and the Environment, Inc. 1665 Palm Beach Lakes Road Suite 500 West Palm Beach FL 561-640-6552 sebersold@ene.com Jerry Zekert HQ, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CEMP-DA 441 G St NE Washington DC (202) 761-7525 Jerry.C.Zekert@USACE.ARMY.MIL