Implementation of Base Realignment and Closure 2005 and Enhanced Use Lease Actions at Fort George G. Meade PDF Download
Are you looking for read ebook online? Search for your book and save it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Download Implementation of Base Realignment and Closure 2005 and Enhanced Use Lease Actions at Fort George G. Meade PDF full book. Access full book title Implementation of Base Realignment and Closure 2005 and Enhanced Use Lease Actions at Fort George G. Meade by . Download full books in PDF and EPUB format.
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 530
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 530
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 684
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 478
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 296
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author:
Publisher: DIANE Publishing
ISBN: 9781422397985
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 10
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 524
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Administrative law
Languages : en
Pages : 212
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author: U.s. Government Accountability Office
Publisher: Createspace Independent Publishing Platform
ISBN: 9781973922155
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 98
Get Book Here
Book Description
"To help improve the implementation of jointness-focused recommendations in any future BRAC rounds, GAO recommends that DOD provide additional guidance for consolidating training and reporting BRAC costs and require the development of baseline cost data. DOD partially concurred with the recommendation to clarify guidance for reporting BRAC costs but did not concur with the other recommendations, stating that GAO misunderstood its approach to joint training. GAO believes its findings and recommendations are valid and addresses these points in the report. What GAO Found For each of the six recommendations GAO reviewed from the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) round, the Department of Defense (DOD) implemented the recommendations by requiring military services to relocate select training functions; however, GAO found that two of the six training functions reviewed were able to take advantage of the opportunity provided by BRAC to consolidate training so that services could train jointly. In implementing the remaining four BRAC recommendations, DOD relocated similar training functions run by separate military services into one location, but the services did not consolidate training functions. For example, they do not regularly coordinate or share information on their training goals and curriculums. DOD's justification for numerous 2005 BRAC recommendations included the assumption that realigning military department activities to one location would enhance jointness-defined by DOD as activities, operations, or organizations in which elements of two or more military departments participate. For these four training functions, DOD missed the opportunity to consolidate training to increase jointness, because it provided guidance to move personnel or construct buildings but not to measure progress toward consolidated training. Without additional guidance for consolidating training, the services will not be positioned to take advantage of such an opportunity in these types of recommendations as proposed by DOD and will face challenges encouraging joint training activities and collaboration across services. DOD cannot determine if implementing the 2005 BRAC joint training recommendations that GAO reviewed has resulted in savings in operating costs. For three of the recommendations in this review, the services did not develop baseline operating costs before implementing the BRAC recommendations, which would have enabled it to determine whether savings were achieved. Without developing baseline cost data, DOD will be unable to estimate any cost savings resulting from similar recommendations in any future BRAC rounds. Further, costs reported to DOD by the training functions business plan managers for implementation of two of the six recommendations in this review likely did not include all BRAC-related costs funded from outside the BRAC account. A DOD memo requires BRAC business plan managers to submit all BRAC-related expenditures, including those funded from both inside and outside of the BRAC account. GAO identified at least $110 million in implementation costs that likely should have been reported to DOD in accordance with the memo but were not; therefore the $35.1 billion total cost reported for BRAC 2005 is likely somewhat understated. A DOD official stated that it was up to the military departments to ensure that all BRAC implementation costs were accounted for and that the military departments had the flexibility to determine which costs were associated with the BRAC recommendation and which were attributed to other actions. GAO found that this flexibility in determining which costs were to be reported as BRAC costs led to inconsistencies in what kinds of projects had their costs counted as BRAC implementation costs.
Author: United States. Congress. House. Committee on Armed Services. Readiness Subcommittee
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : History
Languages : en
Pages : 232
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author: Mark A. Little
Publisher: DIANE Publishing
ISBN: 9780756725419
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 72
Get Book Here
Book Description
Congress recently authorized another round of defense base realign. and closures beginning in 2005, but many in the Congress continue to have questions about the implementation of the prior rounds in 1988, 1991, 1993, and 1995. This report updates the status of the 4 prior rounds of defense base realign. and closures at the conclusion of the 6-year implementation period assoc. with the 1995 round. The report addresses: the magnitude of the net savings accruing from the prior 4 closure rounds and the impact of remaining closure-related costs on future savings; DoDs progress in transferring unneeded base property to other users; and the econ. recovery of communities affected by base closures.
