Military Base Closures: Frequently Asked Questions

Military Base Closures: Frequently Asked

Questions

(name redacted)

Specialist in National Defense

March 19, 2014

Congressional Research Service

7-....

www.crs.gov

R43425

Military Base Closures: Frequently Asked Questions

Summary

These FAQs examine the provisions in the Constitution and in permanent statute that define and

limit federal authority to disestablish or diminish employment at defense sites. They do not

discuss the special, temporary BRAC (Base Realignment and Closure) process that Congress has

periodically authorized for the reduction of defense infrastructure.

Congressional Research Service

Military Base Closures: Frequently Asked Questions

Contents

Does the President require legislation to be passed before he can close a military base? ............... 1

What authority does the President have to close military bases? .................................................... 1

What role does Congress play in base closures? ............................................................................. 1

Are there limits on presidential authority to close military bases? .................................................. 2

Are those restrictions laid out in permanent law? ............................................................................ 2

What are those restrictions? ............................................................................................................. 2

Did the restrictions in Sections 2687 and 993 apply to the disestablishment of Joint

Forces Command (JFCOM)?........................................................................................................ 3

Will future base closures constitute a BRAC round? ...................................................................... 4

If my question is not answered here, how can I find additional information? ................................. 4

Contacts

Author Contact Information............................................................................................................. 4

Congressional Research Service

Military Base Closures: Frequently Asked Questions

Does the President require legislation to be passed

before he can close a military base?

No. Congress wrote restrictions that would have prevented the closure of military installations

without prior congressional action into several National Defense Authorization Acts during the

1960s and 1970s, but each of these bills was vetoed. Nevertheless, Congress has been able to

place in statute provisions that delay actions to reduce operations at or close installations that

employ civilians above certain numbers.

What is commonly referred to as a “BRAC (Base Realignment and Closure) round,” a

comprehensive reduction of Department of Defense (DOD) real property, has been carried out

under the provisions of temporary statutes. The authorization for the most recent BRAC round

expired on April 16, 2006. As outlined below, the President and his subordinates have

considerable existing authority to close military installations.

What authority does the President have to close

military bases?

Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution appoints the President as the commander in chief of the

Army, the Navy, and the state Militias (National Guards) when they are called into federal

service. This gives the President the authority to deploy those forces, which in common practice

has included creating and closing the installations needed to house and train them.

Title 10 of the United States Code encompasses laws pertaining to the federal armed forces.

Section 113 of Title 10 (10 U.S.C. §113) creates a Secretary of Defense, who is the principal

assistant to the President in all matters relating to DOD and who has authority, direction, and

control over the department. The Secretary is second to the President in commanding operational

military forces. Other sections within Title 10 create the secretaries of the military departments

(Army, Navy, and Air Force).1 These offices are under the authority, direction, and control of the

Secretary of Defense, and their statutory powers include the administration of federal real

property (facilities and land) needed to carry out the functions of their departments. The authority

to create, realign, or close installations under their administration has commonly been held to be

one of those powers.

What role does Congress play in base closures?

Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution gives the Congress the authority to raise revenues and pay

the debts of the United States, to provide for the common Defense, and to raise armies, maintain a

Navy, and regulate the Militias when called to federal service. Therefore, Congress funds the

operations of DOD through its annual defense and military construction appropriations acts and

1

See 10 U.S.C. §3013 for the Secretary of the Army, 10 U.S.C. §5013 for the Secretary of the Navy, and 10 U.S.C.

§8013 for the Secretary of the Air Force.

Congressional Research Service

1

Military Base Closures: Frequently Asked Questions

sets DOD organization and policy through the annual National Defense Authorization Act.

Through this legislation, Congress authorizes the acquisition and transfer of title of military real

property; funds the construction, maintenance, and operation of military installations; empowers

DOD to waive statutory requirements in the disposal of property, and otherwise enables DOD to

shape and maintain its infrastructure inventory. Nevertheless, primarily because the President and

his subordinates have been responsible for the deployment of military forces, Congress has been

hesitant to direct the creation or disestablishment of specific military installations.

Are there limits on presidential authority to close

military bases?

Yes. Congress has passed, and the President has enacted, restrictions on presidential powers to

close military installations using the annual appropriation and defense authorization bills.

Are those restrictions laid out in permanent law?

Yes, some are. Principal among them are 10 U.S.C. §2687 (Base Closures and Realignments),

enacted in 1977,2 and 10 U.S.C. 993 (Notification of Permanent Reduction of Sizable Numbers of

Members of the Armed Forces), enacted in 2011.3 These sections impose a “notify, evaluate, and

wait” process on the Secretary of Defense and the secretaries of the military departments before

they may take actions to close or realign any military installation that meets certain criteria.

What are those restrictions?

Under 10 U.S.C. §2687, for military installations at which at least 300 civilian personnel are

authorized to be employed, the Secretary of Defense or a secretary of a military department may

take no action to carry out a closure until he submits to the Committees on Armed Services of the

House and Senate

1. notification of the closure as part of the department’s annual request for

appropriations;

2. an evaluation of the fiscal, local economic, budgetary, environmental, strategic,

and operational consequences of the closure;

3. the criteria used to consider and recommend the military installation for closure;

and

4. a period of 30 legislative days or 60 calendar days, whichever is longer, expires

following the day on which the notice and evaluation is submitted to the

committees.

2

3

Act of August 1, 1977, P.L. 95-82, Title VI, §612(a), 91 Stat. 379.

Act of December 31, 2011, P.L. 112-81, Division B, Title XXVIII, Subtitle F, §2864(a), 125 Stat. 1702.

Congressional Research Service

2

Military Base Closures: Frequently Asked Questions

The statute defines a realignment as any action that both reduces and relocates functions and

civilian personnel positions. Exempted from the definition of a realignment is a reduction in force

resulting from workload adjustments, reduced personnel or funding levels, skill imbalances, or

other similar causes. For realignments at installations of at least 300 authorized civilian positions,

it imposes the same restrictions on the secretaries as a closure if the realignment involves a

reduction by more than 1,000, or by more than 50%, in the number of civilian personnel

authorized to be employed there.

The section also bans the preparation of any facility at another military installation intended to

accept employees relocated by the closure or realignment until the four conditions listed above

have been fulfilled.

While Section 2687 is predicated on the predicted reduction of civilian employees at an

installation, 10 U.S.C. §993 lays out a similar, though slightly different, process where a

reduction in uniformed military personnel is involved.

Section 993 prevents the secretaries concerned from taking any irrevocable action to implement a

reduction of more than 1,000 members of the armed forces at an installation until they

1. notify the Committees on Armed Services of the reduction (there is no restriction

on when such notification may be given);

2. justify the reduction and evaluate its local strategic and operational impact;

3. wait for a period of 21 days after the notification is submitted (14 days if

submitted in electronic format).

Both statutes state that they do not apply in cases where the actions are being taken for reasons of

national security or a military emergency

Did the restrictions in Sections 2687 and 993 apply

to the disestablishment of Joint Forces Command

(JFCOM)?

No. U.S. Joint Forces Command, a major combatant command, was headquartered in several

military installations in the Hampton Roads, Virginia, area. During August of 2010, Secretary of

Defense Robert Gates announced that the command would be disestablished and its headquarters

staff would be disbanded, an event that occurred on August 31, 2011. Although the civilian

employment within the headquarters exceeded the number needed to invoke Section 2687, it was

not concentrated on a single installation. Rather, the disbandment represented either a reduction in

force or a realignment at each of the several installations it affected. At none of the installations

did the reduction in numbers reach a realignment threshold. Section 993, pertaining to the number

of uniformed personnel, was not enacted until after JFCOM was disestablished. Therefore, there

was no statutory requirement for congressional notification and justification.

Congressional Research Service

3

Military Base Closures: Frequently Asked Questions

Will future base closures constitute a BRAC round?

No. As outlined earlier, BRAC has been a process established under specific authorization from

Congress that has been time-limited. There have been five distinct BRAC rounds, of which the

last four have been carried out under the provisions of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment

Act of 1990, as amended. The authority under that act expired on April 16, 2006. Therefore, there

can be no future BRAC round until and unless Congress passes and the President signs legislation

that specifically authorizes one. Because the relevant statutory authority has expired any such

future round need not follow processes used in prior rounds.

If my question is not answered here, how can I find

additional information?

The issues involved with the closing of any military installation can cover a range not necessarily

restricted to those regarding real property. For questions related to the following broad areas,

please consult with the following CRS experts:

1. Military personnel, manpower, pay, benefits: (name redacted), Specialist in

Military Manpower Policy (-redacted-@crs.loc.gov, 7-....)

2. Defense budget, policy: (name redacted), Specialist in U.S. Defense Policy and Budget

(-redacted-@crs.loc.gov, 7-....)

3. Military construction, installations, BRAC: (name redacted), Specialist in National

Defense (-redacted-@crs.loc.gov, 7-....).

Author Contact Information

(name redacted)

Specialist in National Defense

-redacted-@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

Congressional Research Service

4

EveryCRSReport.com

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) is a federal legislative branch agency, housed inside the

Library of Congress, charged with providing the United States Congress non-partisan advice on

issues that may come before Congress.

EveryCRSReport.com republishes CRS reports that are available to all Congressional staff. The

reports are not classified, and Members of Congress routinely make individual reports available to

the public.

Prior to our republication, we redacted names, phone numbers and email addresses of analysts

who produced the reports. We also added this page to the report. We have not intentionally made

any other changes to any report published on EveryCRSReport.com.

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 permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or

otherwise use copyrighted material.

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' institutional role.

EveryCRSReport.com is not a government website and is not affiliated with CRS. We do not claim

copyright on any CRS report we have republished.