Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management MG Ted Harrison Director of Operations Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management 29 February 2016 America’s Force of Decisive Action Current Facilities Environment Reduced SRM and MILCON investments since 2009 • Drop in the percent of “Green” rated facilities from 76% to 70% • Percent of “red” and “black” rated facilities is on the rise Degraded Army facilities hurt readiness and quality of life The Army is looking for cost effective opportunities to: • Divest of its worst facilities; save operations and maintenance costs in the near-term • Preserve its best facilities; meet contingency capabilities • Balance the Installation footprint; align readiness requirements to physical assets Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management Army Military Value Analysis Model Developed by the Center for Army Analysis (CAA) and managed by HQDA G-3/5/7 Contributes to stationing decisions; evaluates installations based attributes within four operational categories: • • • • Training Power Projection Well Being Expansibility/Reversibility Each attribute score contributes to a total score for the installation The MVA informs the Army Senior Leadership’s decision-making process. Other factors considered outside the MVA include • • • • • • • Strategic Considerations Cost and Efficiencies Readiness Mission Command Feasibility Environmental & Socioeconomic Impacts Community Input Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management Application of the MVA The 2005 BRAC MVA model as adapted for use to support: • 2007 Grow The Army (GTA) • 2009 stationing study which addressed: • A possible Brigade Combat Team (BCT) returning from Europe • Activation of a new Fires Brigade • Stationing of Combat Aviation Brigades • 2013 Active Component (AC) end-strength reductions (490K) and BCT reductions/reorganization (45 AC BCT to 32) • 2015 end-strength reductions (450K) and BCT reductions (32 AC BCTs to 30) The MVA model and its attributes are detailed in the Army Force Structure and Installation Alignment Report to Congress, April 2015. Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management MVA Going Forward Army Facility Capacity Analysis vs Parametric Analysis The Army conducted a “Facility Capacity Analysis,” which showed an Army-wide excess capacity of 18% (490K AC) and 21% (450K AC) by FY19 The Army conducted a “Parametric Capacity Analysis,” based on the methodology used in 1998 and 2004 by the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Results have not been released by OSD Both methods have advantages & disadvantages. Both methods show the Army has too much excess capacity Outside of BRAC authority, the Army has options to mitigate the fiscal impacts associated with retaining excess capacity EXORD 164-15; Reduce the Installation Facility Footprint Senior Commander effort to collapse units into minimum authorized footprint “Rightsize” through demo, facility conversions, termination of off post leases, etc. Lay-way facilities awaiting demo or contingency re-use Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management Partnership Spectrum Public Works $$ Reimbursement Environmental Training Fire/EMS/Law Enforcement Education Soldier & Family Services Recruiting No Cost Recreation Risk & Complexity Low Moderate High We leveraged the full range of authorities and instruments to establish agreements Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management Conclusion The Army has excess capacity across our enterprise; sustaining this capacity creates fiscal pressure on our Installations Infrastructure and Services portfolio. We continue to take risk in installation readiness to meet higher priority operational readiness requirements. Outside of BRAC authority, the Army has taken action to mitigate the impacts of reduced funding levels on our installation infrastructure. Together, we must continue to find innovative, cost effective means of delivering quality facilities and services to our Soldiers, Families, and Civilians that live and work on our installations. Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management BACKUP Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management HQDA Partnerships POCs • Garrison Commanders should use IGSA authority to maximize efficiencies and economies of scale, including cost reduction. – Only ASA (IE&E) can approve – New Army EXORD currently being staffed – Public facing website will provide up to date information on all partnerships • For more information about the Army partnerships: – visit our website: http://www.acsim.army.mil/partnerships/ – email one of the following OACSIM contacts: • Ivan Bolden, Chief of Partnerships: [email protected] • Donna Wilhoit, OACSIM: [email protected] • Pressley Carr, OACSIM: [email protected] Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management