1995 Army Team Lead Desk Material - Adds to List Hearing, May 21, 1993 Page: 7 of 222
This legal document is part of the collection entitled: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission and was provided to UNT Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
- Highlighting
- Highlighting On/Off
- Color:
- Adjust Image
- Rotate Left
- Rotate Right
- Brightness, Contrast, etc. (Experimental)
- Cropping Tool
- Download Sizes
- Preview all sizes/dimensions or...
- Download Thumbnail
- Download Small
- Download Medium
- Download Large
- High Resolution Files
- IIIF Image JSON
- IIIF Image URL
- Accessibility
- View Extracted Text
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
%wo 1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
62
63
64
65
66
67
69P RO C E E D I
CHAIRMAN COURTER: The
Commission will come to order. If we can have
order in the room, please. Thank you very
much.
Good morning, Ladies and
gentlemen, and welcome to one of the most
important meetings that the Base CLosure and
Realigrent Commission wilt have. we're here
today, as you know, to develop a menu of
options, a List of possible alternatives to
some of the military installations that the
Secretary of Defense has recommended for
closure.
I want to ephasize that we're
not here today to produce a final List of
closures and realigrments. We will not take
that definitive action until the Latter part
of next month, June. It will probably be the
third week of June, perhaps the last week in
June.
We're here today to make
decisions about adding bases for further
consideration, not because we have determined
that we need to close more bases than the
secretary has recommended, necessarily, but
because we want to make sure he selected the
right ones for closure and realignment.
I also want to make it clear
that our job is not to upset and, in some
cases, almost terrorize communities that may,
in some cases, breathe a sigh of relief in
March when they found out they were not on the
Secretary's List of recommended realignments
or closures. We are as a panel acutely aware
of the pain and the dislocation that
communities fear when they face the prospect
of an important military base being closed or
realigned in their neighborhood.
Our job as an independent
Commission is to render a fair and informed
judment of the Secretary's recommendations.
I don't think we can do that in some cases
without making direct comparisons between
bases that are on the Secretary's list and
similar bases that are not found on the
Secretary's list.
If, after full and open
discussions today we add bases for further
consideration, we will be fair to those
additional installations, just as we have been
fair to those that were on the Secretary's
List. Simply put, an affirmative vote, which
will require if there is no refusals, four
commissioners voting in the affirmative to put
a base on the review list does not necessarily
mean they're going to be closed.
It means that for us to do an
honest and independent job in analyzing that
particular category, as did the Department of
Defense, we have to look at a broader picture.
WeI have to look at other installations, we
feel, if there is an affirmative vote, other
than those that were found on the Secretary' s
list Mlarch 15th.
At least one commissioner if,
in fact, we vote affirmtively to add bases on
our review List today, will visit any
installation that we add for furtherN G S
consideration, if it falls in the category of
being major. And representatives of that
community, just like those that occurred
during the past couple of months, will be
given the opportunity to testify in their area
of the country. And then their elected
representatives in Washington, D.C., will be
given the opportunity to testify Later on this
month with respect to those additional
facilities here in Washington.
A schedule of those additional
base visits, if we have affirmative votes
today, and hearings will be announced within
the next few days. After we complete a new
round of base visits and hearings during the
early days of June, we will have additional
hearings in Washington, during which menders
of Congress and other important witnesses will
be given a final opportunity to testify.
I have spoken to various
commissioners individuaLly, and they feel
strongly that what we may want to do in some
instances-- not all, but in some instances,
and maybe all instances -- is to invite back
the Department of Defense, the Secretary of
Defense, Service Secretaries, and other
personnel that :ame up with the original List
that was published on March 15th.
We will then begin our final
publications or public deliberations around
the 17th or 18th of June and will vote on our
final recommendations to the President, as I
mentioned, late June -- we anticipate June
25th or 26th.
As we have been, I believe,
throughout this entire process, we'll continue
to be fair, open, and, of course, fiercely
independent. C ir job is to make sure that we
make the best decisions for the interests of
the country.
Finally, I want to say a word
about how we proceed today, and I have a
couple of technical housekeeping chores. I
have asked Matt 8ehrmart, who is sitting in
front of me, and our chief of staff, and Ben
Bordon, who is, as well, in front of me, our
director of review and analysis, to give us a
short presentation, after which the leaders
for the commission's three service teams and
interagency team -- we have a team Leader for
the Air Force, the Army, and the Navy, and an
interagency team.
And we'll have them be
available to take us through the various
options that they have prepared at our
request, as well as any other options that any
commissioner may raise during the day. I
anticipate, obviously, a full and broad an
vigorous discussion with regard to all these
categories and all these bases.
I want to emphasize the fact
that the process with respect to today's
events started before today. And I just want
to make sure that everybody understands what
that process was. The commissioners, before
they were sworn in as commi ssiLoners by the
United States Senate, obviously disclosed
their financial situations- financial
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This document can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Matching Search Results
View 10 places within this document that match your search.Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Legal Document.
United States. Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission. 1995 Army Team Lead Desk Material - Adds to List Hearing, May 21, 1993, legal document, February 17, 2006; (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc25520/m1/7/?q=food+rule+for+unt+students: accessed July 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.