Army report looks at effects of potential cuts to Fort Bragg, other installations

[nitpicker]

http://www.stripes.com/news/us/army-report-looks-at-effects-of-potential-cuts-to-fort-bragg-other-installations-1.314708

Army report looks at effects of potential cuts to Fort Bragg, other installations

By Drew Brooks
The Fayetteville Observer, N.C. (TNS)
Published: November 17, 2014

Nearly a year after sequestration and a government shutdown forced U.S. military leaders to pinch pennies, Army leaders again warned that deep budget cuts could cripple the force.

The Army has finalized a report that outlines the effects of potential cuts across 30 installations, including Fort Bragg. Under the worst-case scenario first proposed when a draft of the U.S. Army Environmental Command report was released earlier this year, Fort Bragg could lose up to 16,000 soldiers and defense civilians by 2020.

The final report, published in late October, looked at the economic impact along with effects the cuts could have on environmental issues, such as land use and air quality.
(snip)

Ultimately, officials said there was a "finding of no significant impact" for the report, known as the Supplemental Programmatic Environmental Assessment for Army 2020 Force Structure Realignment. (snip) But officials said the economic impact would be significant on most posts.
(snip)

The Army report was a follow up to a similar report released last year outlining potential troop cuts. But the latest report built on those earlier troop cuts based on newer budgetary projections. The 2013 assessment looked at the possibility of cutting the Army from 560,000 to 490,000 soldiers, officials said. The newer report analyzed the potential loss of an additional 70,000 soldiers and Army civilians.

The active-duty end-strength of 420,000 is needed to meet spending levels required by the Budget Control Act of 2011, officials said. But Army officials also have warned of potentially deeper cuts due to sequestration.

"Nearly all Army installations will be affected in some way by the reductions," officials said in the report, however, the document itself only looked at installations where losses could number 1,000 or more.

Those installations analyzed on the 2013 report include Fort Benning, Georgia; Fort Bliss, Texas; Fort Bragg; Fort Campbell, Kentucky; Fort Carson, Colorado; Fort Drum, New York; Fort Gordon, Georgia; Fort Hood, Texas; Fort Irwin, California; Fort Knox, Kentucky; Fort Lee, Virginia; Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri; Fort Polk, Louisiana; Fort Riley, Kansas; Fort Sill, Oklahoma; Fort Stewart, Georgia; Fort Wainwright, Alaska; Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska; Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Virginia; Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington; and, United States Army Garrison Hawaii - Schofield Barracks, Hawaii.

The 2014 report looked at those same installations, in addition to Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland; Fort Belvoir, Virginia; Fort Huachuca, Arizona; Fort Jackson, South Carolina; Fort Leavenworth, Kansas; Fort Meade, Maryland; Fort Rucker, Alabama; Joint Base San Antonio - Fort Sam Houston, Texas; and U.S. Army Garrison Hawaii - Fort Shafter, Hawaii.

[nitpicker]

1. Link to the report

http://aec.army.mil/Services/Support/NEPA/Documents.aspx