DOD is currently implementing several major force structure and basing initiatives that are expected to result in a large number of personnel movements and changes in the size and shape of its domestic installation infrastructure. First, under the 2005 BRAC round, DOD is implementing 182 recommendations, as set forth by the Base Closure and Realignment Commission, which must be completed by the statutory deadline of September 15, 2011. Through the BRAC process, DOD intends to transform its departmentwide installation infrastructure and, as such, the recommendations have an unusually large number of realignment actions that are expected to result in significant personnel movements across DOD’s installations. Second, under the Global Defense Posture Realignment, DOD is realigning its overseas basing structure to more effectively support current allies and strategies in addition to addressing emerging threats. Included in this rebasing effort is the expected return of about 70,000 military and civilian personnel to the United States by 2011. Third, the Army is also undergoing major force restructuring in implementing its force modularity effort, which has been referred to as the largest Army reorganization in 50 years. The foundation for the modular force is the creation of brigade combat teams that are expected to be more agile and deployable to better meet combatant commander requirements. Finally, DOD has recently initiated a Grow the Force initiative intended to permanently increase the end strength of the Army and Marine Corps by 74,000 soldiers and 27,000 marines, respectively, to enhance overall U.S. forces, reduce stress on deployable personnel, and provide necessary forces for success in the Global War on Terrorism. When considered collectively, the simultaneous implementation of these initiatives is generating large personnel increases at many military installations within the United States, which, in turn is impacting the communities that are in close proximity to those installations. As of January 2008, OEA was assisting 20 communities surrounding growth installations based on direct DOD impacts in light of community-specific needs and resources. Figure 1 shows those impacted locations. As indicated in figure 1, most of the growth locations are attributable to the Army, which is affected more than any other military service by force structure and basing initiatives. As shown in table 1, available DOD data indicate that these 20 installations are expecting a combined net growth of over 173,000 military and civilian personnel over fiscal years 2006-2012, not counting family members and nonmission-related contractors who are also expected to relocate to the surrounding communities and generate additional community infrastructure needs. It should be noted that these estimates are based on planned personnel movement actions as of March 2008 and are subject to change over time as there are a number of factors, such as revisions in operational plans associated with the Global War on Terrorism, which may give cause for estimate revisions. As table 1 shows, the vast majority of the community locations predicted to be most affected by DOD growth surround Army installations, with Fort Bliss, Fort Belvoir, Fort Riley, and Fort Lee expected to experience personnel growth rates of more than 50 percent over fiscal years 2006-2012. Moreover, while Fort Knox, Kentucky and Cannon Air Force Base, New Mexico are actually expected to incur overall losses in personnel at their facilities between fiscal years 2006 and 2012, OEA has identified growth challenges for the surrounding communities and therefore treats them as such. For example, the Fort Knox population is changing from mostly military students living on base to a civilian population living off base, creating new growth demands on the surrounding community’s infrastructure and services. Moreover, because the growth estimates displayed in table 1 exclude dependents associated with military and civilian personnel movements as well as support contractors who may elect to relocate to these growth locations, these estimates do not represent total growth at these locations. As shown in table 2, available military projections for increases in the number of dependents at these locations over fiscal years 2006-2012 currently exceed 168,000. The Army has reported significant dependent growth for the communities surrounding Fort Bliss, Fort Belvoir, Fort Riley, Fort Knox, Fort Lee, and Fort Carson, each of which is expected to experience a greater than 50 percent increase in the number of military dependents. It should be noted that the Army dependent numbers are currently being reviewed by some communities and the Department of Education, which is described later in this report. It should also be noted that even with the best estimate, the number of dependents that will actually relocate and when is not certain due to a number of factors, such as the timing and duration of the military personnel’s next overseas deployment. In addition to the growth estimates depicted in tables 1 and 2, the communities surrounding growth installations can expect additional personnel growth from indirect economic development such as employment opportunities created by defense support contractors. Based on a series of presidential executive orders dating back to 1978 and amended as recently as May 2005, it has been long-standing DOD policy that DOD takes the leadership role within the federal government in helping communities respond to the effects of defense-related activities. The current version of the executive order, which is included in appendix III, states that the Secretary of Defense, through the EAC, shall, among other things, establish a Defense Economic Adjustment Program to assist substantially and seriously affected communities from the effects of major defense closures and realignments. The order identifies the 22 federal agency members of the EAC and names the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary’s designee as the Chair of the committee with the Secretaries of Labor and Commerce as co-vice chairs. The order states that the EAC shall advise, assist, and support the program and develop procedures for ensuring that state and local officials are notified of available federal economic adjustment programs. The order further states that the program shall, among other things, identify problems of states and communities that result from defense-related activities and that require federal assistance; assure timely consultation and cooperation with federal, state, and community officials concerning DOD-related impacts; assure coordinated interagency and intergovernmental adjustment assistance; prepare, facilitate, and implement cost-effective strategies and action plans to coordinate interagency and intergovernmental economic adjustment efforts; and serve as a clearinghouse to exchange information among federal, state, and community officials involved in the resolution of community economic adjustment problems including sources of public and private financing. The order also states that all federal executive agencies shall afford priority consideration to requests from defense- affected communities for federal assistance that are part of a comprehensive plan used by the committee. OEA, located in Arlington, Virginia, is a DOD field activity that reports to the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installations and Environment, under the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics. OEA is responsible for facilitating DOD resources in support of local programs and providing direct planning and financial assistance to communities and states seeking assistance to address the impacts of DOD’s actions. The office has a fiscal year 2008 budget exceeding $57 million, $45 million of which is to fund its core programs—which include assistance to closing and growing locations—and a staff of 35 civilians and 3 military liaisons. Currently, OEA is managing about 240 community projects including closing, downsizing, and growth bases. OEA assistance to growth communities is primarily focused on assisting local communities to organize and plan for population growth due to DOD activities. Communities surrounding DOD growth installations have begun to identify infrastructure needs in general terms, but planning efforts have been hampered by a lack of consistent and detailed information about anticipated DOD personnel movements. Due to the complexity of DOD’s current growth activities, coupled with ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, precise data about the magnitude and makeup of personnel movements continue to evolve. However, until the military departments begin to disseminate consistent and more detailed information about the defense personnel moves they know about, it will be difficult for community, state, and federal officials to plan for and provide necessary infrastructure and quality-of-life support to members of the armed services, their families, and other community residents. Many of the 20 communities that OEA has determined will be substantially and seriously affected by DOD growth have begun planning and taking action on projects and programs that will help them accommodate the expected influx of military and civilian personnel, military families, and contractors over the next several years. DOD’s Base Redevelopment and Realignment Manual states that mission and personnel increases at military installations can place direct and significant demands on surrounding community infrastructure and services. It further notes that large, rapid influxes of personnel and changes in missions create the need for an immediate partnership between community leaders and installation leaders to manage the changes. Coordinated management of change provides an opportunity to minimize the negative effects on the community while enhancing the long-term quality of life for defense personnel and community residents. Among other things, communities must prepare roads, schools, and other infrastructure to accommodate the expected growth, which can require significant lead time to plan, budget for, finance, and construct. According to our survey of 20 growth communities, 18 have established planning processes to engage local stakeholders to consider potential community impacts, determine priorities, and ultimately develop an action plan. Although all communities are different and are in various planning stages, most of these growth communities have begun developing growth management plans, which are used to identify specific infrastructure improvements such as, roads, schools, and housing that may be required to support the expected growth. Of the 20 communities, 3 completed growth management plans by the end of 2007 and 13 had started plans— the majority of which are scheduled to be completed by the end of 2008. Two of the remaining 4 communities have opted not to develop a growth management plan and instead are proceeding to develop studies targeted toward issues that are already apparent. For example, Fort Belvoir, where traffic congestion has been identified as an issue, will be using its OEA planning grant to develop transportation models.