1 / 14

Overseas Base Closures

Overseas Base Closures. February 28, 2012; Miami, Florida. CONVERSION PROCESS IN GERMANY. William Karl Wilburn, Esq. I. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT A. Relevant History. Bundeswehr. US Forces in Germany. 1991: Reunification adds GDR’s installations 2001: MoD Deployment Concept:

cade
Download Presentation

Overseas Base Closures

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Overseas Base Closures February 28, 2012; Miami, Florida

  2. CONVERSION PROCESS INGERMANY William Karl Wilburn, Esq.

  3. I. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXTA. Relevant History Bundeswehr US Forces in Germany • 1991: Reunification adds GDR’s installations • 2001: MoD Deployment Concept: 18% Manpower Reduction; bases cut from 575 to 388 • 2003: Defense Policy Guidelines: Shifts from Cold War to international expeditionary force • July 2011: Conscription ends; all-volunteer begins. • 1945: End of WW2: US assumes many former German installations (e.g. Grafenwöhr/Bavaria, Campbell Barracks HQ/Heidelberg) • 1991 - 2000: Break up of the Soviet Union leads to major reductions and base closures, and force posture change • June 2010: USAREUR outlines Transformation between FY10 – 15; ceases presence in Heidelberg, Mannheim • February 2012: USAREUR announces withdrawal of 2 BCTs; closes Schweinfurt, Bamberg

  4. I. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT B. Current Conversion Volume US Forces in Germany Bundeswehr • Bundeswehrreform 2011: • 31 Closures • 33 “Almost Closures”; significant reductions to <15 personnel • 57 “Significant Reductions”; personnel reductions <50% or 500 personnel • Result: Conversion assets in more than 120 communities • USAREUR Transformation and Budget Cuts from NDAA FY12: • Significant Reductions in the areas around Heidelberg and Mannheim: • Consolidation primarily in Bavaria, Rheinland-Pfalz and Hessen (Wiesbaden)

  5. II. PROCEDURE A. Summary Overview Phase I: U.S. Transfer of Asset to Germany German coordinating agency (“BImA”) supervises conversion process Ad hoc “Working Group” formed Use issues vetted Phase II: Design, construction, valuation determined Negotiations with Buyer or RFP or both Goal: Sales Contract

  6. NATO Status of Forces Agreement II. PROCEDUREB. RELEVANT CONVERSION AGENGIES AND AGREEMENTS US Forces Return Real Property to Host Nation Germany MINISTRY of FINANCE MINISTRY of DEFENSE Federal Agency for Real Property Issues [Bundesanstalt für Immobilienaufgaben] (BImA) est. 2005 Coordinating Agency for Conversion Questions (KStK) est. 2004 Federal Agency for Real Property Issues (BImA) est. 2005

  7. II. PROCEDURE C. Phase I: 1 - 2 Years MoD and US Forces Internal Decision Property Evaluation Alternative Uses MoD Contacts Local Authorities;US EUCOM Notifies German Federal Authorities Federal Republic of Germany Assumes Ownership of Assets “Working Group” Comprised; public involvement begins Preliminary Land Use Issues Vetted Zoning Environmental Commercial Potential Contaminants Interim Use?

  8. II. PROCEDUREC. PHASE I (con’d) “WORKING GROUP” Comprised State, Local, Private Federal • State • County (Kreis) • City • Private Interest Groups MoD + BImA • Ad hoc “Working Group” • calibrated to specific real property

  9. II. PROCEDURE D. PHASE I Stakeholders and Interests • Local Community • Land Use / Infrastructure • Zoning / Regulatory • Tax Income • BImA • Mandate to achieve highest possible sales value for Federal Gov. • Private Sector • Re-use Opportunities • PPP • Redevelopment • Value Creation

  10. Determination of Use Alternatives Public Input Sifting through Preliminary Concepts Design, Construction, Value Finalize Possible Uses Land Use Environmental Economic, Infrastructure Impacts Negotiations with specific buyers Request for Proposals Goal: Sales Contract II. PROCEDURE E. Phase II: 2 - 4 years

  11. II. PROCEDURE PROCESS F. Timeline Summary • Valuation through BImA • Sales Comparison Approach • Income Approach • Cost Approach Site Returned from Military Use Civilian Re-use Starts • Site Review and Assessment • Facility Condition Assessments, if applicable • Environmental Site Assessment • Location and Infrastructure • Planning • Public Interest • Potential Re-use Concepts • Land Use and Master Planning • Zoning • Marketing and Transfer • Site Redevelopment Concept and Marketing • Disposal through BImA Approx. 1 – 4 years

  12. III. Closing Remarks MoD makes closure decisions with military, administrative, budgetary factors; less so community economic impact factors. Process is less political than in U.S. normally takes four years. BImA is main coordinating agency. Ad hoc “Working Group” intends to promote transparency, consensus. Military property in 120 German locations will be disposed of in next five years. BImA representatives in each state (Land) are contact points for expressions of interest.

  13. SOURCES www.bundeswehr.de www.bundesimmobilien.de (BImA) (Federal Agency for Real Property Issues) www.konversions-konferenz.de (February 2012 conference on German base closings)

  14. William Karl Wilburn, Esq. WKWilburn P.C. Attorneys at Law 7910 Woodmont Avenue Bethesda, MD 20814 Phone: (301) 652 – 9700 Fax: (301) 652 – 9701 Mobile: (301) 461 – 3057 wkw@wkwilburn.com www.wkwilburn.com

More Related