Summary: GAO was requested to review the Army's current proposal to realine Fort Indiantown Gap, Pennsylvania. Concerns were expressed about the differences between the Army's initial and current studies supporting the realinement decision and a GAO report which questioned the Army's use of the initial study as a basis for its realinement decision.
The Army's current study compares two realinement alternatives with Fort Indiantown Gap as it is now operating. The first alternative, the Army's preferred option, proposes terminating active Army operation of the Fort, transferring installation control to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and assigning to Fort Meade, Maryland, the mission of providing logistical and administrative support to reserve units in the geographical area. The second alternative proposes reducing Fort Indiantown Gap to a subordinate installation of Fort Meade and transferring most reserve unit support to Fort Meade. The Army estimates that implementing the first alternative would result in one-time costs of $1.3 million and annual savings of $3.3 million and that implementing the second alternative would result in one-time savings of $1.2 million and annual savings of $2.7 million. Despite miscellaneous errors, omissions, and questionable procedures in the Army's current study, GAO believes that savings are possible if the Army chooses either of the two proposed alternatives. On the basis of the review, GAO estimated that, under the first alternative, the Army would incur one-time costs of $5.6 million and would save $2.1 million annually. Under the second alternative, GAO estimated that the Army would incur one-time costs of $2.9 million and would save $2.2 million annually.
