Defense Infrastructure: Fire Protection at Philadelphia Naval
Business Center Meets Response Standards (29-OCT-02, GAO-03-20).
When the Department of Defense closed military installations as a
part of the base realignment and closure process and transferred
properties to public and private ownership, it in some cases
retained a portion of an installation as a military enclave.
During this process, legal jurisdiction over an enclave may be
transferred from the federal government to the local government.
Such a transfer may incorporate provisions for fire protection
and other services by local and state governments. A federal
fire-fighting service provides fire protection services at the
Navy's enclave located at the Philadelphia Naval Business Center.
This is one of the three military enclaves, formed during the
base closure and realignment process, which is still protected by
federal firefighters. Twenty-four other military enclaves were
converted from federal to local fire protection during the base
closure process. The Navy retained a federal fire-fighting force
at its enclave at the Philadelphia Naval Business Center because
of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania did not respond to the Navy's
request to change the jurisdiction of the Navy-retained land. The
level of fire protection at the Philadelphia Naval Business
Center is similar to that available elsewhere in the City of
Philadelphia, but the arrangements for providing that protection
differ. If a fire occurs on non-Navy property within the business
center, both the Navy and the Philadelphia fire departments will
automatically respond to the call, with the Navy as the first
responder. However, if the fire is located on Navy-owned property
at the business center, only Navy firefighters will automatically
respond to the alarm. As private development at the Philadelphia
Naval Business Center continues, the fire protection arrangements
are expected to be reassessed. The Commissioner of the
Philadelphia Fire Department stated that, as development at the
business center continues to increase, his office will need to
reevaluate the location of city-owned fire stations in the area
around the business center.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-03-20
ACCNO: A05406
TITLE: Defense Infrastructure: Fire Protection at Philadelphia
Naval Business Center Meets Response Standards
DATE: 10/29/2002
SUBJECT: Base closures
Base realignments
Fire fighters
Naval bases
Naval facilities
Facility security
Philadelphia (PA)
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-03-20
Report to Congressional Requesters
United States General Accounting Office
GAO
October 2002 DEFENSE INFRASTRUCTURE
Fire Protection at Philadelphia Naval Business Center Meets Response
Standards
GAO- 03- 20
Page i GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases Letter 1
Results in Brief 1 Background 2 Most Enclaves Rely on Local Rather Than
Federal Fire Protection 5 Fire Protection at the Business Center Is
Similar to That Provided
Elsewhere in Philadelphia 7 Future Development Could Affect Existing
Arrangement for Fire
Protection 9 Conclusions 10 Agency Comments 10 Scope and Methodology 11
Appendix I Federal Enclave at the Philadelphia Naval Business Center 14
Appendix II Mutual Aid Agreement between the Navy and the City of
Philadelphia 17
Appendix III Comments from the Department of Defense 22
Tables
Table 1: Fire Protection Services at Federal Enclaves Created at Closed
Installations 6 Table 2: Navy Fire, EMS, and Other Calls and Mutual Aid
Responses by the Navy and the City of Philadelphia, 2000 to 2002 (as of
September 4, 2002) 9
Figures
Figure 1: Map of the Enclave at the Philadelphia Naval Business Center 14
Figure 2: Aerial Photograph of the Philadelphia Naval Business
Center 16 Contents
Page 1 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
October 29, 2002 The Honorable Solomon P. Ortiz Ranking Minority Member
Subcommittee on Military Readiness Committee on Armed Services House of
Representatives
The Honorable Robert A. Brady House of Representatives
When the Department of Defense closed military installations as part of
the base realignment and closure process and transferred properties to
public and private ownership, it in some cases retained a portion of an
installation as a military enclave. During this process, legal
jurisdiction over an enclave may be transferred from the federal
government to the local government. Such a transfer may incorporate
provisions for fire protection and other services by local and state
governments. Because of your concerns about the adequacy of fire
protection at the federal enclave located on the former Naval Shipyard and
Naval Station in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, now called the Philadelphia
Naval Business Center, we conducted this review. Our overall objectives
were to determine (1) who provides fire protection services for the Navy-
retained property in Philadelphia and how this fire protection compares
with that at other closed military bases where some property was retained
by the Department of Defense; (2) how the level of fire protection
services at the business center measures up to that provided elsewhere in
the City of Philadelphia; and (3) what the future prospects are for
changing the way fire protection is provided at the Navy*s enclave.
A federal fire- fighting service provides fire protection services at the
Navy*s enclave located at the Philadelphia Naval Business Center. This is
one of three military enclaves, formed during the base closure and
realignment process, which is still protected by federal firefighters.
Twenty- four other military enclaves were converted from federal to local
fire protection during the base closure process. The Navy retained a
federal fire- fighting force at its enclave at the Philadelphia Naval
Business Center because the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania did not respond
to the Navy*s request to change the jurisdiction of the Navy- retained
land. The Navy sought to change the jurisdiction from exclusive federal to
proprietary to provide uniform fire and police protection over the
business center and the Navy*s enclave there.
United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548
Results in Brief
Page 2 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
The level of fire protection at the Philadelphia Naval Business Center is
similar to that available elsewhere in the City of Philadelphia, but the
arrangements for providing that protection differ. If a fire occurs on
non- Navy property within the business center, both the Navy and the
Philadelphia fire departments will automatically respond to the call, with
the Navy as the first responder. However, if the fire is located on Navy-
owned property at the business center, only Navy firefighters will
automatically respond to the alarm. If they need additional fire- fighting
assistance, they must first call the city fire department, which will then
send assistance. These arrangements are the result of a mutual aid
agreement the Navy and the City of Philadelphia signed in March 2000 that
is up for renewal in March 2003. According to Navy officials, the
agreement enables the Navy to meet the Department of Defense*s and the
Navy*s fire response standards. In the 29 months since the agreement was
signed, the Navy*s fire department has requested assistance from the
Philadelphia Fire Department for one fire, but the Navy has responded to
25 fire requests at non- Navy property within the business center. Both
city and Navy fire department officials told us they have found the
agreement beneficial and they expect to renew it.
As private development at the Philadelphia Naval Business Center
continues, the fire protection arrangements are expected to be reassessed.
The Commissioner of the Philadelphia Fire Department told us that, as
development at the business center continues to increase, his office will
need to reevaluate the location of city- owned fire stations in the area
around the business center. This reevaluation could provide an opportunity
for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the City of Philadelphia, and the
Navy to reassess jurisdictional issues and the need for a separate fire
department to service the Navy*s enclave.
In commenting on a draft of this report, the department concurred with the
results.
To enable the Department of Defense (DOD) to close unneeded bases and
realign others, Congress enacted base realignment and closure legislation
that instituted base closure rounds in 1988, 1991, 1993, and 1995. 1 In
some
1 The 1988 round was completed under the Defense Authorization Amendments
and Base Closure and Realignment Act (P. L. 100- 526). The last three
rounds were completed under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act
of 1990 (P. L. 101- 510). Background
Page 3 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
cases, DOD retained some of the property and created military enclaves on
closed installations.
Generally, as part of the base closure process, DOD prefers to change the
jurisdiction of the property that it has retained from exclusive federal
to proprietary jurisdiction. 2 Under exclusive federal jurisdiction, the
federal government is responsible for providing all municipal services and
enforcing federal laws. The state and local governments do not have any
authority or obligation to provide municipal services under this type of
jurisdiction, except under mutual support agreements. Under proprietary
jurisdiction, 3 the federal government has rights* similar to a private
landowner* but also maintains its authorities and responsibilities as the
federal government. Under this type of jurisdiction, the local government
is the principal municipal police and fire authority.
Following the decision to close the installations in 1991, the Naval
Shipyard and the Naval Station in Philadelphia were officially closed in
September 1995 and January 1996, respectively. In March 2000, the Navy
transferred 1,180 acres of the property to the Philadelphia Authority for
Industrial Development, the local redevelopment authority. The Navy
retained exclusive federal jurisdiction over about 270 4 acres as a
military enclave. As a result, the Navy is responsible for providing all
municipal services, including fire protection, in this enclave. Similarly,
the City of Philadelphia and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania maintain
jurisdiction over the 1, 180 acres that were transferred. The federal
government has no jurisdiction over this land. Together, the Navy-
retained and Navy- transferred property is called the Philadelphia Naval
Business Center.
The Navy*s 270- acre enclave in Philadelphia is made up of several
distinct noncontiguous areas separated by the transferred acreage. (See
app. I for a map and an aerial photograph of the enclave.) The Navy
retained 67 buildings that house more than 2,300 civilian, contractor, and
military
2 Two other types of jurisdiction exist. Under concurrent jurisdiction,
federal and local agencies provide services and enforce both federal and
local laws, respectively. Under partial jurisdiction, the local government
retains all legislative and judicial authority not ceded to the federal
government.
3 Proprietary jurisdiction over property is also sometimes described as
having a proprietary interest in the property. We use the two
interchangeably. 4 About 162 acres are on land and 108 acres are submerged
at the enclave*s reserve basin.
Page 4 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
employees. The majority of the Navy*s employees* about 1,800* work in
about 47 office buildings. The remaining 500 Navy employees work at
industrial or maintenance activities, including the Naval Foundry and
Propeller Shop; a hull, mechanical, and electrical systems test facility;
and a public works center. The enclave also includes a reserve basin that
is used as a docking area for about 38 Navy inactive ships.
In contrast, the non- Navy part of the business center includes about 45
private firms with approximately 2,500 employees. This part is being
developed by the Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation, the City
of Philadelphia*s private economic development corporation. The
corporation is authorized by the local redevelopment authority to attract
private business to the Philadelphia Naval Business Center, a business and
industrial park that is undergoing redevelopment utilizing the 1,180
transferred acres.
The Navy facilities are protected by a federal fire service consisting of
26 personnel 5 and 2 fire engines 6 located on the enclave. The Navy
estimated that the cost was $2.5 million to operate the federal fire
department at the enclave during fiscal year 2001.
The City of Philadelphia is responsible for providing fire protection
services to private development on non- Navy property at the business
center. It is also responsible for providing additional fire protection to
the Navy facilities according to a March 2000 Mutual Aid Assistance
Agreement. The agreement was signed by both Navy and City of Philadelphia
officials, and it is intended to provide additional fire equipment and
firefighters to respond to fires and other emergencies on each other*s
property at the business center. (See app. II for a copy of the
agreement.) Although not specified in the agreement, enclave command
officials and Navy and city fire department officials told us that in
practice, the Navy firefighters are first responders to all fire alarms at
the business center* on both Navy and non- Navy property. The city fire
department automatically responds to fire calls on non- Navy property at
the business center; it responds to a fire on Navy property if it is
called by the Navy fire department.
5 The Navy fire service is authorized 29 staff, but 3 positions are
currently vacant. The Navy*s intent is to fully staff the fire service. 6
The Navy fire service also has a reserve engine that is not staffed.
Page 5 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
The DOD Fire and Emergency Services Program 7 provides policy that governs
fire protection at military installations. The policy states that the
first arriving fire apparatus shall meet a travel time 8 of 5 minutes for
90 percent of all alarms and that the remaining apparatus shall meet a
travel time of 10 minutes for all alarms. The policy also states that the
initial response to a fire will be two engine companies and one ladder
company but that another engine company may replace the ladder company.
The number of full- time fire and emergency service personnel and
equipment needed to meet these standards at any installation may depend on
the extent to which equivalent forces are available from outside sources.
The DOD policy encourages installations to enter into reciprocal
agreements with local fire departments for mutual fire and emergency
services to meet these standards. Navy policy 9 mirrors that of DOD.
The Navy considers a number of factors, including the strategic
importance, the criticality to the overall Navy mission, the degree of
fire and life safety hazards, the value of facilities and equipment, and
the availability of outside support, in determining fire protection
requirements at each installation. Using these criteria, the federal
enclave at the business center is required to have a fully staffed on-
site federal fire- fighting force; however, some of the fire- fighting
force may be satisfied by city assets based on a mutual aid agreement.
Today, according to military service base realignment and closure
officials, federal firefighters operate at only 3 of the 27 federal
enclaves that were created at closed Navy, Army, and Air Force
installations (see table 1).
7 DOD Instruction 6055. 6. 8 Travel time is defined as the amount of time
it takes a fire apparatus to travel from the fire station to an emergency
incident. 9 Operations Navy Instruction 11320. 23F, April 25, 2001. Most
Enclaves Rely
on Local Rather Than Federal Fire Protection
Page 6 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
Table 1: Fire Protection Services at Federal Enclaves Created at Closed
Installations
Number with fire protection provided by Service Closed installations
with federal enclaves Federal
firefighters Local
firefighters
Navy 3 12 Army 14 1 13 Air Force 10 1 9
Total 27 a 3 24
a Other military enclaves receive fire protection from local firefighters,
but they had local fire protection services before the installation
closed. Source: DOD data.
The enclave at the former Philadelphia Naval Shipyard and Naval Station is
the only Navy enclave where a federal fire protection presence remains.
According to Navy officials, federal fire protection was retained because
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania did not respond to the Navy*s request in
1999 to change the jurisdictional status of the property from exclusive
federal to proprietary jurisdiction in anticipation of the Navy
transferring the ownership of excess land. In its April 1999 letter to the
governor of Pennsylvania requesting the change, the Navy stated that such
a change would provide uniform jurisdiction over the business center and
the Navy*s enclave there. In addition, Navy officials told us that the
change would mean that the City of Philadelphia would have been
responsible for providing all municipal services such as fire and police
protection.
The Navy*s two other enclaves* the former Charleston, South Carolina, and
Long Beach, California, shipyards* receive fire protection services from
the local communities. 10 A Navy official told us that the land at the
former Charleston and Long Beach shipyards had already been designated as
concurrent jurisdiction before they were closed, so the Navy did not have
to request a change in designation. In addition, local governments agreed
to provide fire protection to the federal enclaves at both former
shipyards.
Like the Navy, the Army retained federal firefighters at only one of its
federal enclaves. The remaining 13 Army enclaves are protected by local
community firefighters. According to an official in the Army*s Base
10 The enclave at Charleston consists of 26 acres and 15 buildings and the
enclave at Long Beach consists of 15 acres and 4 buildings.
Page 7 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
Realignment and Closure Office, a federal fire- fighting force was
retained at the enclave created when Fort Ord, California, was closed in
order to provide fire protection for a 1,600- unit housing complex and
other community support facilities, such as a military exchange and
commissary. Before Fort Ord closed, the installation was under exclusive
federal jurisdiction, but now the enclave is under concurrent
jurisdiction. According to an Army base realignment and closure official,
most of the other 13 Army installations changed from exclusive federal to
proprietary jurisdiction.
The Air Force also retained federal firefighters at only one of its
enclaves while local firefighters provide fire protection at nine other
Air Force enclaves. According to the Air Force*s Fire Protection Program
Manager, a federal firefighter force was maintained at the enclave created
when Grissom Air Force Base, Indiana, was closed to support the
substantial flying mission that remained. Before the installation was
closed, most of the land at Grissom, which is now an Air Reserve Base, was
under exclusive federal jurisdiction, while a smaller portion was under
proprietary jurisdiction; currently, all of the property at Grissom is
under proprietary jurisdiction. The other nine Air Force enclaves are also
under proprietary jurisdiction, although five had exclusive federal
jurisdiction and two had a mix of exclusive and proprietary jurisdiction
before the installations were closed.
The level of fire protection at the business center is similar to that
available elsewhere in the City of Philadelphia, but the arrangements for
providing that protection are different. When a fire occurs on non- Navy
property within the business center, both the City of Philadelphia Fire
Department and the firefighters from the Navy*s enclave automatically
respond to the call. When a fire occurs at the Navy*s enclave at the
business center, only the Navy firefighters automatically respond to the
alarm. If they need additional fire- fighting help, they must first call
the city fire department, which will then send assistance. This mutual
assistance is part of the agreement between the Navy and the City of
Philadelphia, which Navy officials state enables them to meet DOD*s and
Navy*s fire response requirements.
Senior Philadelphia city fire department officials told us that they
respond to alarms in the city or within the city- owned parts of the
business center with a minimum of 2 engines, 2 ladders, and 19
firefighters. They noted that none of their 61 fire stations have the full
complement of equipment and firefighters needed for the minimum response
but that they rely on Fire Protection at the
Business Center Is Similar to That Provided Elsewhere in Philadelphia
Page 8 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
support from other fire stations throughout the city. Similarly, the
Navy*s fire department at the federal enclave in the business center does
not have* on its own* the full complement of equipment and firefighters
needed for a minimum response as specified in DOD and Navy policy.
However, the Navy*s fire department is able to meet DOD*s and Navy*s
standards through its agreement with the City of Philadelphia. According
to the Philadelphia Fire Commissioner, when the city responds to a request
for assistance from the Navy, the city fire department would not
necessarily respond with a ladder truck but with enough equipment and
firefighters to bring the responding assets up to the city*s minimum
standards. This is especially true when the call involves an emergency
other than a fire.
A Philadelphia Deputy Fire Commissioner estimated that the response time
for an engine company from the nearest Philadelphia city fire station to
the main gate of the business center would be just under 7 minutes and
that the response time from the nearest ladder company would be less than
11 minutes. He also said that it would take additional time to get from
the main gate to various parts of the Navy*s enclave. According to a study
performed by the International Association of Firefighters, 11 the first
Philadelphia Fire Department ladder truck would arrive at the main gate of
the business center in about 5 minutes and 55 seconds. Navy officials said
that the Philadelphia Fire Department*s response times meet the current
DOD and Navy response criteria* 10 minutes for subsequent arriving
vehicles* assuming the city fire department is arriving after Navy
firefighters have already responded to the alarm.
The Navy*s fire department has responded to more than 300 calls each year
during the last 2 full years, and it is on track for responding to more
than 300 calls in 2002. These calls included fire emergencies, emergency
medical service (EMS) requests, rescues, natural gas leaks, hazardous
materials incidents, standby fueling operations, and alarms with no fire.
During this same period, Navy data indicate the enclave*s firefighters
have responded to a total of 41 fires, 16 of which were on the enclave.
From the time that the agreement was signed in March 2000 to September
2002, 29 months later, City of Philadelphia firefighters responded to one
11 International Association of Firefighters, Philadelphia Naval Shipyard
Federal Fire Department (NAVSSES): Feasibility Study on the Use of
Philadelphia City Fire Apparatus to Comply with Department of Defense
Instruction 6055.6 Fire Apparatus Deployment Requirements (Philadelphia,
Pa.: June 21, 2002).
Page 9 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
fire call on the Navy*s enclave as part of the agreement. They also
responded to 39 EMS calls and 4 other calls at the enclave during the same
period. Table 2 shows the number of fire, EMS, and other responses that
the Navy and the City of Philadelphia conducted under their mutual aid
agreement.
Table 2: Navy Fire, EMS, and Other Calls and Mutual Aid Responses by the
Navy and the City of Philadelphia, 2000 to 2002 (as of September 4, 2002)
City aid to the Navy Navy aid to the city Calendar year Total number of
Navy fire
and emergency calls Fire EMS Other Fire EMS Other
2000 320 1 16 1 7 39 23 2001 363 0 10 3 10 55 17 2002 219 0 13 0 8 56 14
Total 1 39 4 25 150 54
Source: Navy fire department on the business center.
On the other hand, during the same period, the Navy fire department
responded to 25 mutual aid fire calls on non- Navy property at the
business center. It also responded to 150 EMS and 54 other calls on non-
Navy property. Both Navy and Philadelphia city fire department officials
told us that they have found the agreement mutually beneficial and that
they expect to renew the agreement in March 2003.
According to city fire department officials, future economic development
at the business center is expected to require a reassessment of fire
protection services provided by the City of Philadelphia. Currently, about
45 private tenants with about 2,500 employees are housed in 47 buildings
located on non- Navy property. However, the development corporation plans
to add additional office space at the business center over the next
several years. For example, a 43, 000- square foot building directly
across from the Navy command building is under renovation; when it is
completed in early 2003, it will provide office space for about 150
people. In addition, the development corporation plans to provide an
additional 800,000 square feet of office space over the next 8 years.
According to the Philadelphia Fire Department Commissioner, as development
in the business center continues to expand, his office is expected to
reevaluate the location of fire stations located near the business center.
This reevaluation could provide an opportunity for the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, the City of Philadelphia, and the Navy to reassess Future
Development
Could Affect Existing Arrangement for Fire Protection
Page 10 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
jurisdictional issues and the need for a separate fire department to
service the Navy*s enclave.
A recent development underscored the possibility of change in fire
protection at the business center. In August 2002, the development
corporation announced that a developer plans to build 230 private homes on
land outside the main gate of the business center. A Philadelphia Deputy
Fire Commissioner stated that the city would need to reconsider fire
protection for this area once the planned development was completed.
At the time of the transfer of excess land at the former Philadelphia
Naval Shipyard and Naval Station to the redevelopment authority, the Navy
tried unsuccessfully to change the jurisdiction of the 270- acre enclave
it retained from exclusive federal to proprietary. This jurisdictional
change would have been similar to what occurred at most other military
enclaves created during the base closure and realignment process.
According to Navy officials, such a change would have provided uniform
jurisdiction over both the non- Navy property and the Navy- owned enclave
at the business center. This change would have given the City of
Philadelphia responsibility for providing all municipal services,
including fire protection, at the business center. Instead, the
jurisdiction at the Navy- owned enclave remains exclusively federal, and
the Navy spends about $2.5 million annually to retain its fire department
there. As private development at the business center and in its immediate
vicinity continues to grow over the next few years, the business center*s
fire protection arrangements may have to be reevaluated. Philadelphia Fire
Department officials told us they recognize they will need to reevaluate
the way fire protection is provided at the business center. This
reevaluation could provide the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the City of
Philadelphia, and the Navy with an opportunity to reconsider the
jurisdictional issues and reassess the need for a separate Navy fire
department to service the Navy*s enclave at the business center.
In commenting on a draft of this report, the Deputy Under Secretary of
Defense (Installations and Environment) concurred with the report. DOD*s
comments are included in this report as appendix III. Conclusions
Agency Comments
Page 11 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
We conducted our work at the Office of the Director Navy Fire and
Emergency Services and Base Closure Office, the Naval Facilities
Engineering Command in Washington, D. C., the Ship Systems Engineering
Station and the Fire Department, the Philadelphia Naval Business Center,
the Philadelphia Fire Department, and Philadelphia Industrial Development
Corporation. We also did work at the Army*s Base Realignment and Closure
office, the office of the Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation
Management, and the Air Force Base Conversion Agency.
To determine how fire protection services at the business center compared
with those at other federal enclaves created under base closure, we
reviewed the 1988, 1991, 1993, and 1995 base realignment and closure
reports and identified where DOD retained property on closed
installations. We analyzed information from the Army and Navy base closure
offices and the Air Force Base Conversion Agency on how fire protection
was provided at the retained federal property on closed installations and
on the jurisdiction at the installations prior to and after closure. We
reviewed DOD and Navy guidance regarding the staffing and equipping of
fire departments.
To determine how fire responses at the business center compared with those
elsewhere in the City of Philadelphia, we interviewed the Commissioner and
two Deputy Commissioners in the Philadelphia Fire Department to obtain
information on how city firefighters respond to fire alarms in the City of
Philadelphia and on the business center. In addition, we interviewed the
Chief and the Assistant Chiefs of the Navy fire department to determine
how Navy firefighters respond to fire alarms on Navy and non- Navy
properties within the business center and we analyzed Navy fire department
workload data. We also analyzed response time information provided by the
Navy and the Philadelphia fire departments. Finally, we reviewed the
agreement between the Navy and the City of Philadelphia regarding fire
protection at the business center.
To determine how future development of the business center would affect
how fire protection is provided, we interviewed the Commissioner and two
Deputy Commissioners in the Philadelphia Fire Department. To obtain
information on future development at the business center, we interviewed
officials from the Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation. Scope
and
Methodology
Page 12 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
We conducted our review from July through September 2002 in accordance
with generally accepted government auditing standards.
We are sending copies of this report to interested congressional
committees; the Secretaries of Defense, the Army, the Navy, and the Air
Force; and the Director, Office of Management and Budget. We will also
provide copies to others upon request. In addition, the report will be
available at no charge on GAO*s Web site at http:// www. gao. gov.
Please contact me on (202) 512- 8412 if you or your staff have any
questions regarding this report. Key contributors to this report were
Michael Kennedy, Richard Meeks, Aaron Loudon, Ken Patton, and Nancy Benco.
Barry Holman, Director Defense Capabilities and Management
Page 13 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
Appendix I: Federal Enclave at the Philadelphia Naval Business Center
Page 14 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
Figure 1: Map of the Enclave at the Philadelphia Naval Business Center
Appendix I: Federal Enclave at the Philadelphia Naval Business Center
Appendix I: Federal Enclave at the Philadelphia Naval Business Center
Page 15 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
Source: Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation and Navy data.
Appendix I: Federal Enclave at the Philadelphia Naval Business Center
Page 16 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
Figure 2: Aerial Photograph of the Philadelphia Naval Business Center
Source: Navy photograph.
Appendix II: Mutual Aid Agreement between the Navy and the City of
Philadelphia
Page 17 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
Appendix II: Mutual Aid Agreement between the Navy and the City of
Philadelphia
Appendix II: Mutual Aid Agreement between the Navy and the City of
Philadelphia
Page 18 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
Appendix II: Mutual Aid Agreement between the Navy and the City of
Philadelphia
Page 19 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
Appendix II: Mutual Aid Agreement between the Navy and the City of
Philadelphia
Page 20 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
Appendix II: Mutual Aid Agreement between the Navy and the City of
Philadelphia
Page 21 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
Appendix III: Comments from the Department of Defense
Page 22 GAO- 03- 20 Military Bases
Appendix III: Comments from the Department of Defense
(350237)
The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, exists
to support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities and to
help improve the performance and accountability of the federal government
for the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates
federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and
other assistance to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and
funding decisions. GAO*s commitment to good government is reflected in its
core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through the Internet. GAO*s Web site (www. gao. gov) contains abstracts
and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding
archive of older products. The Web site features a search engine to help
you locate documents using key words and phrases. You can print these
documents in their entirety, including charts and other graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as *Today*s Reports,* on its
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full- text document files.
To have GAO e- mail this list to you every afternoon, go to www. gao. gov
and select *Subscribe to daily E- mail alert for newly released products*
under the GAO Reports heading.
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
be sent to:
U. S. General Accounting Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington, D. C.
20548
To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512- 6000 TDD: (202) 512- 2537 Fax: (202)
512- 6061
Contact: Web site: www. gao. gov/ fraudnet/ fraudnet. htm E- mail:
fraudnet@ gao. gov Automated answering system: (800) 424- 5454 or (202)
512- 7470
Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@ gao. gov (202) 512- 4800 U.
S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, D. C.
20548 GAO*s Mission
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
Order by Mail or Phone To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal
Programs
Public Affairs
*** End of document. ***