Saw this on Trainorders:http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?10,979173The BRAC referred to apparently means Base Realignment and Closure, not Brotherhood of Railway and Airline Clerks.

Some one is pulling someone's leg. I have worked BRAC issues here in New Jersey. Generally speaking the closure process must begin two years after the decision to close has been made. The final closure is then due roughly within 6 years of the BRAC decision.NOTE!!! No decision has yet been made. Make that clear. Period. The BRAC commission will forward its recommendations to the President of the US on 8 September 2005. By September 23, the president must either accept or reject on an "all or nothing" basis. If he accepts, it then goes to Congress. Within 45 days Congress must enact a joint resolution rejecting the recommendations or they become binding.Unless of course, the place was BRAC'ed previously. Was it? This is about the 5th BRAC round over the past 10 years or so.Assuming we are talking about the current BRAC round, you are talking early November 2005 before we have the real answers. Votes are being taken now by the commission to alter elements of the BRAC as provided to them by Secretary of Defense. It takes 5 votes to take a location off the list, 7 votes to be added. Politics and consultants are hard at work right now trying to influence these votes.That said, lets assume the pier closes. The navy will want to turn it over to someone. It must be remeadiated first of any polution and that can take years. Bottom line? I see it as an opportunity for the Museum to establish a firm home for their collection without ever moving a wheel.It takes imagination and balls, but it can be done.I am a defense consultant by trade. Been doing it most of my life it seems. If they need some guidance, I would be willing to help out for free, no problem. Again, if a base is voted to close, someone does not simply shut the lights off with in a day or two. It takes years. These guys have an opportunity and should have known of this situation for the past year or two. It should not be a surprise at all. if it a previous BRAC round they are responding to, then they had lots of warning there too. But the opportunity is still there to better themselves.J.R. MayWall, NJ

I checked the 2005 BRAC and Hunters Point is not on it. That's a bad sign. I looked further and it looks like Hunters Point Shipyard (HPS) was identified for closure during the Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) process of 1991. It should have been an opportunity. I would assume the Museum tried. There are generally community meetings on such closures. Bottom line is that the decision to close the facility was 14 years ago. For some history I found the following:The shipyard is approximately 936 acres in size, 443 acres of which are on land with the remaining acreage under water. Hunters Point was operated as a commercial drydock facility from 1869 until 1939. In 1940, the Navy obtained ownership of the shipyard for ship building, repair, and maintenance activities. After World War II, activities shifted from ship repair to submarine servicing and testing. HPS was deactivated in 1974 and remained relatively unused until 1976. Between 1976 and 1986, the Navy leased most of the property to a privately-owned ship repair firm. In 1986, the Navy again occupied the shipyard and began a program to investigate and clean up contamination resulting from past activities.In 1989, the U.S. EPA placed HPS on the National Priorities List (NPL). Shipyard activities generated a variety of inorganic (e.g., metals) and organic (e.g., petroleum) wastes. The Installation Restoration Program (IRP) has been initiated to clean up past disposal sites at HPS. HPS was an annex of Naval Station Treasure Island until March 1994 when the Navy’s Engineering Field Activity, West (EFA West) assumed management of the property. In October 1999, the Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Southwest Division (SWDIV) assumed management of the shipyard. The HPS Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) meets to review and comment on reports and documents prepared as part of the environmental restoration programs underway at HPS. The RAB has been meeting since 1994 and is comprised of community members, Navy officials, and state and local environmental regulators. Meetings are held in the evening of the fourth Thursday of each month, or as needed. Meetings are advertised in local newspapers and agendas and the previous month’s meeting minutes are mailed to those on the HPS RAB mailing list.

Similar issues are facing Michigan Transit Museum in nearby Mount Clemens. Due to realignment/ assignment of certain "wings", and a stepped up "clean-up" policy to keep Selfridge ANG base open here (first defense against Canada, and Selfridge jets were scrambled for 9/11) , much of the ties and older equipment is being forced out of the base, including the last surviving "Big Four" caboose, which they now have to find another home for (last used by ArtTrain, it is serious need of repair).Cleaning up the site is the only hope for the group maintaining its train, and at a time when they are just begining to "regroup" as it were.TJ Gaffney

That is a good run down. the older of the two dry docks is the oldest dock in San Srancisco. It is a site to see! Built up of granite blocks which tier up from the bottom of the dock,it is a wonderful survival of the 10th century.the Maritime Park had our railroad ferry in there some years ago.The pump house for the docks is still intact and could be used. The Navy bailed out because they did not want to go to the trouble and millions of dollars to dredge the entrance channel. The water at the dock sill (entrance) is to shallow for commercial ships or Navy vessels.Ted Miles

10th century? First Defense Against Canada?You learn something new here every day.

As noted, Hunter’s Point Naval Yard has been closed for some years. Since closure there has been an ongoing clean up of what proved to be a very dirty site. (The ship yard dates to before the Civil War) The first portion was just turned over to the City of San Francisco (this does not include the RR museum’s area) This is not a surprise. The museum has known they would eventually have to move. San Francisco has a variety of development plans for the site, none of which (as far as I can tell) include a railroad museum. The only question was how soon, and how much notice.In some ways, if they are able to move in an orderly manor, this could be a blessing. The ship yard is in a questionable neighborhood, making visitation difficult at best. In a perfect world a new site can be found, which will be better Museum, at least from a visitor’s perspective.The Golden Gate RR Museum has a significant thought out collection, (unfortunately much of it in poor condition) including equipment to assemble three representative passenger trains, a SP Overland train of the late 1920’s, (with their SP pacific 2472) a SP streamlined train, with an articulated coach and three unit dinner (with SP F’s for power) and a SP San Francisco Commute, with a SD9. Additionally they have both steam and diesel switches which were used along the San Francisco waterfront. Given the right setting, and time and money to restore more of the collection they could be a very impressive railroad museum.Near by stands the remains of the Former SP Bayshore roundhouse and back shop. The yard site and agacent fill land are slated for a massive devlopment. It is nice to dream about creating a new museum at the old round house site.

Hi TJ, Selfridge has been a gracious host to the MTM for many years now, and they aren't really asking us to do anything over and above what we should have been doing for the past however many years. What they want is for us to have a neat and tidy train and MOW equipment parked on the sidings on the Base, and nothing more. We have used the security of the Base as a place to put ties, spikes, signals, etc. that we plan to use on projects because we currently do not have a secure place off-Base in which to store this stuff where it won't walk off. That was never a part of the operating agreement with the Base, but until recently, they haven't made it an issue. In all fairness, Selfridge ANG Base is the ONLY military base in the country where all FIVE branches of the military reside together. Each branch has it's own environmental people and EVERYBODY, not just the MTM have been scrutinized as part of this BRAC goings on. We are only guests, and as such, we need to keep a cleaner house, it should be expected of us. I have only been a member for a year and a half now, but it seems like what's taken place is the result of about 5 or 6 years of steady decline of the most-active members either moving on or passing on. Many of our active members are getting on in age as well, so the number of people who can take on the bigger projects has dwindled down, and although we have always desired a secure spot off-Base, it's something that is necessary on many fronts. I have been put in charge of a project in which should remedy this situation and finish cleaning up our years of complacency or inattentiveness on the Base, which will get things squared away. This project is a temporary solution, but not "the answer". As any museum knows, it must keep moving forward, not settle for complacency or it will not survive. There have been many ideas passed around lately of what the future of the MTM would be if Selfridge were to close. What has resulted is a more defined direction for the Museum, both in train operation and the Depot museum. I'm not aware of the Golden Gate's situation beyond what I've read here, but I can say the MTM has the advantage of owning some of it's own track OFF-Base, if the worst-case scenario should ever occur, we still have some track to run on, including a possible addition to our line down the road. Right now, with so few able active members, we have to focus on the major things, keeping everything in safe shape and being able to have people who are trained properly to operate the equipment. I'm currently motorman-in-training on our Chicago South Shore & South Bend #11 interurban car. There are many more people training to give flexibility to those "old-hands" who are working the train every single weekend! That's a small step in the grand scheme of things, but little by little we're getting back to where we should be. It won't happen overnight, but with the right amount of dedication by our members, and a want to make our Museum a success in the wake of the City's problems and the everpresent uncertainties on an active military installation, it's time for the MTM to continue to step up to the plate and keep hitting home runs. What the Base is asking of us is not at all imposing, it's something that we should have never let get that way. We have proved to them that we are serious about our operation, we are serious about the Base's concerns, and we want to continue to have a great working relationship with Selfridge ANG Base. Once we have our secure area built off-Base and everything out that Selfridge wants, we can continue to focus on our restoration efforts and everpresent trackwork so our guests can continue to enjoy their MTM experience. The mass of ties is now *gone* thanks to the Base. They had a company come in and environmentally dispose of literally thousands of "dead" ties, good for nothing more than compost in Creosoteville. Those ties alone were a huge monkey off the backs of not just the MTM, but the Base as well! We have taken most of the tie plates, rail joiners, track bolts, spikes, etc and placed them in boxcars to get them off the ground. What little is left, like the signals and switch stands are in the works to be moved as well. Volunteer labor comes at a price.... TIME! The NYC/Big Four caboose is in discussions right now to be moved, and hopefully restored. That situation is another story in itself, but one which we will be happy to finish the chapter on. Another piece of equipment to be moved is the old coal clamshell crane that the Base used to use when the powerhouses were coal-fired. It (in an extremely confusing roundabout way) ended up officially in the MTM's possession, but the Board decided that it really doesn't fit into our collection with the track space/storage available, not to mention with our unique railline arrangement, it wouldn't be possible to use it for any type of MOW work. There is talk about the disposition of the crane, and if given permission, I'll pass word this way on it's specifics if anyone may be interested. We want to exhaust ALL possible avenues we can to preserve both pieces of equipment. After all, education through preservation is what we're all here for, right?Take care, God bless, and keep on chuggin'!Dave JandronMichigan Transit Museum member