On October 13, 2010, the DoD IG Technical Assessment Directorate initiated a detailed independent engineering assessment of the sufficiency of the Army's Final Environmental Assessment Implementation of 2005 Base Realignment and Closure Recommendation 133, dated July 2008 (BRAC 133 EA), and the Transportation Management Plan for BRAC 133 at the Mark Center, dated July 2010 (BRAC 133 TMP). The assessment was undertaken in response to a requirement of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011, Section 2704, "Transportation Plan for BRAC 133 Project under Fort Belvoir, Virginia, BRAC Initiative," (Public Law 111-383). The Act directed that the DoD IG "submit to the congressional defense committees a report evaluating the sufficiency and coordination conducted in completing the requisite environmental studies associated with the site selection of the BRAC 133 project." We issued a draft report, considered your comments, and are releasing our final findings, recommendations, and report. As reported in the February 24, 2011 draft, we determined that the proposed traffic mitigations in the BRAC 133 EA may not be sufficient to support the Finding of No Significant Impact (FNSI) and recommended that the Army perform a reassessment of the transportation effects, including a traffic impact analysis and monitoring program. The Army responded to our draft stating that they do not intend to perform any new traffic analyses because recent studies sufficiently support the suggested improvements. However, we found that the recent studies were inadequate to support the FNSI and are standing by our recommendation. We also found that the 2010 BRAC 133 TMP did not include or sufficiently address several critical travel demand management strategies and recommended that that the Army revise and update the BRAC 133 TMP and conduct a more technically robust, standalone traffic impact analysis. The Army agreed to revise the TMP; but did not agree to conduct a more technically robust traffic impact analysis, stating that more recent traffic studies were sufficient. However, the recent traffic studies did not adequately address existing and projected peak hour traffic volumes; appropriate site variables; and effects of BRAC 133 traffic on additional intersections and interchanges beyond the narrowly defined BRAC 133 EA and/or TMP study limits. Therefore, we are standing by our recommendations.