The U.S. War Department has received strong interest from states and communities seeking to host the proposed Next Great American Base, a planned joint force installation intended to support the rapid deployment of U.S. military forces.
Dale Marks, assistant secretary of war for energy, installations and environment, reported the nationwide response in an October 22 letter to governors and state adjutants general. He said submissions reflected a shared commitment to national defense and the development of infrastructure capable of supporting global military operations.
The competition is still in the site-selection stage. The department has not identified a winning location, and the reported interest does not establish that a construction decision or funding commitment has been made.
Pentagon outlines land requirements for the proposed base
When Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced the competition in September 2026, the department proposed a general land footprint of 100,000 to 250,000 acres.
That range would accommodate a substantial military complex, potentially combining training areas, operational facilities, logistics infrastructure and accommodation for personnel. The precise configuration of the proposed installation has not been publicly established in the information provided.
Marks clarified that the acreage guideline would not automatically disqualify proposals outside the stated range. According to his letter, smaller sites could remain competitive if they presented an otherwise compelling offer, while all proposals would be evaluated against the installation’s operational requirements.
The department’s central criterion is mission suitability rather than land size alone.
This distinction matters because a large tract of undeveloped land does not necessarily offer the infrastructure needed to support a major military installation. Access to transportation networks, utilities, training areas and other essential facilities could affect whether a location meets the department’s needs. The department has not publicly detailed the relative weight of these factors in its scoring process.
A base designed for joint force operations
Hegseth has described the proposed installation as a platform for countering increasingly complex threats across multiple operational domains and improving the military’s ability to project power globally.
He has said the base could accommodate as many as 25,000 service members. That figure indicates the potential scale of the project, although the department has not provided a finalized force structure or explained how personnel would be distributed among the services.
The concept also differs from a facility designed around a single military branch. A joint installation could bring personnel and capabilities from multiple services together, depending on the eventual mission requirements and approved design.
Hegseth has described the intended facility as a self-sustaining power projection platform rather than a conventional government installation. However, the available information does not establish whether the department plans to develop new energy systems, independent utility networks or other specific self-sufficiency measures.
Those details will matter when the department moves from site selection to engineering, cost estimation and construction planning.
Existing military land remains eligible
The competition is not limited to undeveloped land or locations without an established military presence.
According to the guidance accompanying Marks’ letter, the department may consider locations across the United States, including former military installations and land adjacent to existing bases.
Using an existing installation or expanding a neighboring military property could offer advantages, depending on the location. Established transportation links, utilities, housing and military support facilities might reduce the need to develop all infrastructure from the beginning.
However, those advantages would need to be weighed against the available land, environmental restrictions, infrastructure capacity and compatibility with the proposed mission. The department has not identified which locations are under consideration or indicated that existing installations have an advantage in the competition.
The decision to consider a broad range of locations also leaves the geographic field open. The information released so far does not establish whether the department favors a particular region or intends to prioritize proximity to existing operational commands.
Governors will present leading proposals in spring 2027
The next identified milestone is a presentation stage scheduled for spring 2027.
Governors representing the highest-scoring candidate sites are expected to present their proposals to War Department officials. The process will give state leaders an opportunity to make the case for their locations, although the department has not disclosed the full evaluation framework or the number of sites expected to reach that stage.
The distinction between initial submissions and shortlisted candidates is important. Strong nationwide interest indicates that the project has attracted attention, but it does not reveal how many proposals meet the military’s requirements or how competitive individual locations are.
The department also has not announced a final site-selection date, a construction schedule or a project budget in the information provided.
Those decisions will determine how quickly the proposal can move from a competition into an executable military construction program.
Infrastructure and cost will shape the decision
A project intended to support up to 25,000 service members would require more than a large land parcel. Depending on the final design, the installation could need extensive transportation access, utilities, maintenance facilities, accommodation, training infrastructure and logistical support.
The cost would depend on the selected site, the facilities required, the extent of existing infrastructure and the installation’s intended operational role. Without a defined design and cost estimate, it is not possible to determine the project’s likely construction cost or long-term operating expenses.
Land availability would therefore be only one part of the assessment. A location offering sufficient acreage but requiring extensive new infrastructure could present a different financial proposition from an existing military property that already has suitable facilities.
There are also practical questions about how the proposed base would fit into the wider U.S. military network. Its contribution to rapid global power projection would depend on its assigned missions, transportation connections, available forces and relationship with existing installations.
The department has not yet publicly explained how the proposed base would complement current military infrastructure or which operational requirements it is intended to address that existing installations cannot adequately meet.
For now, the competition has established the broad ambition and initial selection criteria, but not the final shape of the project. The spring 2027 presentations should provide a clearer indication of which locations can offer the land, infrastructure and operational suitability the War Department is seeking.
