New London and Portsmouth to stay open - Oceana gets another chance

Since 08-26-05

From: Waspscpo@aol.com
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 12:59 PM
To: undisclosed-recipients:
Subject: New London, Portsmouth to stay open; Oceana gets another chance

http://www.navytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1055055.php

New London, Portsmouth to stay open; Oceana gets another chance (Realignment could be last chance)

By Gordon Trowbridge
NavyTimes staff writer
August 24, 2005

The independent base closings commission Wednesday rejected Navy recommendations to close Submarine Base New London and Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, and gave Virginia and the Navy one last chance to save Naval Station Oceana. Tackling three of the most controversial topics over the four months since the Pentagon made its closing recommendations in May, the Defense Base Realignment and Closure Commission turned down Pentagon arguments in each case.

On Oceana, commissioners made it clear they believe the Virginia Beach, Va., base is not the best place for the Navy’s East Coast fighter fleet — but did not vote to close it. “Ten years, 15 years from now, Oceana cannot be the future of naval aviation,” said Commissioner James Hill, a retired Army general.

While it did not vote to close the base, the panel placed extraordinary requirements on local and state governments, including a requirement to spend at least $50 million a year to buy property near the base to eliminate development that hampers operations there. If that and other steps are not in place within six months, the commission directed the Navy to move Oceana’s fighters to Cecil Field, Fla., which shut down in a previous base-closing round. Virginia Beach officials attending the hearing just outside Washington, D.C., said they did not yet know if they could comply with the commission’s requirements.

The panel also directed the Defense Department to undertake a study of a longterm replacement for Oceana as the Navy’s East Coast master jet base, and to include Cecil Field, near Jacksonville, Fla., in that analysis.Jobs vs. savings. By denying requests to close Submarine Base New London and Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, the commission passed up as much as $3 billion in savings, but saved roughly 13,000 jobs in New England.

The panel voted to keep the Connecticut sub base, citing concerns that the closing would handicap the future submarine fleet and disrupt the historic home of the sub community. And commissioners found that there was not enough excess capacity in naval shipyards to close Portsmouth, in Kittery, Maine. The votes are an enormous victory for New England officials who had vigorously attacked the closings, saying they would badly damage the region’s economy and essentially divorce the military from the Northeastern United States.

But they are likely to draw protests from Navy officials, who have said planned savings from the closings are vital to their modernization efforts. The commission made other changes to Navy proposals. It rejected plans to close the naval facility at Corona, Calif., and Naval Air Station Brunswick, Maine. The Navy had wanted to leave the Brunswick base open but move its P-3 patrol aircraft to Jacksonville, Fla.

The New London recommendation would have cost the Groton area more than 8,600 jobs. But economic issues got less attention than the base’s history and future threats to the nation. “It would be a big mistake to close this facility at this time,” said Commissioner Lloyd Newton, a retired Air Force general, citing potential future threats from China’s expanding submarine fleet. Anthony Principi, the commission’s chairman, said closing New London “would be a tragic mistake, a tragic loss to this nation.”

The commission voted 7-1 to retain the base, with one abstention. Former Rep. James Hansen was the only vote to close, saying the Navy’s plans to shrink from roughly 100 fast-attack submarines during the Cold War to as few as 41 in the future requires a consolidation of submarine infrastructure. “We’re going to have some vacant piers,” Hansen said. “It comes down to the idea that bases cost money.” Navy officials argued hard for the plan, saying the Navy’s future is with a smaller sub fleet and that projected savings from closing the base — roughly $1.6 billion over 20 years — are badly needed for the Navy’s modernization efforts and to help meet manpower reduction goals.

The Navy’s plan would have moved New London’s 17 subs to Kings Bay, Ga., and Norfolk, Va. The Navy’s submarine training school and several smaller organizations also would have moved. Commissioners were persuaded by several arguments, including warnings from officials of sub builder Electric Boat Corp. that moving the base, next door to the company’s facilities, would damage important relationships that improve construction and crew performance and save money. The Pentagon estimated that closing Portsmouth would save nearly $1.3 million over 20 years, eliminating 201 military and 4,000 civilian jobs.

But the commission’s staff found that closing the yard would leave the Navy’s three remaining shipyards with just 8 percent excess capacity — not enough to satisfy commissioners who worried that the Navy could not meet a surge of ship repair. “All human activity must involve some amount of excess capacity,” said Commissioner Phillip Coyle. “I don’t use my garage 24 hours a day, but I’m not about to tear it down.” The panel also rejected the closing of Naval Support Activity Corona, Calif., a small station with about 230 workers, roughly half civilian, who are involved in independent analysis of weapons system performance.

Based on revised Navy estimates, the panel determined the closing would actually cost the Navy money. Several commissioners said the vote to close Brunswick was largely a cost-savings measure — closing a base already deprived of its aircraft would double the savings to the Pentagon, said commissioner Harold Gehman, a retired Navy admiral.

The Navy estimated its original plan would save about $230 million over 20 years. The panel also voted 5-2, with two abstentions, to approve the closing of Naval Station Ingleside and Naval Air Station Corpus Christi, moving mine warfare assets from the Texas bases to fleet bases in San Diego and Norfolk.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Contributed,
YNCS Don Harribine, USN(ret)