Military Plans to Shut Down 33 U.S. Bases

By John Hendren and Mark Mazzetti

May 14, 2005 12 AM PT

Times Staff Writers

WASHINGTON —

The Pentagon presented a plan Friday to close 33 major domestic bases and shrink 29 more, a cost-saving makeover that would slash the military’s presence in the Northeast and save nearly $50 billion over 20 years.

If approved without major changes, the closures proposed by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld would move thousands of troops and their equipment from the Northeast and Midwest to the South and, to a lesser extent, the West.

California, which was greatly affected by the last four rounds of base closures, would lose 2,018 jobs under Friday’s recommendation -- a fraction of the 93,000 military and civilian positions the state lost in prior rounds. California avoided deeper cuts in the new recommendations because the most obvious ones had been made, officials and analysts said.

The latest round of proposed closures includes several well-known Northeast installations that employ thousands of troops and civilian personnel: the historic New London submarine base in Connecticut, the Portsmouth naval shipyard in Maine and Ft. Monmouth in New Jersey. The Pentagon also proposed closing Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakota, one of two B-1 bomber bases in the country.

Though the Pentagon report was greeted with a mixture of relief and dismay on Capitol Hill, lawmakers and local community leaders in targeted states expressed anger and vowed to fight the cuts. The base-closing process is designed to be apolitical, but lobbyists and lawmakers will be actively involved.

“Today’s decision by the Department of Defense is nothing short of stunning, devastating, and above all, outrageous,” Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) said. “It is a travesty and a strategic blunder of epic proportions.”

The recommendations partly reflect a U.S. military that is shifting away from heavy formations needed to counter large military adversaries and moving toward joint operations and highly mobile forces for battles against terrorist networks and so-called rogue regimes. Following Rumsfeld’s prescriptions to become lighter and more lethal, the military has trimmed submarine and naval destroyer purchases and cut back on jet fighters.

The base closing recommendation now goes to the independent Base Realignment and Closure Commission, which this fall will submit a plan to President Bush and, eventually, to Congress.

“Our current arrangements, designed for the Cold War, must give way to the new demands of the war against extremism and other evolving 21st century challenges,” Rumsfeld said in a statement accompanying the recommendations.

The military’s plan calls for cuts that largely would preserve combat forces while reducing support units. And the recommendations advanced a trend toward consolidated bases. Across the nation, smaller facilities and ones serving a single branch of the military were sacrificed, while those offering joint training for multiple services benefited.

The overall closure plan is more nuanced than its predecessors, which date to 1988. It would reduce the number of major bases from 318 to 285, in line with major base cuts in previous years. But along with the major closures and tweaks came recommendations for 775 minor closures and realignments -- more than triple the 235 adjustments made in the last four rounds of closures combined.

Under the proposal, the military services would move personnel out of leased space and onto bases, for example, while the Navy would close air depots that are costly to maintain and lease private space.

“To me, the big story of this list is the churn,” said Steve Grundman, a former deputy undersecretary of Defense for installations during the Clinton administration who is now with CRA International, a Boston consulting firm. “What’s really notable are these cats and dogs, these small installations, all the leased space that they’re getting out of and then the consolidation of isolated sites.”

Pentagon officials estimate the recommended cuts would trim 5% to 10% of the overall domestic base structure, a savings of $48.8 billion over 20 years. They would result in 18,223 fewer civilian jobs at a total of 839 bases nationwide.

Labor Secretary Elaine L. Chao said the federal government would work with all affected employees to help them find other jobs.

Although the planned cuts were far smaller than Pentagon strategists had forecast a few months ago, they hammered many Northern and Midwestern states and gave the military an increasingly Southern accent.

The biggest loser in terms of jobs was Connecticut, which would see 8,586 military and civilian positions disappear. Maine would lose 6,938 jobs, while the District of Columbia would lose 6,496. South Dakota would lose 3,797, New Jersey 3,760 and Missouri 3,679.

Massachusetts and Rhode Island defied the regional trend, modestly gaining 491 and 531 jobs, respectively.

“I am shocked by the Pentagon’s decision this morning to target the sub base here in New London for closure,” said Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.). “It is wrong. It is shortsighted. And it is cruel and unusual punishment that Connecticut does not deserve and our national security cannot afford.”

However, based on previous base closings, removing a facility from the list of doomed bases is likely to be an uphill battle. Fewer than 10% of the sites were removed in previous rounds, and no more than 15% of the sites on previous lists were altered. This time, said Michael Wynne, the Pentagon’s undersecretary for acquisition, technology and logistics, the Pentagon is intent on remaining below that figure.

The decision to shutter Northeastern bases was due in large part to the lower cost in most of the more spacious Southern and Western states, Defense officials and military analysts said.

Georgia would gain 7,423 jobs and Texas 6,150. Some states gained at the expense of their neighbors. The storied base at Ft. Knox, Ky., would lose its armored force military school to Ft. Benning, Ga.

The domestic realignment was coordinated with an overhaul of the Pentagon’s overseas troop deployments. The Pentagon is relocating the bulk of two Army divisions based in Germany -- the 1st Armored Division and the 1st Infantry -- back to the United States. Most of these troops will move to Ft. Bliss, Texas, and Ft. Riley, Kan., Defense officials said.

Western states fared comparatively well in the Pentagon’s recommendations. Colorado would gain 4,917 and Washington 760. Oregon would lose 1,083, Idaho 659 and Utah 446. Alaska would be the exception, losing 4,619 jobs.

California would lose 8,555 jobs at some facilities but gain 6,537 at others, for a net loss of 2,018 jobs -- an impact many considered tolerable.

The biggest losses would be in realignments of the Ventura naval base and the San Diego naval medical center. However, the base closing commission could alter the recommendations, dropping or even adding bases targeted for shutdown.

“It’s not as bad as we thought, or as good as one might have hoped, but overall it’s not too bad,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) told reporters.

One saving grace for California’s remaining bases was the availability of swaths of land and sea for training. Many California lawmakers were pleasantly surprised that the Los Angeles Air Force Base, a research complex in El Segundo that was considered one of the state’s most vulnerable sites, was left off the closure list.

“When Connecticut loses more jobs than California, it’s a good year for California,” said Loren Thompson, a military analyst with the Lexington Institute, a public policy institute in Arlington, Va.

The Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakota and the Naval Station Pascagoula in Mississippi were among major bases the Pentagon recommended shuttering. The news was a political blow to their respective Republican champions: Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) and Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.).

Thune, who won an election against former Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) in November, said repeatedly during the campaign that his ties to the White House would help ensure that Ellsworth survived.

Yet the South Dakota base fell victim to a shifting strategic environment. With the Cold War-era bomber currently out of vogue at the Pentagon, military planners saw less need to keep Ellsworth open.

Under the Pentagon’s plan, the B-1 bombers housed at Ellsworth will move to Dyess Air Force Base in Texas, where the other half of the B-1 fleet is based.

In its recommendations, the Pentagon put new emphasis on joint facilities -- ones that are shared by the various armed services.

The Army’s Walter Reed Medical Center in the nation’s capital, for example, would be moved to the nearby site of the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, Md., renamed Walter Reed National Military Medical Center and be shared by all the services. Partly as a result, Maryland would see an increase of 9,293 jobs.

Likewise, a center for training crews that will operate the Joint Strike Fighter, a new jet designed in slightly different versions for each service, would be created at Florida’s Eglin Air Force Base, which would gain 2,218 jobs.

As advocates of bases on the doomed list licked their wounds, lawmakers and lobbyists for vulnerable installations that were spared celebrated.

Scott Air Force Base in Illinois and Hanscom Air Force Base in Massachusetts were considered possible targets before Friday but survived. Hanscom actually would be expanded by 1,100 workers under the Pentagon plan.

Besides the Los Angeles Air Force Base, other California sites considered vulnerable also were omitted from the list.

But community leaders and lawmakers cautioned that the process will run throughout the year, and that changes to the proposals were possible.

Californians “should be relieved by today’s decision, but I caution them not to pop the champagne corks yet,” said Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher (D-Walnut Creek). “The BRAC process is a long one, and this is just an early stage.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX)

Potential closures

The closure of domestic military facilities recommended by the Department of Defense would affect all 50 states but particularly the Northeast. Thousands of troops could be reassigned to the South and the West. In California, 11 installations would close, with a net loss of 2,018 personnel, some of whom may transfer to other bases. A base closure commission will hold public hearings and visit bases before making final recommendations to President Bush, who has until Sept. 23 to approve or reject the list.

California’s proposed closures, personnel net losses

Concord: Naval Weapons Station (Inland portion), 71

Oakland: Defense Finance & Accounting Service, 50

Sunnyvale: Onizuka Air Force Station, 278

Modesto: Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant, 89

Seaside: Defense Finance & Accounting Service, 61

Encino: Navy-Marine Corps Reserve Center, 33

Los Angeles: Navy-Marine Corps Reserve Center, 48

Bell: Armed Forces Reserve Center, 24

San Bernardino: Defense Finance & Accounting Service, 120

Corona: Naval Support Activity, 892

San Diego: Defense Finance & Accounting Service, 240

Losers and gainers

The states with the largest net loss and gain in combined military and civilian jobs:

Net loss

New Jersey: -3,760

South Dakota: -3,797

Alaska: -4,619

D.C.: -6,496

Maine: -6,938

Conn.: -8,586

Net gains

Arkansas: +3,585

Oklahoma: +3,919

Colorado: +4,917

Texas: +6,150

Georgia: +7,423

Maryland: +9,293

Closure timeline

Friday: Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld forwarded the departmentOs recommendations to the base closure commission.

Sept. 8: Deadline for the commission to forward its report on the recommendations to the president.

Sept. 23: Deadline for president to accept or reject recommendations in their entirety. If accepted, recommendations are final within 45 legislative days, unless Congress blocks the package.

* The military defines a major base as one for which the replacement cost is $100 million or more. However, California officials consider only the Corona base a major facility.

Sources: Department of Defense, Associated Press. Graphics reporting by Julie Sheer, Brady MacDonald

In California

California military facilities with the greatest proposed net losses or gains in personnel:

Losses

Naval Base Ventura Co.: -1,534

Naval Support Activity Corona: -892

Naval Base Coronado: -460

Marine Corps Logistics Base Barstow: -419

Naval Medical Center San Diego: -200

Gains

Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake: 2,469

Naval Station San Diego: 1,170