Lobby Trip Makes Splash, Treads Water : Navy: A Long Beach delegation dives into Capitol Hill fray but leaves with no commitment to save shipyard.

A delegation of Long Beach’s highest-ranking officials made “a big splash” at a three-day lobbying mission last week to stop the closure of the Long Beach Naval Shipyard. But they came away with no firm commitments from the Pentagon or the Navy.

“We were a big splash hit on Broadway,” Long Beach lobbyist Del Smith proclaimed at the close of the city’s first trek to Washington to save the shipyard, one of 100 military installations marked for closure by the Pentagon.

It was clear, however, that it would take more than one East Coast journey to salvage the 43-year-old yard and the 4,100 civilian jobs that hang in the balance.

Delegations like Long Beach’s have become common sights on Capitol Hill since the military cuts were announced in January, as local representatives try to rally support to save military jobs and revenues in their districts.

Generally, such missions involve a good deal of preaching to the converted--those local representatives and senators who would be hurt politically by the yard’s closure. But they tend to make little headway with other officials with their own interests and installations to defend.

The group--led by Long Beach Mayor Ernie Kell and U.S. Reps. Glenn M. Anderson (D-San Pedro), Dana Rohrabacher (R-Lomita) and Mervyn M. Dymally (D-Compton)--pressed their case with Secretary of the Navy H. Lawrence Garrett III and White House officials. They also met with Democratic and Republican congressional leaders, including Les Aspin (D-Wis.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, and Julian C. Dixon (D-Los Angeles), a member of the Military Appropriations Committee.

“All of them agreed with our statement that the Long Beach Naval Shipyard should not be closed--except for Garrett. He said he’s going to evaluate it very carefully,” Kell said at a news conference outside the House chamber. Kell was accompanied by Long Beach Vice Mayor Wallace Edgerton, City Manager James C. Hankla and Councilmen Tom Clark, Ray Grabinski, Evan Anderson Braude and Jeff Kellogg.

Although no promises were made, city leaders emphasized that the Defense Department has not closed the casket on the shipyard yet; a final decision is months away.

A bill introduced by Aspin would require that a bipartisan committee review every proposed military closure, a process that could take up to two years. Opposition to the bill is already mounting, however, Smith said.

Long Beach legislators took to Washington the results of a hastily conducted study showing that it would cost the Pentagon $1.7 billion to shut down the yard and make it useful for some other purpose, far exceeding the $8 million a year the Defense Department hopes to save by closing it.

“The Navy hasn’t really put pen to paper. They couldn’t believe it,” Smith said of the report commissioned by the Long Beach City Council.

The delegation seemed encouraged by Vice President Dan Quayle’s endorsement of the shipyard during a recent visit to Long Beach and by similar backing from a number of congressional leaders in Washington.

“Vice President Quayle has given me his word that he will work with me to assure that there is an honest evaluation, that shipyard will stay in service,” Rohrabacher said. “And that’s what’s best for Long Beach, but it’s also what’s best for the United States of America and the United States Navy.”

One of the areas that could be hardest hit economically is Dymally’s district in Compton, where about one-fourth of the shipyard’s employees live.

“I told the many people we met with that the Long Beach shipyard is not a facility that taxes the Pentagon, but if it is closed it would punish my people,” said Dymally, who noted the high level of minorities among his constituents.

The delegation contends that the Long Beach yard is the only one of eight Navy ship-repair facilities to operate in the black last year. According to new figures released last week by Anderson’s office, the yard saved the Navy $36 million by finishing work under estimated costs--about $15 million more than was previously reported by the government.

City officials argue that closing one of the Navy’s most efficient shipyards would actually increase the deficit because repair work would have to be doled out to yards that regularly overrun their cost estimates.

“Why would you close down the one that made all the money and keep open the ones that lost the money?” said Anderson, calling the Navy’s logic “faulty.”

“I have to conclude that the Department of Defense is playing politics with Long Beach,” he said.

More than 130 ships--nearly one-third of the Navy’s fleet--are home-ported in Southern California. Although the Navy says some vessels might be redeployed, Long Beach is the nearest repair facility for most California-based ships.

“It’s right there. It’s handy,” argued Anderson, saying that the next-nearest repair yard is at Puget Sound in Washington state--1,200 miles away.

The shipyards in Long Beach and Philadelphia--the only other one marked for closure--are incapable of repairing nuclear-powered ships, including some of the Navy’s most modern vessels.

A senior Pentagon official who declined to be identified said that was “one of the factors” that put the Long Beach yard on what has come to be known as the Pentagon’s “hit list.”

Times staff writers John M. Broder in Washington and Faye Fiore in Long Beach contributed to this story.