2 Make Quick, Last-Ditch Pitch for Point Mugu : Military: Given five minutes each before a federal base-closure commission, Reps. Beilenson and Gallegly state their case for keeping the naval station open.

After 16 regional hearings, 151 base visits, extensive community lobbying and hundreds of hours of analysis by the federal base closure commission staff, Ventura County’s two lawmakers were given just five minutes apiece Monday to plead for the Point Mugu naval base.

Rep. Anthony C. Beilenson had from 11:10 to 11:15 a.m. Rep. Elton Gallegly’s appearance began at 5:40 p.m. and was over at 5:45.

Held as a courtesy to Congress, the marathon hearing was a final opportunity for Beilenson (D-Woodland Hills), Gallegly (R-Simi Valley) and about 200 other lawmakers to pitch their local bases as the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission prepares to begin its official deliberations on the 181 installations now on the endangered list.

“This is one last chance for members of Congress to contact us and let us know their concerns,” a commission spokesman said. “I’m sure if there’s some new information, the commission will catch it.”

With the panel just two weeks away from preparing its final closure list, Beilenson and Gallegly sounded a common theme: It just doesn’t make sense to shut down most of the Point Mugu Naval Air Warfare Center, Weapons Division.

“Point Mugu is a necessary base, in strategic and military terms,” said Beilenson, who represents most of Thousand Oaks. “In fact, it ranks so high in military value that its closure makes no good sense at all. Point Mugu should be preserved in the manner and for the purposes for which it currently operates.”

Gallegly, whose district encompasses the bulk of Ventura County, trumpeted the same idea when his turn at the podium came: “I can understand why, superficially, Point Mugu may have appeared a tempting target for closure. I can only hope that now that you have had a chance to explore this matter in depth you will agree that closing or further realigning Point Mugu simply does not make sense.”

Congressional testimony continues today. Whether it will affect the final decision remains unclear.

“Who knows?” Beilenson asked. “One can only hope that it makes a modest amount of difference to be there. If we did not come and speak, they might feel it’s not all that important to the community. At the very least, it’s important that we appear. It can’t hurt.”

With so many bases on the endangered list, lawmakers did everything they could Monday to make their installations stand out.

Some pointed out how their bases played key roles during Operation Desert Storm. Others quoted words of support from former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell, or mentioned how the ongoing war in Bosnia illustrates the need to keep U. S. military readiness at its peak.

Again and again, the lawmakers disputed the promised savings of tax dollars that led to their bases’ inclusion on the list.

An audit by the Defense Department’s inspector general first raised the idea of huge cost savings if most of Point Mugu’s missile-testing operations were transferred to nearby bases at Port Hueneme and China Lake. The numbers in the audit have since been widely discredited, and Beilenson and Gallegly sought to drive that point home.

Calling the report “abysmally wrong,” Gallegly told the panel that “the IG’s assumption about savings derived from consolidation is wholly invalid.”

Beilenson reiterated testimony offered last month by Adm. Dana B. McKinney, the commanding officer of the Point Mugu base. At a regional hearing in San Francisco, McKinney had estimated that the Navy would have to spend $800 million to relocate Point Mugu’s testing facilities and that taxpayers would not realize a savings for 63 years.

Point Mugu also had two other advocates on its side, U.S. Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, who argued that California has been pummeled by the previous base closure rounds and should be spared further painful cuts.

“California has contributed with base closings until it hurts--far beyond any state in the union and far beyond our equitable share,” Boxer said. “We can’t brutalize the largest state in the nation like this.”

Feinstein added that the state stands to lose another 36,000 jobs if the commission closes the California bases now under scrutiny.

“No state can make an argument of cumulative economic impact like the state of California can,” Feinstein said. “I would urge the commission to consider the negative economic impact and leave out the state of California from this round of base closures.”

In closing remarks, Boxer mentioned the time constraints that frustrated many lawmakers throughout the day: “It is difficult for us to speak in only five minutes when we’re such a large state.”

The panel’s chairman, Alan Dixon, sympathized but said the base closure commission has a tight deadline of its own, with its final list of bases due to the White House by July 1.

“We recognize the inadequacies of the time,” Dixon said. “The time frame for this commission is a short one too.”

The commission winds up its hearings Wednesday with testimony from Defense Department officials. Defending Point Mugu and other recent additions to the hit list will be top Navy officials, including Secretary of the Navy John H. Dalton.