WASHINGTON — A bipartisan federal commission, in an unprecedented effort to save money and consolidate the nation’s sprawling complex of military bases, recommended Thursday that Defense Secretary Frank C. Carlucci shut 86 bases and partly close another five, yielding a savings of $700 million a year.
The commission called for six California bases to be closed, including the historic Presidio in San Francisco and two Air Force bases in San Bernardino County. It recommended also that the Navy halt construction of a new station at Hunters Point in San Francisco and that ships slated to have been based there be transferred instead to ports at San Diego, Long Beach and Pearl Harbor in Hawaii.
Cleanup Problems Seen
If approved by Carlucci and not overruled by Congress, the panel’s recommendations could move more than 17,000 Defense Department employees out of California and lead to the sale of thousands of acres of military warehouses and airfields–as well as environmental cleanup problems–to new owners in the private sector across the country.
Moreover, approval of the commission’s recommendations would mark the first time in a decade that the Defense Department has overcome political obstacles to base closures and shut any major military facility in the United States.
In presenting the report, former Rep. Jack Edwards (R-Ala.)–co-chairman of the 12-man President’s Commission on Base Realignment and Closure with former Sen. Abraham Ribicoff (D-Conn.)–called the report “a totally nonpartisan effort” and added that in reaching its conclusions, “we didn’t accept any list from anybody.”
The panel’s findings met mixed reaction on Capitol Hill, where several members of the California delegation complained that the state would be unfairly affected by the closures. But congressional leaders predicted that the recommendations would be implemented despite the objections.
Congress, which established the panel last May to hold down the rising cost of maintaining the nation’s military bases, will have 45 days from March 1 to reject the entire list by voting a measure of disapproval in both houses. A two-thirds’ vote is required. Unless it does so, the Defense Department is expected to move quickly to implement the commission’s recommendations, with official base closures beginning in January, 1990.
Won’t Give Up Fight
Representatives from hard-hit states, however, were not yet ready to give up their home-state military facilities without a fight. Illinois Democratic Sens. Alan J. Dixon and Paul Simon criticized the commission for not recommending closures of U.S. bases overseas.
“How can we justify closing military bases in our own back yard when we don’t even consider a single one of the 1,500 overseas U.S. military facilities?” Dixon asked.
Still, the vast majority of House members will support the base-closing recommendation, in large part because their districts are not affected, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Les Aspin (D-Wis.) said. Most of the 86 bases slated for closing have fewer than 30 employees, Aspin noted.
“We’re really talking about a universe of only 27 communities that will be hit markedly,” Aspin said. “I would say the chances of overturning this process are not high.”
In the Senate, Armed Services Committee Chairman Sam Nunn (D-Ga.) praised the commission for its “workman-like approach” to the task of closing unneeded bases and predicted that the recommendations will not be overturned by Congress.
Neither Aspin’s Wisconsin district nor Nunn’s home state of Georgia is affected by the base-closing plan, which would provide an estimated savings of $5.6 billion over 20 years.
Edwards defended the heavy hits against California bases–which represented a little more than 7% of the total closures–saying that the state’s high economic growth and its large military presence made it a likely site for some shutdowns.
“We found over 300,000 military and civilian people in California,” Edwards said. “When you’ve got that kind of activity in a state, it’s not unlikely that you’re going to have some activity on this committee on that state.”
New Hampshire, New Jersey and Illinois, states with a much smaller military presence than California, were hit hardest by the initiatives. With the closure of Pease Air Force Base, New Hampshire would lose almost half of its military population. With the proposed closure of Chanute Air Force Base and Ft. Sheridan in Illinois and Ft. Dix in New Jersey, those states’ military populations would be cut by 9.7%. By contrast, California would lose 5% of its military population.
Citing air traffic congestion and encroachment by the surrounding civilian communities, the commission recommended the closure of George Air Force Base and Norton Air Force Base in San Bernardino County.
March Would Grow
The move would draw 6,653 military and civilian workers from Norton and 5,358 from George. But March Air Force, 9 miles southeast of Riverside, would pick up an additional 3,420 military and civilian employees from proposed consolidations, many of them from Norton.
In both cases, the panel contended that the actions would have a “minimal impact on local employment,” though its members conceded that those affected by the recommendations might differ with that assessment. The commission noted that Norton and George have had trouble recruiting civilian workers from the local population because of competition from the high-technology private firms operating in and around the Apple Valley.
The closure of Norton could cost $132 million, according to commission estimates. But the panel believes that the move would save the Air Force $68 million annually in operating costs, yielding savings within three years. The closure of George, estimated to cost $37 million early in the process, would result in quicker returns because the Defense Department will save $70 million in operating costs once it is shut.
The panel urged also the closure of Mather Air Force Base, 12 miles southeast of Sacramento, a move that would take away about 3,000 military and civilian employees and a payroll of $242.3 million.
The Pentagon tried unsuccessfully to shut Mather in January, 1987, but was prevented by Reps. Robert T. Matsui and Vic Fazio, both Democrats from Sacramento, who won backing for an amendment forbidding the use of appropriated funds for the closure.
The closure of the Presidio–1,416 acres of land at the base of the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco–may be one of the commission’s most lucrative recommendations. All but 32.5 acres of the land by law must be turned over to the National Park Service. The rest of the land, which houses a hospital, under current law is to be offered for lease to the city of San Francisco for use in treating victims of acquired immune deficiency syndrome.
“The full value of the 36.5 acres could be realized if the legislation on lease of Presidio lands were repealed,” the commission report notes, adding that closure will save $314 million initially and $74 million in yearly operating costs.
In recommending that the Navy discontinue construction of a new home port at Hunters Point in San Francisco, the commission anticipates that the Defense Department will save $8 million annually “forever,” Edwards said. The panel proposed that the Navy shift to Pearl Harbor a battleship and two cruisers to have been based at Hunters Point, send one cruiser to Long Beach and one cruiser, two destroyers and two frigates to San Diego.
Although Congress’ acquiescence to the recommendations is expected, the Defense Department must count on more than that if it is to carry out the panel’s proposals, lawmakers said. Edwards said that Congress will have to approve $300 million next year “to prime the pump” with funds until the proceeds from early land sales, which will help pay the initial costs of closures, become available.
It is during the annual appropriations fight that dissident members of the Senate and House may try to win back funding for bases in their states.
“Watch out for appropriations,” Aspin warned. “I’m going to be watching for any such shenanigans. And I hope the press and public will keep an eye out, too.”
