Oh NO........................

[MIRCS]

Doesn't look good for some on the list today

[clacoste]

Yes, it does look a little grim.  Moody should be ok though....looks to be picking up some of Eielson's A-10's.

[MIRCS]

Yes, it does look a little grim.  Moody should be ok though....looks to be picking up some of Eielson's A-10's.

Why would an AFSOC base be picking up A-10's??

Though I do bet that there are some people dancing in Clovis New Mexico

[clacoste]

Hi MIRCS,

From Fairbanks News-Miner.....don't know where they got their info...


Article Published: Saturday, May 14, 2005

Defense realignment plan guts air base

By SAM BISHOP News-Miner Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON--The Department of Defense recommended Friday that the Air Force move all 2,800 personnel out of Eielson Air Force Base during the next five years, along with all A-10 and F-16 fighter jets.

The change would likely eliminate another 320 civilian jobs on the base and 1,770 jobs indirectly supported by military spending, the department estimated. After adjusting for some new contractor positions, the expected total job loss for the Fairbanks area would be 4,700 jobs.

That would represent about 8.6 percent of the region's 54,500 jobs, the department estimated. Using 2000 population figures, the loss of about 6,100 military members and their dependents would drop the Fairbanks North Star Borough's total population by more than 7 percent, to about 76,000.

Eielson would be left with an Alaska Air National Guard wing, which currently employs about 580 personnel supporting eight KC-135R refueling aircraft. About half the guard personnel are full-time.

The base would also continue to support various military exercises, such as Cope Thunder.

The department's recommendation is part of a nationwide base closing and realignment process launched by Congress in 2002. The department's suggestions now go to a nine-member commission. In September, the commission will forward a final plan to President Bush, who will have two weeks to accept or reject it. If he accepts the plan, Congress will have 45 legislative days to reject it. Otherwise, it goes into effect.

The Defense Department also recommended removing several dozen fighter aircraft from Elmendorf Air Force Base near Anchorage, an action that would eliminate about 1,500 military positions.

Finally, the department suggested moving Kulis Air National Guard Station operations to Elmendorf and consolidating some Elmendorf operations with the nearby Fort Richardson Army Post.

Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, said Friday in Washington, D.C., that he was surprised by some of the proposed cuts. However, he said Alaska's overall military population would recover from the reductions even if they are approved.

"I would view this as having very little economic impact on the state," he said.

That's because the proposals announced Friday only reflect changes developed for the base closing and realignment process, Stevens said. The military already plans to move just as many personnel to Alaska, in part to support new transport and fighter planes to Alaska.

In fact, some of the proposals announced Friday would make room for that "augmentation," Stevens said.

For example, Elmendorf should receive a few dozen new F-22 fighters starting in 2007 and eight new C-17 transport planes starting in 2008. And an airborne brigade is coming to Fort Richardson, he said. At the Fort Wainwright Army Post in Fairbanks three new aviation companies with about 150 personnel from Korea will arrive by mid-June.

"In the long run, the only real disappointment is Eielson," Stevens said.

Stevens said he doesn't know of any plans that would offset the proposed personnel and equipment losses at the base, located about 30 miles southeast of Fairbanks.

Stevens, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee's subcommittee on defense, said he would tell the commission that removing the fighters from Eielson and Elmendorf is unwise.

The A-10s are stationed in Alaska to provide backup on the Korean Peninsula if war occurs there, he said. In addition, removal of nearly all fighters from Alaska "would leave our area without protection."

"It was worse than I anticipated in terms of fighters," Stevens said of the Defense Department's recommendation.

The Defense Department said Eielson has a high military value because it is near "valuable air space and ranges."

"Eielson is, however, an expensive base to operate and improve," according to justifications released Friday with the report.

"The Air Force recommends realigning Eielson, but keeping the base open in a 'warm' status using the resident Air National Guard units and a portion of the infrastructure to continue operating the base for USAF/joint/combined exercises," the document stated.

The 354th Fighter Wing, Eielson's largest military force, has 18 F-16s. They would be sent to Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada. The wing's A-10 jets would be split up, with 12 going to Moody Air Force Base in Georgia, three to Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana and three to "backup inventory" at an unspecified location.

The military expects to save about $2.78 billion over 20 years by moving the aircraft and personnel out of Eielson and making related changes at Moody and Shaw Air Force Base in South Carolina. The onetime cost of the changes would be $141 million, the report said.

Eielson, like other Alaska military bases, has seen a number of major construction projects in recent years. In January, the Defense Department awarded a $39.6 million contract to build a new 16-pit fuel hydrant system for aircraft. A year before that, it contracted for a $14.4 million military police building and a $13.4 million dormitory. In 2003, the Air Force agreed to spend $21.7 million for new pollution control bag house on the coal-fired power plant.

Maj. Mike Haller, spokesman for the Alaska Air National Guard in Anchorage, said the state administration opposes the proposed reductions at Eielson.

"Such losses would be staggering for the Interior," he said.

Eielson is important from a military standpoint, he said, because the Korean Peninsula remains a volatile place.

"So the need to have bases that are capable and ready in Alaska is significant," he said.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said in a news release that the Eielson changes would be "a huge blow." It would affect not just tax revenues and local businesses but also schools, churches and community services.

"There is still a long way to go in the BRAC process," Murkowski said. "The Base Realignment and Closure Commission must still conduct hearings and visit each facility. ... I am confident that the commission will recognize the strategic importance of Alaska's bases to our national security."

Stevens said commissions in the past four rounds of base closings generally have trimmed the Defense Department's recommendations, even while trying to maintain the dollar savings.

The situation is different this time because the military is undergoing a worldwide realignment at the same time as the domestic realignment, he said.

The only proposed change at Fort Wainwright, which has about 4,750 military personnel, would move the headquarters of the Cold Regions Test Center back to Fort Greely near Delta Junction. The move would affect about five positions, said Lt. Col. George Bond, the center's commander.

The test center headquarters moved to Fort Wainwright after the last round of base closings, in 1995, when a previous commission decided to all but close Greely. Since then, the post has been resurrected as a national missile defense interceptor site.

Fort Richardson, with 3,300 soldiers, was on an initial BRAC closure list produced by the commission in 1991. However, the commission voted in June of that year not to put it on the final list.

Richardson appeared on an alleged Defense Department closure list that circulated on the Internet during the past year.

"That was a bogus list," said Chuck Canterbury, Army spokesman at Fort Richardson.

[MIRCS]

It still makes no sense....then again that's goverment.....and moving 3 to barksdale? WTF.

Moody already has enough aircraft with all the T-6, T-38, HC-130P, HH-60J......now they are going to add A-10's. Man that's going to be some crowded airspace around there. Those T-6's are flying missions every 20 minutes.