Community Correspondence - 81 Letters from Concerned Citizens - Crane Page: 1 of 81
This letter is part of the collection entitled: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission and was provided to UNT Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
7 July 2005
BRAC Commission
The Honorable Samuel Knox Skinner
BRAC Commissioner JUL 1 4 2005
Base Realignment and Closure Commission
2521 South Clark Street, Suite 600
Arlington, VA 22202
Dear Commissioner Skinner,
I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your recent visit to NSWC Crane,
CAAA and Southern Indiana. As a concerned taxpayer I support the work you are doing to
ensure that our Military operations remain as effective and affordable as possible. I realize that
you have a very difficult job in deciding which activities to re-align or close as part of the BRAC
process. I hope that your visit helped you to realize what important assets NSWU Crane and
CAAA are to our Nation's Defense and the Global War On Terrorism.
I have been following the BRAC process closely since the proposed closure/re-alignment
list was published and I am growing increasingly concerned that DOD has not properly followed
the law in developing recommendations. DOD is required to give priority consideration to
installations that have a high military value ranking. Data available on the DOD website
(www.defenselink.mil/brac) leads me to conclude that NSWC Crane's military value rating was
not taken into account properly, which is violation ofBRAC law. Specifically, NSWC Crane has
one of the highest military value ratings of all activities performing Electronic Warfare work,
including a higher rating than NAS Whidbey Island and yet it is recommended that Electronic
Warfare workload related to repair of the ALQ-99 system be re-aligned from NSWC Crane to
NAS Whidbey Island.
The DOD is also required to take into account the return on investment resulting from its
closure/re-alignment recommendations. In reviewing the cost data that is available on the E-
Library at the BRAC Commission website (www.brac.gov) I have come to the conclusion that
the moving the ALQ-99 Electronic Warfare workload to NAS Whidbey Island does not result in
any cost savings. It appears that all of the savings in this scenario are generated by re-aligning
work within Whidbey Island and moving work from North Island, CA to Whidbey Island. In
other words this scenario will save DOD even more money if the NSWC Crane BRAC
recommendation is eliminated!
I urge you to reconsider the recommendation to re-align work from NSWC Crane by
properly taking into account the Military Value and Return On Investment requirements of
BRAC law.
Very Respectful ,
elly R. derson
RR 2, Box 318C
Bloomfield, IN 47424
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This letter can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Letter.
Community Correspondence - 81 Letters from Concerned Citizens - Crane, letter, July 27, 2005; (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc18812/m1/1/: accessed March 28, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.