1995 Army Team Lead Desk Material - Adds to List Hearing, May 21, 1993 Page: 55 of 222
This legal document 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.
- Highlighting
- Highlighting On/Off
- Color:
- Adjust Image
- Rotate Left
- Rotate Right
- Brightness, Contrast, etc. (Experimental)
- Cropping Tool
- Download Sizes
- Preview all sizes/dimensions or...
- Download Thumbnail
- Download Small
- Download Medium
- Download Large
- High Resolution Files
- IIIF Image JSON
- IIIF Image URL
- Accessibility
- View Extracted Text
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
52
~1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
U3 6
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
W 67
- 68
" 69MR. YELLIN: Chase Field,
Kingsville, and Corpus are all fairly close
together.
COMMISSIONER MCPHERSON:
Within 40 or 50 miles of each other?
MR. YELLIN: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COURTER: Something
had just occurred to me. The OLF that the
1991 Cmmission recndted for closure, how
was that treated in the Navy's assumptions
this time with regard to capacity? I think I
was told by someboxdy or I saw a graph
someplace that the Navy's numbers that
reflected training capacity assumed that the
OLF would be able to be utilized.
MR. YELLIN: That Chase Field
would be able to be able to be used as an OLF?
CHAIRMAN COURTER: Yes.
LTC RICHARDELLA: Sir, the
Navy's Kingsville capacity numbers were
ccmputed predicated on the use of OLF Orange
Grove, which is its OLF.
CHAIRMAN CCNRTER: Not OLF
Chase?
LTC RICHARDELLA: The capacity
numbers considering the use of Chase were
computed and footnoted, not used as a primary
capaci ty number. They were placed in the
capacity chart.
CHAIRMAN COURTER: But the OLF
was not used to justify anything with respect
to the Navy proposal.
LTC RICHARDELLA: They were
shown but not used. That's correct, sir.
CHAIRMAN COURTER: Shown but
not used. Why would they show it if it's
closed?
LTC RICHARDELLA: believe
that they consider that field as potentially
usable if an agreement could be worked out
with the City of Beeville.
CHAIRMAN COURTER: So they're
hoping to work out an agreement with the city?
LTC RICHARDELLA: If
necessary.
CHAIRMAN WJRTER: We have a
motion seconded. Any further discussion on
that motion?
(No response.)
CHA I RMAN COURTER:
Commissioner Stuart?
COMMISSIONER STUART: Aye.
COMMISSIONER BYRON: Aye.
GEN JOHNSON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COURTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MCPHERSON: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COX: Aye.
COMM I SSIONER SOaIAN: Aye.
MS. CHESTON: The motion that
the Commission consider HlAS Corpus Christi and
Naval Hospital Corpus Christi, Texas, as
proposed additions to the Secretary's List of
military installations recomene for closure
or realigrment, the vote is seven in favor,
zero against; the motion passes.
CHIMANIJ CGJRTER: Are there
anty other motions in this category?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CCIJTER: No motionsin this category. We'll move to other
categories.
MR. YELLIN: Put up 20 and 21,
please.
I would like to introduce on
my left Commander Greg Cruze, who is the
analyst for the Naval stations category. The
slide on the left Lists the East Coast Naval
bases, of which it's proposed for the DOD
proposal to cLose Charleston, Staten Island,
and Mobile and to realign Sbase Mew Lorn
and NATC Newport. And for consideration, we
have Naval Stal:ion Pascagoula and Naval
Station Ingleside.
CHAIRMAN COJRTER: Are we
taking up the East Coast?
MR. YELLIN: The East Coast
first and then the West Coast. Yes.
Put up 22, please.
CDR CRUZE: Mr. Chairman, if I
could invite your attention on chart rv. r
22, just by way of reminder, to the fact that,
because of the Navy's rules for the
configuration analysis, Norfolk, Llttlecreek,
King's Bay, and Mayport on the East Coast are
part of every solution. In addition, on the
West Coast, Bargor and the San Diego complex
are part of every solution.
Further, on that same chart,
all the way at the bottom right corner, you'll
see the excess berthing pack number of 11.
Those 11 are cruiser equivalents of berthing.
With its focus on maximum elimination of
excess capacity, the initial analysis came up
with the recomendat i on to close Pearl Harbor.
And the Navy senior Leadership decided that
that was strategically unsound and put Pearl
Harbor back in, so that that excess capacity
in the Pacific is not really 11 cruiser
equivalents, but it's 38.
If you would put up 23 and 24,
please.
MR. YELLIN: 23 and 24 are
summary charts for the East Coast Naval bases,
and they are for consideration of Naval
Station Pascagoula, Naval Station Ingleside as
alternatives to the closure and reatigrment of
the other East Coast Naval stations.
COR CRUZE: On the left on the
screens, on chart 23, are all those on the
East Coast which are recommended for closure
or realigrnment. On your right are those which
the commissioners have given us as candidates
for consideration. I won't go through every
Line of these. There are various alternatives
and possibilities which could reduce capacity
and potentially increase average military
value by adding or substituting Pascagoula
and/or Ingleside.
For example, I would note that
the miIi tary value of Pascagoula and Mobilte
are almost ident:ical, as is the berthing
capacity. I would also note that the military
value of Newprt: is higher than both of those,
with almost the sanie capacity. And, in
addition, that Charleston could clearly, at
least in capaci ty, accomodte both Inglesie
and Pascagoul a.
And those are the real main
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This document can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Matching Search Results
View 10 places within this document that match your search.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 Legal Document.
United States. Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission. 1995 Army Team Lead Desk Material - Adds to List Hearing, May 21, 1993, legal document, February 17, 2006; (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc25520/m1/55/?q=food+rule+for+unt+students: accessed July 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.