1995 Army Team Lead Desk Material - Adds to List Hearing, May 21, 1993 Page: 65 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:
62
21
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
35
36
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
67
68
~69was proposed by the City of Philadelphia and
received same interest from the comissionrs,
the Ships Parts Control Center would move from
Central Permylvania to Philtadelphia.
I should point out that that
will not empty out the SPCC compound since,
although it's the host, it only occupies about
5 to 10 percent of the space on that compound.
The Defense Logistics Agency would then become
the primary tenant and, perhaps, the host at
that compound.
Naval Supply System Comrnd
would move from Crystal City to the
Phi tadelphia compo , and Defense Persornel
Support Center would move from South Philly to
North PhiLly. With the addition of movement
of several tenants, this would empty the South
Philty compound and would create the savings
associated with that move. It would also
involve the move of about three to three and-
a-ha lf thousand people, about four and-a-haltf
thousand people, probably fewer than would
move wnder the DOD scenario.
COMMISSIONER MCPHERSON: Let
me just get that straight again. Mumber 33
says that the current -- well, it doesn't say.
No, that's not apples and apples.
How many people are in ASO?
MR. EPSTEIN: ASO has about
2,000 people right now. SPCC is somewhat
Larger.
COMMISSIONER MCPHERSON: So
the Mechanicsburg one is somewhat Larger?
MR. EPSTEIN: Definitely.Yes, sir.
bit aboutI would Like to talk a Little
COMMISSIONER MCPHERSON: These
are civilians we're talking about?
MR. EPSTEIN: Yes, sir. Both
of these organizations only have about 50
military personnel.
I would like to talk a Little
bit about the comparisons on chart 33 between
the two organizations. And I emlphasize,
neither one is being recommended for
disestablishment in the sense that their jobs
are going to rain; it's just the question of
where they end up.
Some of you heard Admiral
Eckelberger, retired, talk about the impact on
the Defense Management Review. And he pointed
out that, under the OMR, both of the inventory
control points are responsible for achieving
certain savings. And he suggested that
approximately $1.8 billion of ASO's goals of
reducing inventory would be threatened by the
people at ASO concentrating on the move and
the disruption of their lives. And the
corresponding figure for SPCC would be about
$800 million.
idhether or not that's the case
is sort of subjective. But Admiral
Eckteberger would suggest that the costs of
the move is far outshadowed by the potential
impact on the OMR savings.
With regard to military value,
you see a difference. The Commniity andAviation Supply Office in Philadelphia said
that the primary reason for the difference is
because the criteria that were used in
calculating military value were heavily
weighted towards SPCC's mission and also
because SPCC got credit for having a rail head
and a Lot of expendability capabilities that
ICP and ASO in Philadelphia said is not
relevant to their mission at all.
There are certain ties of the
two ICPs. ASO has a very strong tie to
NAVIAR; SPCC's ties to NAVSEA are somewhat
weaker.
Under the discussion of
commands which must move, I would point out
that, except for DPSC, they're all tenants at
ASO. I say DPSC would "have to move," because
it's probably just a Logical thing that would
occur, not because there's any requirement.
The others are all tenants of ASO.
The approximately $72.3
milLion is part of a proposed group move that
involves the Navy Food Service System Office
and a couple of other C: ards and NAVSUS.
And the annual savings, the $16 million, is
part of an estimated 20 million an ual
savings. And the total net present value
estimated savings is about $80 million.
One of the other differences
is that ASO is a very significant minority
emptoyer with about 26 percent of its
workforce being minority, as opposed to
SPCC's, which is about 2 to 3 percent. As you
know, Philadelphia has already been hit pretty
hard by previous sub RAC action, and that
amounted to about 7,200 jobs.
COMMISSIONER STUART: Could I
interrupt for a minute?
MR. YELLIM: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER STUART: Alex,
put this in a larger sense for us. You know,
we have got a lot of information indicating we
have got excess depot capacity.
MR. YELLIN: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER STUART: Is this
the Navy's part of this excess that we have
got to take a look at, and how is the private
commercial world factored into this analysis?
MR. YELLIN: The people that
are at these locations are office workers.
They do what's catted "inventory control,"
which is a supply function that controls the
procurement and the control of materials
bought for, basically, the Navy.
And so this is not necessarily
an excess category, other than, if you look at
this whole area --
COMMISSIONER STUART: Are
there interservice aspects to this that have
been cons idered?
MqR. EPSTE IN: Defense
Logistics Agency has taken a lot of the comlon
use item that are used by allt the services
admanages those centrally.
COMMI SSIONER STUART: You' re
talking about Naval facilities, rather than
CIA facilities; is that correct?
MR. YELLIN: These two groups
have basically control over materials that are
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/m1/65/?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.