1995 Army Team Lead Desk Material - Adds to List Hearing, May 21, 1993 Page: 69 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:
66
2
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
W~67
ii 68
69Chairman, if you'll entertain a motion, I move
that the Comission consider NESEC Portsmouth,
Virginia, -s a proposed addition to the
Secretary's List for closure or reaLigrmant.
GEM JOHNSON: Second.
CHAIRMAN COURTER: The motion
has been seconded. Any discussion?
(No response. )
CHAIRMAN COURTER: We'll start
with Peter Boan.
COMIC SS IONER SIMAN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COX: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MCPHERSON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CWRTER: Aye.
GEM JOHNSON: Aye.
COMMISSIONER BYRON: Aye.
COMISSIONER STUART: Aye.
MS. CHESTON: On the motion
that the Commission consider NESEC, N-E-S-E-C,
Portsmouth, Virginia, as a proposed addition
to the Secretary's List of military
installations recommne for closure or
reallgrment, the vote is seven in favor, zero
against; the motion passes.
MR. YELLIN: Now, 1 would Like
to go to the Reserve air stations, 41 and 42.
Michele Sisak will soon be
sitting on my Left, and she is our analyst for
Reserve air and Reserve surface facilities.
The Navy is proposing the
closure of and realignments of a numer of
Reserve air facilities: Glenview, Illinois;
South Weymouth, Massachusetts; Dallas, Texas;
Detroit, Michigan; and the movement of Reserve
air out of Memphis.
If you can put up 43 along
with 42.
The proposal here involves the
closure of Naval Air Facility Johnstown,
Pennsylvania, and Naval Air Facility
Martinsburg, West Virginia, as alternatives to
the closures of Glenview and South Weymouth.
These two fac lit ies, Johnstown and
Martinsburg, are facilities that are currently
under construction.
The two air stations that I
mentioned that are on the list for closure,
Glenview and South Weymouth, during our base
visits, both expressed the concern that, with
the construction of new capacity in the
category at a time when significant reductions
in capacity were being requested by the
Defense Department in order to reduce excess
capacity and that one of the concerns of all
of us in Looking at both the air Reserve and
the surface Reserve is the issue of relocation
of units and the resultant impact on their
ability to do their mission because of
potential staffing problems, because,
typically, Reservists are only abLe to fill
positions in an area that is a reasonable
distance from their home. So those are
concerns that we have related to the Reserve
air stations.
would like Michele to
discuss a few of the issues that are shown on
our chart. In fact, put Lp 4,3 and 4 along
wi th that, please.MS. SISAK: Mr. Chairman and
cammissioners, what these two charts represent
are a comparison of the stations that are on
DOD's list for closure and realigrment and
also the two ccommrity proposals for Johnstown
and Mart i nsbxr!;.
At the present time, Johnstown
and Martinsburg are National Guard facilities,
and the inclusion of air assets at those
facilities wilL require the construction
Listed in the bottom block. The major issues
are those that were reviewed by the Navy and
also deemed as those issues that would impact
on moving Reserve air assets.
The military value
calculations are those that the Navy
determined, and the greatest weight was placed
on the questions dealing with flight training
and air space. That was a!proximately 50
percent of the value. So the numbers there
are the Navy's numbers.
The unit manning ties directly
to demographics, and, as you can see, the
nuaters there would indicate overall Reserve
manning, as opposed to the ratio of active
duty to Reservists and a Reserve squadron is
approximately cre active duty person for three
Reserve individuals. The nurters there are
the Reserve marking.
Proximity to the military
operating areas, the military training routes,
and the ranges are taken primarily from the
date calls, and in those data calls that did
not have a nutmer listed, we used the
available charts to determine the distance to
the closest MOA/MTR range.
I might preface that with not
all of those ranges, military operating areas
and training areas are used by the stations
identified.
Encroachment concerns, this
block deals primarily with the air issue, as
opposed to the land issue, because of the
excess capacity at the stations concerned.
And it's an area that we're still studying at
this point. But the information on the chart
is taken directly from the data calls.
The waique capabilities
primarily deal with training assets that are
available at a :single station or whether or
not joint operations are available because of
other units, either as hosts or tenants on the
same base. And, again, weather impact listed
there from the data calls, and then the total
one-time costs are taken out of the DOD
recommendations and the Navy analysis.
In the cases of Johnstown and
Martinsburg, we did not have data available,
and the operating costs were taken from the
data call as a comprison.
MR. YELLIN: Onae thing I want
to note here, art the Naval Air Facility in
Meqphis, the very large one-time costs, that
is for the realigrtet that incLudes moving
the training down to Pensacola. So the balk
of those costs are for that, and we were
unable to have a spl it-out of those costs,
because it's a single scenario which moved the
air mission and the training out that we had.
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/m1/69/?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.