Legislature(2011 - 2012)CAPITOL 120
04/11/2012 08:00 AM House MILITARY & VETERANS' AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SJR20 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SJR 20 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SJR 20-RELOCATION OF 18TH F-16 SQUADRON
8:10:24 AM
CO-CHAIR THOMPSON announced that the only order of business
would be SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 20, Relating to Eielson Air
Force Base and the strategic importance of retaining the 18th F-
16 Aggressor Squadron in the Fairbanks North Star Borough.
8:11:03 AM
ANNA SORENSEN, Staff, Senator Joe Paskvan, Alaska State
Legislature, presented SJR 20 on behalf of the Senate State
Affairs Standing Committee, sponsor, on which Senator Paskvan is
Vice Chair. She paraphrased the sponsor statement, which read
as follows [original punctuation provided]:
The United States Air Force has recommended the
relocation of the 18th F-16 Aggressor Squadron from
Eielson Air Force Base located in Interior Alaska.
Senator Paskvan, along with countless other Alaskans,
believe [sic] that this is wrong.
This move will have dramatic impact on the Fairbanks
and Interior Alaska economies, and will reduce the
operational capabilities at Eielson, making it
vulnerable in future [Defense Base Realignment and
Closure Act (BRAC)] rounds. This is detrimental to
our entire state. The benefits and strategic
importance of Eielson AFB now and into the future far
outweigh any negligible savings achieved by the
transfer of the F-16 squadron.
Eielson is at the forefront of protecting the United
States interests in the Pacific Theater and serves a
critical function in reinforcing the region. It helps
to secure important oil infrastructure, including the
Trans-Alaska Pipeline and the refineries located in
Interior Alaska. The Trans-Alaska Pipeline supplies a
significant portion of our nation's energy needs.
Eielson AFB also has adjacent access to the largest
joint air and land training range and the largest
unrestricted airspace in the United States. This area
has minimal airspace congestion and is well-suited to
perform operations for live-fire exercises and
unmanned vehicles that are critical to 21st century
combat capabilities.
Further, Eielson has a large fuel storage capability
and a runway capable of handling the armed forces'
largest aircraft year around. Movement of the 18th F-
16 Aggressor Squadron puts Eielson AFB at risk. This
base has served America's interests for decades and
because of its location, should continue to serve
America's interests. The base has access to unique
training grounds, fuel storage, ample housing for
servicemen and women and their families, and provides
critical support for joint training exercises. During
the 2005 base closure and realignment rounds the
strategic and economic importance of Eielson was
proved. Just as the community-at-large, elected
officials, retired military personnel, and business
leaders spoke in support of Eielson seven years ago,
this resolution seeks to remind the President and the
Air Force that the F-16s should stay at Eielson AFB.
8:14:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLER recalled the Pentagon, U.S. Department of
Defense (DoD), was requested to provide actual economic numbers
regarding the amount of savings expected from the relocation,
and he asked whether that information has been received.
MS. SORENSEN related her understanding that it has been
difficult to obtain information from the U. S. Air Force ("Air
Force") regarding the decision it is making. At this time,
there is a decision-making group visiting Eielson AFB and Fort
Richardson that is collecting information for analysis.
8:15:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN noted that the Air Force is alleging the
move is to save money, and he questioned the basis for this. He
asked how moving the F-16s to Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson
(JBER) from Eielson AFB would save money.
MS. SORENSEN said part of her concern is that there would only
be minimal savings at best, because there is less adequate
housing for families at JBER. In addition, there would be the
need to regularly transport all of the F-16s back to Fairbanks
for training, which is quite expensive. She related that the
Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB) and Senator Paskvan do not
believe there would be any savings.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN surmised returning to Eielson AFB for
missions - considering the price of jet fuel - would be pretty
expensive.
MS. SORENSEN said yes.
8:16:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER expressed his support of the base and the
value of the F-16 squadron and its mission. In fact, the
legislature has taken steps in support of all the bases in the
state. He said he supported the intent of the resolution and
asked why it is important to have a specific resolution for
Eielson AFB.
MS. SORENSEN explained that because a decision-making group will
soon visit Eielson AFB, the sponsor felt it was important to
show specific support for the base as it "seems to be their
target at this point."
8:18:05 AM
LUKE HOPKINS, Mayor, FNSB, stated that Fairbanks has a group of
citizens - which includes staff from the Alaska Congressional
Delegation - who question the validity of the proposed move of
the F-16s in terms of the cost savings. His experience during
base reallocation and closure (BRAC) proceedings in 2005 was
that work by the community brought forward different numbers in
cost savings and operational expenses than were presented by the
BRAC commission. Mr. Hopkins said issues raised by the
community have not been adequately apprised and cost estimates
from officials have not been released. Although it is unclear,
Mr. Hopkins warned there may be intent "to BRAC" Eielson AFB in
2013, even though its location holds geographical strategic
importance in the new Pacific/Asia defense strategy. He advised
that the Fairbanks group will continue to ask questions and work
with the congressional delegation, acknowledging budget
concerns, but questioning the savings from moving the F-16
training squadron to Anchorage. Mr. Hopkins urged the passage
of SJR 20 as fast as possible.
8:21:36 AM
CO-CHAIR THOMPSON, upon determining no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony.
CO-CHAIR THOMPSON observed that the proposal is also devastating
to the military families of the 1,500 active military members
who would be moved to JBER; for example, there is not enough
housing. In addition, he estimated between 200 and 300 of the
transferred military families own homes in Fairbanks and the
sales of these homes will cause prices to plummet. He pointed
out that - unlike the circumstances during a BRAC transfer - the
federal government will not purchase the mortgages of families
who are transferred.
8:22:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER moved to report SJR 20 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal
notes. There being no objection, SJR 20 was reported out of the
House Special Committee on Military and Veterans' Affairs.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|