Mat-Su: Leave F-16s at Eielson

PALMER — Nearly everyone who spoke during a public hearing Monday opposed an Air Force proposal to relocate the 18th Aggressor Squadron from Eielson Air Force Base in Fairbanks to Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage.

Although Air Force Col. Steven Basham explained how the plan would save hundreds of millions in tax dollars and would maintain the “mission effectiveness of Air Force bases in Alaska,” public testimony largely favored leaving the 21 F-16s, their pilots and support crews at Eielson.

Basham said consolidating three squadrons of fighters — two F-22 squadrons and one F-16 squadron — under the 3rd Wing at JBER would save taxpayers an estimated $227 million over five years.

About 35 people, including Air Force personnel, attended the public hearing July 15 at Hoskins Hall on the Alaska State Fairgrounds, one of four around the state this week. The hearings are required as part of the approval process for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Air Force proposal.

Of the six people who spoke during the public comment portion of the hearing, only Chris Gates of Palmer said that he would support the re-location of the F-16s.

First, he said he’d like to see a detailed cost analysis of the direct and indirect impacts. He said the Air Force also should pledge to use the best available technology to mitigate noise and other harms expected, and review the mitigations every five years to see if they can be improved.

As for why he’d support the move, Gates said living in the United States comes with an implied social contract with government.

“We will pay you your taxes, but in return you will not spend one more dollar than it takes to get the job done,” he said.

That said, if a detailed analysis shows the plan would save taxpayers, the Air Force should pursue the savings, Gates said.

“If you can fulfill your mission and save a quarter of a billion dollars, I think that’s the social contract you made,” he said.

The proposal

Hearing officer Col. Mark Allred said the proposal would reduce defense spending, while maintaining the mission effectiveness of Alaska’s Air Force bases. The Air Force plan considers three alternatives.

Under Alternative A, crews would deploy to Eielson for 12 weeks a year to conduct major flying exercises.

Using Alternative B, the F-16s would not deploy to Eielson for training and major flying exercises would use “air refueling tanker aircraft to support the F-16 participation in the flying exercises.”

And Alternative C, the no-action option, would maintain the status quo.

Allred said there the plan is divided into two years. During the first year, 542 people would be transferred to JBER, and during year two, 749 military and 179 civilian positions at Eielson would be eliminated.

Eielson would retain 559 military and 210 civilian staff members, sufficient to maintain base operations, Allred said.

With fewer staff and a changed mission, the proposal would demolish or reuse 17 Eielson facilities.

Allen Richmond, who is leading this draft EIS process, said the hearings had been postponed to allow more time for public comment. He said more than 1,500 comments were received during the scoping process. This week’s public hearings were in the same communities where scoping meetings were earlier on the plan, Richmond said.

“The hearings are to gather public comments to help the Secretary of the Air Force make the most informed decision,” he said.

Comment period ends on the draft EIS on Aug. 2 and the final EIS is anticipated to be released in October.

But while the Air Force considers this plan, it also has a proposal on the table to relocate an unmanned aerial vehicle flying mission to Eielson. That chance could reduce staff reductions at Eielson by 10 percent, Richmond said. And another plan considers moving the F-35s to Eielson, he said.

Local impacts

If the F-16s, pilots and support crews are relocated to Anchorage, the draft EIS says up to 150 personnel and their families may need to seek housing outside the Anchorage area, Allred said.

During the public comment portion of the hearing, each speaker was allowed three minutes to share views on the plan. In the audience Monday night were Mat-Su Borough Mayor Larry DeVilbiss, Borough Manager John Moosey and Assemblyman Noel Woods, along with representatives from U.S. Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Mark Begich’s offices.

DeVilbiss said the borough hasn’t taken an official position on the plan, but the borough would welcome these new neighbors, if they arrive, he said.

“If the day comes, we will welcome you with open arms,” DeVilbiss said.

The borough mayor said the Valley already is home to thousands of people who commute to work in Anchorage as military or civilian personnel.

But first to put his views on the record at the mic Monday was Nathan Burgerbest from Sen. Murkowski’s staff. He said the senator planned to present her oral comments at the meeting in Fairbanks on Wednesday, but supports Alternative C — as does the rest of Alaska’s Congressional delegation.

He said the proposal doesn’t shift resources from the Interior to Southcentral. Rather, he said the proposal represents a net loss to Alaska.

Burgerbest said the Pacific Air Force Command has options for how it makes the required reductions. He said the Air Force should instead look for assets to cut that are less valuable to the state and nation than Eielson.

He said the rest of the story is that the Air Force was told in February 2012 that it had to reduce costs.

“You can get anywhere in the world quickly from Eielson,” he said.

At the state level, Tom Katkus of the Division of Military and Veterans Affairs said support is also behind the no-action alternative. Rather than relocate the F-16s, he said he’d rather see the F-35s and F-16s stationed at Eielson, which would set up perfectly for stealth on stealth training exercises.

For Anchorage resident Bill Bassett, the lessons of history advise against the planes from Eielson to JBER. He said we learned at Pearl Harbor the dangers of placing all of our planes at the same base.

“All of our planes were in one bomb pit,” he said.

Instead, Bassett suggested cuts at bases in England, Germany and Japan.

Send written comments to: Allen Richmond, AFCEC/CZN, 2261 Hughes Ave., Ste. 155, Lackland AFB, TX 78236-9853, or online at alaskaf-16eis.com.

For more information, call (210) 395-8555.