When did Navy philosophy change to dispersal from consolidation?

by C. Grigsby Scifres

Recently, the United States Navy released a Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the homeporting of additional ships, including a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, at the Mayport Naval Station in Mayport, Florida. This EIS indicates that the preferred alternative is to homeport a nuclear carrier in Mayport, Florida. If implemented, this recommendation poses a serious economic threat to Hampton Roads.

If a nuclear carrier is moved to Mayport, Florida, then the job losses in Hampton Roads will exceed 11,000 and the annual economic loss will exceed $650 million (some estimates take this up to $1 billion annually).

Our Commonwealth’s federal, state and municipal elected officials will have an early opportunity to work together as one to fight against the regional loss of an aircraft carrier to Mayport. Virginia’s Senators and Representatives need to vigorously debate their colleagues on the merits of Secretary of the Navy Donald Winter’s announced preference for a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier in Mayport, Florida. Governor Kaine should utilize his relationship with the Obama administration to counter the influence wielded by Florida with the Bush administration.

Among the questions that should surface in the debate are:

• how does the required $500+ million infrastructure expenditure measure up against other Navy budget priorities, particularly in the face of the economic challenges facing our government and the nation;
  
  
• how does shifting an aircraft carrier to Mayport reduce security demands on the fleet;
  
  
• why did the maintenance inspections of the conventional aircraft carrier JFK (formerly homeported in Mayport) fare poorly;
  
  
• what is the quality of the public school system in Mayport;
  
  
• when did the Navy change its philosophy to dispersal from consolidation;
  
  
• how much will the entire move actually cost;
  
  
• how rare is it that several aircraft carriers are in port at the same time;
  
  
• what will be the impact on moving thousands of people and housing a crew in geographic limbo for five years; and
  
  
• is it good policy to impose the hardships on Navy families that will come when a Mayport-based nuclear carrier and crew has to come back to Hampton Roads for major overhauls (Mayport lacks the capability to perform such overhauls on a nuclear carrier) lasting 6-12 months at a time?

The announced preference to create a second East Coast homeport for a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier in Mayport, Florida is not supported by operational necessity, nor is it grounded in economic realities. The Navy identified $4.6 billion in unfunded budget requirements in FY2009 for important infrastructure improvements to facilities such as the four public shipyards and Naval Station Norfolk. The taxpayers of these United States cannot afford unnecessary redundancy in facilities or personnel.

A recent headline in the Jacksonville newspaper read “Our Ship Has Come In.” The obvious target is the soon to be commissioned USS GHW Bush CVN-77.

We can not discount the enormity of the impact that this “political” decision will have on our lives in Hampton Roads and on the lives of the men and women who serve our country in the greatest Navy in the world. In many ways, this political decision (not based on economic or military strategic imperatives) is being imposed on the backs of sailors and their families.

We must now have faith in our elected leadership to arrive at a decision that puts the interest of the Nation first and best supports our sailors and the mission of the United States Navy.


C. Grigsby Scifres is a partner in the law firm of Williams Mullen and Chair of the Hampton Roads Chamber of Commerce. A version of this article appeared as an Op-Ed in the Daily Press and the Virginian-Pilot.