Joint Warfighting Conference

The United States Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM) bloggers share their coverage of the Joint Warfighting Conference held May 12-14, 2009 at the Virginia Beach Convention Center. They "twittered" and they "live-blogged" for a truly enhanced social media experience. Click on the blog post titles to visit their blog at USJFCOMLive:

Deputy secretary speaks at Joint Warfighting Conference
Posted by Gregg Your on May 14, 2009
Deputy Secretary of Defense William J. Lynn shared his thoughts on today’s joint force and the future of the department to close the three-day Joint Warfighting Conference organized by USJFCOM, NDIA, the U.S. Naval Institute and AFCEA.

One key quote really reflected the whole conference’s theme.

We need a truly joint force capable of confronting the full spectrum of threats. This budget has the means to back them up. We reaffirmed our commitment to joint force, not only in the way we fight, but in the way we buy. Read more.


How USJFCOM executes the mission of building the joint force
Posted by susydodson on May 14, 2009
This is the last day and my last blog at the Joint Warfighting Conference in Virginia Beach, Va. I have been listening to Craig Wilson, USJFCOM’s Strategy and Policy Directorate, chief of staff, address the Joint Operating Environment (JOE) and the Capstone Concept for Joint Operations (CCJO) and USJFCOM strategic themes. His closing remarks are focused on how USJFCOM is executing the mission of building the joint force to best meet the demands of the future security environment.

Wilson said USJFCOM’s execution to meet this mission set begins with the authoring or informing on doctrines like the JOE and CCJO that articulate both the demand signal and solutions to operate in the future.

He goes on to highlight other areas of what USJFCOM’s doing.

• Rigorous experimentation to support the development of future warfighting capabilities.
• Creating vision statements such as the IW and C2 vision statements that aid not only USJFCOM but all of DoD [Department of Defense].
• Working rapidly to inject operational lessons learned from the battlefield back into the fights we’re in.
• Conducting mission rehearsal exercises for forces moving forward and many other exercises in support of our fellow COCOMs.

According to Wilson, this is a snapshot of USJFCOM’s effort to build the joint force.

What a great conference. I enjoyed talking to you!


The CCJO tells the story of the military’s role
Posted by susydodson on May 14, 2009
In our booth at the Joint Warfighting Conference, Wilson talks to how the CCJO describes the joint operations for policy makers.

Wilson said the CCJO provides one means for the chairman to “tell the story of the military’s role as an instrument of national power.”

He went on to say that the CCJO describes the joint force as an instrument of policy, discussing what the joint force brings to national efforts, its fundamental purpose to deter and wage war.

“The joint force must provide options, competencies for political leaders,” Wilson said.

Wilson said the central tenant of the CCJO is that the joint force can generate integrated and adaptive joint operations through interrelated needs.

“Understanding each situation on its own terms, not redefining to conform to some pre-doctrinal solution,” Wilson said. “Integrating and applying some combination of combat, security, relief and reconstruction and engagement to meet the circumstances presented and assessing and modifying as needed.”


Czech Republic officers voice opinion
Posted by nikkicarter on May 14, 2009
While looking for U.S. Joint Forces Command’s business manager, I met up with two Army Czech Republic officers among the various booths. I asked them what they thought of this years Joint Warfighting Conference so far.

Army Lt. Col. Jerry Jancura replied that he found the panels very interesting and informative in topic. He said he is trying to understand the U.S. take on joint warfighting and working with interagency, non-governmental organizatons and the rest of the international community.


A blueprint of how military forces will conduct future operations
Posted by susydodson on May 14, 2009
I’m sitting here listening to Craig Wilson, chief of staff for U.S. Joint Forces Command’s (USJFCOM) Strategy and Policy Directorate, J5 at the USJFCOM booth on the last day of the 2009 Joint Warfighting Conference, discuss the Joint Operating Environment (JOE) and the Capstone Concept for Joint Operations (CCJO).

Wilson said the central mission of the USJFCOM is to develop a blueprint of how military forces will conduct future operations and to test this blueprint in the most realistic and challenging ways possible.

“The first step in developing this blueprint is to understand the terrain upon which our structure is to be built,” Wilson said. “For USJFCOM this terrain is known as the future operating environment.”

Wilson explained the JOE provides a perspective on future trends, shocks, context and implications of future joint force commanders. The Capstone Concept for Joint Operations is the overarching concept for the family of joint concepts, presenting the chairman’s vision of how the future joint force will operate.

“The intent was to create a document that would provide the intellectual foundation for the military professional and for the development of future concepts,” Wilson said. More to follow…


On the floor…
Posted by nikkicarter on May 14, 2009
With the final day of the conference well under way, small groups of people are scattered throughout the convention center exchanging business cards and conversing amongst one another.

I was stopped by a gentleman named Sam Benzacar with the Anatech Electronics, Inc. He told me that he has done multiple conference but this was the first time at the Joint Warfighting Conference, it was a last minute decision but they felt that with the way the tradeshow was going, it was a good decision.

Also I found a very helpful little tid-bit that the U.S. Navy has, a 24/7 assistance center called Global Distance Support Center and it’s available to all branches of the military for ANY problem or topic. Technical and Maintenance, logistics or manpower, training and education or just press “4″ for all others. How great would that have been while deployed?


The importance of global trade
Posted by katrinaparker on May 14, 2009
Senior Vice President for Maritime Services MaerskLine Mr. Stephen Carmel started off the third and final day of the Joint Warfighting Conference with a plenary address. He spoke to the audience about the importance and global impact of trade.

“Trade is frequently cited as a force of peace and as a source of conflict. It is constructive to remember that the cause of World War I and II are routed in the discontinuous transport of information and technology. I feel it is worth exploring where trade and instability intersect. The world is complex now and operated in networks that can be hard to understand. Cyber attacks can seriously hurt military performances, and trading services is universally dependent on the global information system.”

Carmel let the audience know that his remarks are calibrated from his belief that the worlds economy will right itself quickly, but until then, opportunity arises in times of turmoil. He also spoke of the risks associated with import.

“The action and reaction associated with the nature of trade is likely to be non-liner. The U.S. must be more self-sufficient. Keeping a stable market is essential for success.”


SOCOM commander discusses balance
Posted by Gregg Your on May 13, 2009
During a speech at the Joint Warfighting Conference, the commander of U.S. Special Operations Command discussed how balanced warfare reflects how many U.S. special operations forces operate alongside other forces.

“We need to be responsive enough to adjust rapidly to what the enemy throws at us and we need to have the agility to transcend the spectrum of conflict; the ability to do so proactively requires a holistic approach to warfare.” Read more.


Joint capability development
Posted by susydodson on May 13, 2009
It’s just after lunch and I’m sitting in the middle of a standing-room-only Joint Warfighting Conference attendees waiting to hear Maj. Gen. Kevin Kennedy, director for U.S. Joint Forces Command’s (USJFCOM) Joint Capability Development (J8) directorate.

The Joint Capability Development identifies near-and far-term joint, multinational, and interagency capability gaps and works with other combatant commands, the services, coalition partners, and agencies to fill those shortfalls with integrated capabilities.

More to come. Maj. Gen. Kennedy just arrived.


Talking about the JOE and CCJO at the Joint Warfighting Conference
Posted by susydodson on May 13, 2009
I’m listening to Joe Purser give a brief overview of the Joint Operating Environment (JOE) and the Capstone Concept for Joint Operations (CCJO). Purser said the JOE provides context for the future joint force - “the demand signals.”

Purser said the JOE is the problem statement, our understanding of the military in the future.

“It establishes this conceptual framework that we can we go forward … to that place of development and experimentation,” Purser said.

Purser said the 2009 version [JOE] will reflect the new dynamics in the world today, the economic downturn and the global economic situation. The 2009 JOE will be available for download on an open source website within the next 30 to 35 days.

As Purser turned the focus to the CCJO, he said the [CCJO] is the solution for the challenges the JOE …. for the joint force.

He said the CCJO talks in terms of 5 broad national security challenges.

1. win the nation’s wars
2. deter aggression
3. develop cooperative security
4. defend the homeland
5. respond to civil crisis

Gotta run. For more on the implications of the CCJO see you in the next blog!

Salute to the Military on Memorial Day 2009, from The Hampton Roads Flagpole

A weekly compilation of information impacting Hampton Roads military and federal capabilities, from the Hampton Roads Military and Federal Facilities Alliance.


Mullen: Drones Future Stalwart of U.S. Force (DefenseNews.com, May 14, 2009) Unmanned aircraft likely represent the future for U.S. military aviation, with next generation bombers and fighter planes operating without pilots onboard, the top U.S. military officer said. “We’re at a real time of transition here in terms of the future of aviation, and the whole issue of what is going to be manned and what is going to be unmanned,” Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Senate hearing.

Defense Secy. Gates Repeats Support for Mayport Move (Virginian-Pilot, May 15, 2009) Local congressmen trying to halt the Navy’s plan to move an aircraft carrier from Norfolk, Va., to Mayport, Fla., got a reality check on Capitol Hill this week. Although the decision has been postponed, both Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Adm. Gary Roughead, chief of naval operations, made it clear in congressional testimony that they still think the move makes good strategic sense. The Pentagon said last month the issue would be studied as part of its upcoming Quadrennial Defense Review, delaying a final decision until 2011. Local members of Congress celebrated that announcement as a signal that Norfolk might be able to hang on to its five locally based carriers and their associated economic benefits. But this week’s testimony made it clear that top Pentagon officials have not changed their minds about the wisdom of the proposed move.

Navy: F-35 Fighter Jets Needed By 2015 Deadline (WSJ.com, May 14, 2009) The chief of naval operations said that on-time delivery of Lockheed Martin’s next-generation Joint Strike Fighter will be critical in closing the gap of the fighter jets needed to match current and future threats. Adm. Gary Roughead told the House Armed Services Committee that the service’s current fleet of legacy F/A-18s from Boeing is rapidly aging and will need to be replaced quickly. Those jets have seen substantial action supporting forces on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan.

San Antonio To Get AF Cyber Command (San Antonio Express-News, May 15, 2009, Pg. 1) Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio has been selected as the headquarters for a new cyber command, an official close to the process said, bringing an influx of infrastructure, security and 400 staffers. The official announcement was expected today. The headquarters will include the commander’s staff and an operations center that will focus on defending Air Force computers against attack and preventing disruptions.

Marshall, Mattis To Lead QDR 'Red Team' (DefenseNews.com, May 15, 2009) U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced this week he has tapped two prominent defense thinkers to head the team that will challenge the conclusions of the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR).

Mantra at U.S. Navy Budget Hearing: Wait for QDR (DefenseNews.com, May 14, 2009) The Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) due to be sent to Congress in February will answer many of today's questions, senior U.S. Navy and Marine Corps leaders told lawmakers May 14.

Last Manned Aircraft?: (Airforce-Magazine.com, May 18, 2009) Despite eliminating the Air Force's next-generation bomber from the 2010 defense budget, Defense Secretary Robert Gates acknowledged it was his personal view that "we probably do need a follow-on bomber." But he told the Senate Armed Services Committee during May 14 testimony that much had changed since the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review directed USAF to field the NGB by 2018. And, he now believes that the outcome of the new QDR and Nuclear Posture Review may provide different insight on that bomber and will question "whether, for example, the follow-on bomber needs to have a pilot in it." Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, agreed, declaring, "There are those that see the JSF [F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter] as the last manned fighter—or fighter bomber or—or jet, and I'm one that's inclined to believe that." (The Air Force is slated to purchase the last of its 1,763 JSFs in 2034.) Mullen said, "We're at a real time of transition here in terms of the future of aviation, and the whole issue of what's going to be manned and what's going to be unmanned, what's going to be stealthy, what isn't, how do we address these threats … it's changing, even from 2006."

Gates Demands Review of U.S. Service Chiefs’ Wish Lists (DefenseNews.com, May 18, 2009, Pg. 1) Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, who issued a gag order as the 2010 budget request was being prepared, is now inserting himself into a process designed by Congress to promote candid answers from military leaders, raising members’ fears that they are not receiving enough information on defense spending. In April, Gates ordered the service chiefs to brief him on their unfunded requirements lists before they went to Congress. That briefing was set for May 15. “I have no problem with them putting together a list of unfundeds, but the law requires them to inform me about that list before they send it up here,” Gates told the Senate Armed Services Committee on May 14. “What I have tried to do ... is to bring some discipline to a budgetary process that, shall we say, lacked a certain measure of discipline in the past.”

Cash-Strapped Navy Puts Hold on Transfers, Goodwill Visits By Ships $930 Million Funding Backlog May Affect Service’s Readiness (Honolulu Advertiser, May 17, 2009) A cash-strapped Navy has halted 14,000 duty station moves and is reducing by one-third the sailing time of non-deployed ships and cutting back on aviation flight hours and ship visits to U.S. cities to counter a $930 million ship repair and manpower budget shortfall, officials said. That funding backlog is being addressed by Congress; Sen. Daniel K. Inouye, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, on Thursday added $190 million to a defense supplemental bill. The mid-year funds are intended to pay for repairs to the Pearl Harbor-based cruiser Port Royal, which ran aground in February off Honolulu airport, as well as to fix the submarine Hartford and amphibious ship New Orleans following their collision in March in the Strait of Hormuz. Inouye also increased Navy personnel funding by $230 million to address a $350 million manpower-cost shortfall, officials said. The Navy expects to recoup about $89 million with the duty station freeze, the Navy Times reported.

140,000 more feds next year (FederalTimes.com, May 18, 2009) by Stephen Losey
The executive branch will grow to more than 2 million civilian employees for the first time in 15 years, under President Barack Obama’s 2010 budget plan. The growing ranks of government employees reflect the ever-growing responsibilities many agencies are taking on and the different priorities President Obama has from his predecessor: The Defense Department’s workforce will grow by about 19,000 full-time equivalent positions, most of which will come from converting — or “insourcing” — about 13,800 contractor jobs to federal employee jobs. This is the largest staffing increase proposed for next year, aside from Commerce.

No Tricare Fee Hike: (Airforce-Magazine.com, May 18, 2009) The Fiscal 2010 defense budget does not—repeat does not—contain a provision to increase the Tricare fees for retired military personnel, unlike the past three defense budgets in which the Bush Administration tried to raise fees as one means to offset higher healthcare costs.

Housing Relief: (Airforce-Magazine.com, May 18, 2009) The Defense Department has temporarily expanded the Housing Assistance Program with a $555 million boost from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to help military members who have trouble selling their primary residence in the midst of the economic downturn. That means those members at bases undergoing BRAC 2005-directed drawdowns don't have to prove the BRAC action drove the local housing market down.

Congress Will Make Own Shipbuilding Plan: Lawmaker (DefenseNews.com, May 15, 2009) The U.S. Navy's new shipbuilding budget faced a focused round of congressional scrutiny May 15, absent a familiar element: the 30-year fleet plan that generates a central part of the annual debate.

Ex-Gov. Mabus Sworn in as New Navy Secretary (Jackson Clarion-Ledger, May 20, 2009) Former Mississippi Gov. Ray Mabus has been sworn in as the secretary of the Navy, putting him in a key post in the new administration. “He’s going to be a very good choice,” said Loren Thompson, a defense analyst with the Lexington Institute, because Mabus has a close relationship with President Obama and a good understanding of global diplomacy. But it is Mabus’ political skills that will be particularly useful in his new role, Thompson said.

Lawmakers Say Air Force Plane Cuts May Be Too Deep (WashingtonPost.com, May 19, 2009) House lawmakers say the Air Force could end up flat-footed if it carries out plans to end big programs like the C-17 cargo plane and retires fighter jets while waiting for new ones that are still being tested. The Air Force’s roughly $115.6 billion 2010 base budget request includes a significant shift in weapons buying, ending some politically popular but expensive programs like the C-17 and the F-22 fighter plane. It calls for retiring roughly 250 fighter jets on an accelerated schedule in anticipation of building up its fleet of F-35s from Lockheed Martin. But members of the House Armed Services Committee on Tuesday questioned whether that leaves the Air Force with enough planes to perform its mission. They cited other proposed changes, like halving the number of planned C-27 cargo jets and scrapping current plans to build a new long range bomber.

Air Force's "Underfunded" Priorities: (Airforce-Magazine.com, May 18, 2009) The Air Force's wish-list of some 20 additional items not included in its Fiscal 2010 budget request landed on Capitol Hill Monday evening. Noteworthy is the fact that the list adds up to slightly more than $1.9 billion, less than a tenth of last year's $20 billion list of unfunded priorities.

Chambliss: Hill Leaders 'Realize 187 F-22s Is Not Enough' (DefenseNews.com, May 20, 2009) Congressional proponents of more F-22 fighters will aim to put extra money for the stealthy jets in the 2010 U.S. defense appropriations bill, a key senator says.

Lest There Be Any Doubt: (InsideDefense.com, May 20, 2009) During a May 19 House Armed Services Committee budget hearing, several lawmakers questioned Gen. Norton Schwartz, Chief of Staff, about curtailment of F-22 production at only 187 aircraft and insistence by DOD officials that those 187 aircraft met military need. In one instance, Schwartz's response was short and sweet: "Two forty-three is the right number and 187 is the affordable force."

Current QDR Will Push Gates' Reshaping: (Airforce-Magazine.com, May 20, 2009) Irregular warfare and counterinsurgency capabilities not surprisingly are among key focus areas to be scrutinized in the just-commenced Quadrennial Defense Review, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Michele Flournoy told the Defense Writers Group Wednesday morning. Flournoy acknowledged that this QDR will be a "leader driven process" that involves Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn, and other senior leadership. One thing that makes this QDR unique, said Flournoy, is that it is jumping off from an established National Defense Strategy, the one Gates released last year. In fact, she said, there is a "pretty clear consensus internally and interagency" on guidance and priorities and that this QDR will inform program and budget decisions. She added, "This is not some separate process; this is creating a strategic framework to drive that process." Flournoy also acknowledged that the rebalancing Gates started with the Fiscal 2010 budget proposal will move forward under this review. She expects various working groups to complete their work by the end of the summer, making it possible for the QDR insights to help "frame and guide decision making" for the 2011 program objective memorandum.

DoD Official: QDR Will Lead To Further ‘Rebalancing’ of Weapons in FY ‘11 (DefenseDaily.com, May 21, 2009) The Pentagon leadership is “very consciously” moving to implement further program changes in the fiscal year 2011 budget cycle using the latest round of a major weapons portfolio review conducted every four years, a top Defense Department official said. Michele Flournoy, undersecretary of defense for policy, said this year’s Quadrennial Defense Review will have more practical ramifications for the Pentagon’s budget than QDRs of years past have had. “This is not some separate process,” Flournoy told defense reporters. “This is creating the strategic framework that will drive” fiscal 2011 budget priorities.

F-22 Adequate for One, not Two, MCOs: (Airforce-Magazine.com, May 20, 2009) Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.)—the Senate's leading defender of the F-22 program and vocal critic of its cancellation—asked Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz during Thursday's Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the Air Force 2010 budget proposal to characterize the amount of risk inherent with a program-of-record for only 183 Raptors. He asked: "What is the level of risk that we are taking at 183? Is it low, is it moderate, or is it high risk?" Schwartz replied, "I would characterize it as moderate to high." However, he added that his analysis was based on a standard two Major Combat Operations scenario set forth in past Quadrennial Defense Reviews. That two-MCO construct may well get thrown out in the new QDR being orchestrated now by Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Schwartz continued, "There is no question that the program is adequate for one major combat operation."

Musical Chairs: (ShreveportTimes.com, May 22, 2009) According to a report in the Shreveport Times, Gen. William Fraser III, currently serving as the Vice Chief of Staff, is the likely successor to head Air Combat Command when Gen. John Corley retires this summer.

Washington, DC – House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton (D-MO) delivered remarks during House debate on the conference report to S. 454, the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009. The U.S. House of Representatives approved the conference report on a vote of 411 to 0. (House Armed Services Committee website, May 21, 2009) “In the area of policy, we require DOD to balance its desire for cutting edge capabilities with the limits of its resources in setting military requirements. We require competitive acquisition strategies. We require DOD to get programs right in the early stages, when problems can be solved at low cost. We also require DOD to put intense management focus on problem programs until they are either healed, or terminated. We strengthen the Nunn-McCurdy process. And we ask DOD to eliminate or mitigate organizational conflicts of interests among its contractors.”

ISSUE PAPER Outlying Landing Field (OLF): Impacts of A Worst Case Scenario

PURPOSE

To discuss the impacts of a worst case scenario in which an OLF to support Naval Air Station (NAS) Oceana is not located in Virginia or North Carolina.

SUMMARY

The future of NAS Oceana – and to some extent Naval Station Norfolk - is strategically, operationally, and politically tied directly to finding an OLF that meets the Navy’s requirements. Should Navy decision makers not have the benefit of politically and operationally viable sites that meet their mission requirements, they could find themselves in a ‘checkmate’ situation, with no long range alternative other than to find a new east coast master jet base.

Once this situation develops, the ability of the Virginia congressional delegation, the Commonwealth, and the Hampton Roads region to prevent the loss of an aircraft carrier to another homeport and the loss of other capabilities will be seriously hampered – if not fatally neutralized. This IS the worst case scenario.

BACKGROUND

An OLF to augment existing carrier landing practice capabilities at NAS Oceana and Naval Auxiliary Landing Field (NALF) Fentress is required to provide the operational robustness necessary to NAS Oceana’s ability to accomplish its mission.

Strong, well-organized public opposition and the eventual political collapse of the Navy’s preferred OLF site (Site C) in Washington County, North Carolina, changed the dynamics of the OLF identification process, allowing the Commonwealth of Virginia to explore opportunities within the state. North Carolina officials began a parallel process and have offered alternative sites, but there is no indication that a solution exists in North Carolina. At least one of these sites is further south than Site C, extending the distance between the OLF and NAS Oceana which makes it less operationally suitable.

The Navy must soon make a decision regarding the OLF situation. That decision will be based on the results of the alternative site identification processes conducted by Virginia and North Carolina, and the existing environmental impact statement (EIS) that resulted in the earlier selection of Site C. There is a chance that the Navy may re-evaluate the original OLF sites in North Carolina should viable alternatives not be found in Virginia or North Carolina, however there is a low likelihood of this possibility. A Herculean effort would be required to pursue this course of action.

DISCUSSION

For the Commonwealth of Virginia the worst case scenario is a failure to identify any politically suitable, operationally viable OLF sites in Virginia or in North Carolina, thereby providing an incentive to the Navy to move aircraft to other locations. In this worst case scenario, the Navy will be driven by necessity to seriously examine the future viability of NAS Oceana as the east coast master jet base if it cannot meet mission requirements. This opens the door to political suitors to invigorate their efforts to attract the Navy away from NAS Oceana (NAS Kingsville, TX; NAS Pensacola, FL; Moody Air Force Base, Valdosta, GA; etc.) and establish a new east coast master jet base.

Further, there is an undisputed relationship between carrier aircraft basing and aircraft carrier homeporting; proximity is preferred.

The following considerations are germane:

• While the cost of constructing a new master jet base from scratch with an adequate OLF nearby is on the order of $1.8 billion, the relocation to an existing base – particularly one with a welcoming political and public environment – is less expensive. State or local incentives could make such a move even more attractive to the Navy.
  
  
• While Fleet Forces Command (FFC) has stated that the immediate challenge is an OLF to support NAS Oceana, it is not unreasonable to believe that a more strategic, longer-term view has long considered the idea of establishing a new master jet base to replace NAS Oceana.
  
  
• The newly nominated FFC Commander, Vice Admiral Greenert – assuming he is confirmed – will be the most junior four star in the Navy. He is a submariner whose operational experience is all with the Pacific Fleet and he has no prior affiliation with Hampton Roads.
  
  
• The current Commander Navy Region Mid-Atlantic, Rear Admiral Ruehe retires in October. He is being relieved by Rear Admiral Mark S. Boensel, the current Commander Navy Region Southeast – in whose region many of the potential suitor sites for locating a master jet base exist.
  
  
• The EIS for Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) is likely very problematic for NAS Oceana given current noise and other issues surrounding NAS Oceana. As the Navy integrates JSF into the force it will need to find more suitable operating bases out of necessity.
  
  
• A second law suit seeking $500 million in damages has just been filed regarding the noise at NAS Oceana; earlier this year the Department of Justice settled a similar law suit for $38 million, setting a potential precedent for the success of a new suit. It is questionable whether or not the settlement of the first suit would support the later basing of JSF at Oceana by precluding a subsequent suit.
  
  
• While Virginia and Hampton Roads are represented on both the Senate and House Committees on Armed Services, and they have thus far been aggressive and effective in protecting existing capabilities, potential opponents both outnumber and outrank our congressional delegation. Further, Hampton Roads is not represented on either the Senate or House Committees on Appropriations. Thus, the Virginia congressional delegation’s ability to continue to protect existing capabilities and advocate for new ones becomes more problematic.

CONCLUSION

Failure to find an operationally viable OLF site in Virginia is the seminal point in characterizing the Navy’s future footprint – and economic and cultural impact of that presence – in the Commonwealth of Virginia and the Hampton Roads region. Without an OLF supporting NAS Oceana, the Navy will be pressured to put NAS Oceana on the next Defense Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) list or initiate movement of aircraft to other locations, likely to be accompanied by the relocation of an aircraft carrier. The result will be a dramatically changed military landscape in Hampton Roads in the next 5 to 10 years.

Author: Frank Roberts, Executive Director of the Hampton Roads Military and Federal Facilities Alliance (HRMFFA) whose mission is to proactively protect, preserve and grow military and federal capabilities in Hampton Roads for the common good and welfare of the residents of the Hampton Roads. Through regional advocacy and influence the Alliance acts to retain and attract organizations, capabilities, and investments owned, operated or funded by the Federal government.

NOTE: The original date of this paper is Oct 2007. RADM Boensel has been Navy Mid-Atlantic Commander since Nov 2007. VADM Greenert has been Commander of U.S. Fleet Forces Command since Sep 2007 and is off to become the new Vice Chief of Naval Operations (VCNO), the second highest ranking officer in the United States Navy, this summer.

May is Military Appreciation Month

Governor Tim Kaine has declared May as “Military Appreciation Month” in Virginia and is encouraging all citizens of the Commonwealth to join in recognizing the contributions and sacrifices made by Virginia-based military personnel and their families.

“We’re proud of these men and women and their dedication to the defense of our nation and the Commonwealth” said Governor Kaine. “Virginia has a long and distinguished relationship with the military, and we will continue to provide resources, support and gratitude for our service members and defense partners as they perform their missions.”


Virginia is home to more than 206,000 active military and civilian defense personnel, the most of any state, as well as more than 35,000 members of the Reserves or National Guard. In addition to the highest concentration of defense personnel, Virginia is home to dozens of prominent defense installations, including the Defense Department (DoD)’s headquarters at the Pentagon, Marine Corps Base at Quantico, Langley Air Force Base, the Army’s Fort Lee and the Naval Station in Norfolk.

The Defense Department has proven to be a resilient and steadfast part of the Virginia economy, investing more than $46 billion a year in the Commonwealth – second only to California – and employing nearly 6% of the state’s workforce.

Hampton Roads is home to 59% of Virginia's DoD employees and nearly $15 billion impact in expenditures.

In 2005 the General Assembly created the Virginia National Defense Industrial Authority to work hand-in-hand with base commanders and community leaders on behalf of the state, administer grants to communities near installations, and provide strategic counsel to the Commonwealth’s leadership in order to grow the state’s relationship with the military.


The Hampton Roads Military and Federal Facilities Alliance (HRMFFA) was formed in 2006. The mission of HRMFFA is to proactively protect, preserve and grow military and federal capabilities in Hampton Roads for the common good and welfare of the residents of the Hampton Roads. Through regional advocacy and influence the Alliance acts to retain and attract organizations, capabilities, and investments owned, operated or funded by the Federal government.

"May should be Military Recognition Month and every month of the entire year should address appreciation of the military," added Frank Roberts, Executive Director of HRMFFA.

DoD postpones action on carrier homeport from Hampton Roads

Governor Timothy M. Kaine released the following statement on April 9th regarding the Department of Defense’s (DoD) decision to postpone action on the Navy's Record of Decision regarding moving a nuclear aircraft carrier from Hampton Roads and homeporting it in Mayport, FL:

“Today’s decision by the Department of Defense to postpone acting on the Navy's Record of Decision to homeport a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier in Mayport, Florida -- pending a review -- offers some room for optimism among Virginians. Along with other elected and community leaders across the Commonwealth, I remain committed to maintaining Hampton Roads as the East Coast home base for nuclear-powered aircraft carriers.”

DoD decided to delay the decision until it comprehensively reviews the issue during the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review.


U.S. Representatives Rob Wittman and Glenn Nye, along with lawmakers from other states are intensifying their efforts to block moving an aircraft carrier to Mayport FL. Wittman and Nye wrote a letter to the acting Secretary of the Navy B.J. Penn saying they'll oppose any requests for money to move the carrier to Mayport. The letter is signed by 18 representatives including 13 Democrats and five Republicans from Washington, Maryland, Ohio, New York and New Mexico.

Nye and Wittman are working to make this a financial issue rather than a Virginia v. Florida issue. It's a smart strategic move considering the current state of the economy.

Congressman Glenn Nye (VA, 2n District) said: “This is not a Virginia versus Florida issue; this is a question of spending our military dollars wisely at a time when budgets are already stretched thin. Members of Congress from both parties, all across the country, have recognized that it makes no sense to spend a billion dollars to outfit a redundant port facility on the East Coast.

Congressman Rob Wittman (VA, 1st District) said: “I am deeply concerned by the Navy’s decision to shift the homeporting of a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier from Norfolk, VA to Mayport, FL. In fiscal year 2009 the Navy reported unfunded requirements in excess of $4.5B. Building duplicative infrastructure in the current fiscal environment does not make budgetary or strategic sense, especially given the Secretary of Defense’s budget cuts for fiscal year 2010.

Sen. Jim Webb, D-Virginia, said in a statement, "I am gratified that the Department of Defense has formally decided to postpone the major elements of the Navy's proposal until after a proper strategic review has been conducted, as I have consistently urged." "I look forward to reviewing the rest of the proposal - which includes a request for funds to conduct minimal dredging and pier work at Mayport - on its merits, as part of the Fiscal Year 2010 budget process."

Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., struck a similar tone, "This is a promising development for the taxpayers and for the Navy, and I am pleased the Pentagon has agreed with our request to focus on the fiscal and strategic realities of building an extra nuclear carrier facility at Mayport."

Gov. Timothy M. Kaine was more cautious, saying the decision "offers some room for optimism."


Frank Roberts, director of the Hampton Roads Military and Federal Facilities Alliance, said the Navy had more pressing needs than spending $600 million to prepare Mayport Naval Station for a nuclear carrier. "It's definitely the right and appropriate decision," he said. However, Roberts said, "I don't think we're ever safe. We have to be constantly vigilant."

Considering the move as part of next year's quadrennial defense review will delay a decision until at least 2011, he said. This means the Navy will keep its fleet of five operational carriers at Norfolk Naval Station.

The Navy is proceeding with dredging work at Mayport Naval Station, so it can serve as a future homeport or as an emergency location for a carrier. In January, after a 2-1/2-year environmental study, the Navy said that dispersing the East Coast fleet would reduce the risks of a catastrophic attack or natural disaster.

Military-Related Legislation

Learn more about Military-Related Legislation enacted during the 2009 Virginia General Assembly:

• Department of Veterans Services; processing of disability claims.
• Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunity for Military Children.
• Constitutional amendment (first resolution); property tax exemption for certain veterans.
• Department of Veterans Services; burial vaults at state-operated veterans cemeteries.
• Virginia Retirement System; members disabled or killed while in the military.
• Individual income tax; subtraction for Virginia Military Family Relief Fund.
• Income tax; honorably discharged veteran job creation tax credit.
• Special license plates; disabled veterans.
• Homestead exemption; veterans.
• Certain honorary diplomas.
• Public employment; nondiscrimination.
• Motorcycle classifications.

Courtesy of:


For complete details in a downloadable spreadsheet, click here. Click on "Full" to view full screen; click on "Download" to download the presentation to your own computer.

Key Quality of Life Issues Supporting Service Members and Families

Many issues surrounding quality of life and family well-being for military members and their families can only be addressed by states. The USA4 Military Families initiative, working through the Department of Defense-State Liaison Office (DSLO), seeks to engage and educate state policymakers, not-for-profit associations, concerned business interests, and other state leaders about the needs of Military members and their families. By developing state/military partnerships, DoD seeks to work with the states to remove unnecessary barriers, and significantly improve the quality of life for military families.

With estimates of 40-50% of the Hampton Roads economy invested in the defense sector, this is important information to have.

Key Quality of Life Issues Supporting Service Members and Families

1. Increase Key Benefits that Support Guard and Reserve Members and their Families: The high deployment levels of the Guard and Reserve necessitates a reciprocal level of support for the needs of our service members and their families. The desired outcome is that states provide ‘best practices’ support in six areas: support of state employees; educational benefits; tax & financial benefits; family support programs; licensing & registration benefits; and protections, recognition & employment support.

2. Facilitate Assistance to Severely Wounded, Ill or Injured Service Members and their Families: Service members who are severely disabled as a result of wounds, illness or injury, and their families, should receive uninterrupted care – from battlefield to communities – through programs like ‘Heroes to Hometowns,’ which builds the bridges they need to start new and productive lives.

3. Increase Access to Quality, Affordable Childcare for Military Families: The desired outcome is that states will establish or improve Quality Rating Standards (QRS) for childcare programs compatible with DoD effectiveness standards. Through statewide QRSs, DoD can identify providers eligible for ‘preferred’ status (subsidized care) and partner with other providers to help them reach preferred status.

4. Minimize School Disruption for Military Children during Transition and Deployment: The mobile military lifestyle creates challenges for children who attend ~8 schools in 12 years plus endure the anxiety of parental separation during deployments. The desired outcome is that states participate in an interstate compact which provides a vehicle for establishing common guidelines for handling issues (class placement, records transfer, immunization requirements, course placement, graduation requirements, and extra curricular opportunities) that impact military children as they transition between schools.

5. Enhance Opportunities for Portable Careers for Military Spouses: Frequent moves and cumbersome licensing and certification requirements limit career options for military spouses. The desired outcome is that states include military spouses in education & training opportunities, provide alternative certifications, and expedite licensing procedures to support portable careers.

6. Expand Unemployment Compensation for Trailing Military Spouses: The desired outcome is that states recognize that, unlike the private sector, a move mandated by military orders is not ‘voluntary’ and therefore, the trailing spouse should qualify for unemployment compensation.

7. Promote Enforcement of the Predatory Lending Regulation: Some lending practices create a cycle of debt for unsuspecting service members and their families, thus impacting quality of life and military preparedness. The desired outcome is that states sign an MOU with DoD, monitor compliance, enforce the regulation, and obtain authority, where needed, to fully enforce it.

8. Improve Absentee Voting for Military Members and their Families: Citizens need assurance that their vote can be successfully cast and counted while stationed or deployed overseas. The desired outcome is that states authorize flexible processes for absentee voters in the nine areas recommended by the Federal Voting Assistance Program (FVAP) Office.

9. Satisfy Foreign Language Requirements: Foreign language proficiency is critical to the United States’ ability to meet its security and economic objectives. The desired outcome is for states to work with their business and education sectors to develop foreign language roadmaps which meet their requirements as well as assist with meeting strategic national security and economic objectives.

10. Increase Coordination of Local Support Services for Military Families: Since military families and support agencies do not always connect, the desired outcome is that states mobilize military and civilian resources through an integrated team led by the executive branch, such as an Inter-Service Family Assistance Committee, to coordinate services and facilitate easy access to information, services and support for military families.

Mid Atlantic Region Point of Contact:
Julie Gifford, (757) 965-3221, jagifford@cox.net
www.USA4MilitaryFamilies.org

For a downloadable copy, click here; click on "Full" to view full screen; click on "Download" to download the presentation to your own computer.

“Pentagon South” adds another defense supplier in Suffolk

Sparta Composite Products announced they'll be building a $13.2 million plant in Suffolk, Virginia. In association with this new facility, Sparta will be creating approximately 200 new jobs over the next 5 years. The new, high-tech plant will be 67,000 square foot and will be located in the Northgate Commerce Park. The Company also has plans to build an additional 87,000 square foot facility in 5 years.

Sparta is a San Diego-based defense industry supplier and plans to begin hiring this summer for jobs that will pay an average of $43,000 a year.

This region's strengths - the Port of Virginia, the beach, the huge concentration of military installations - are critical to drawing companies here. But, so is the leg work done by local and state economic development teams. Suffolk economic development leaders have been talking to Sparta for at least a year, touting the Virginia Modeling, Analysis and Simulation Center as well as the city's growing cluster of defense contractors - including General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin - all attracted by the adjacent Joint Warfighting Center.

For more on Suffolk's Economic Development work, visit their website: www.YesSuffolk.com

Hampton Roads Highlighted as "Best Region" on East Coast for Defense Jobs

by Tranette Ledford, a free lance journalist and regular contributor to Army Times and other news and defense industry publications. The article was written on behalf of ClearanceJobs.com.

Metropolitan Washington, D.C. serves as the proverbial home base for defense jobs. But, with the private sector, research labs, universities, and government contractors factored in, the playing field gets even bigger all the time. Opportunities extend throughout Northern Virginia's suburbs and down about a three hour drive to the Hampton Roads area.

Southeast Virginia
When it comes to security clearances and the job market, all roads lead to Hampton Roads — and extend outward like spokes along Virginia's southeast coast line. Cleared candidates looking for second careers may want to learn more about ‘Pentagon South,' the moniker for the growing hub of military installations and related businesses. The job market runs from Williamsburg through to Virginia Beach. All told, Southeast Virginia is seeing large growth of security clearance job opportunities.

"In June, the Small Business Administration ranked the Hampton Roads region number one for the highest percentage of high impact firms," said Missy Schmidt, marketing director, Defense and Homeland Security Consortium. "Next to D.C., we have the highest concentration of defense and homeland security jobs. Our ports provide a huge ship-building business and they continually hire security-cleared personnel, from welders to maintenance to supervisors.

"Southeast Virginia is arguably the ship-building capital of the USA, so jobs in the area follow suit. We see an ongoing need for systems engineers with naval backgrounds, welders, radar and IR techs and a host of IT jobs. There are requirements for security guards, training staff and plenty of contract administrators and proposal writers in Norfolk and the surrounding area." – Evan Lesser, Director, ClearanceJobs.com

With several dozen military facilities in the region, cities like Suffolk are welcoming some major players. Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics both have operations due to Suffolk's strategic proximity to U.S. Joint Forces Command.

"The growth is non-stop," said Schmidt. "This is a great place to work and a great place to live. We've got everything from the opera to monster truck shows. It's also affordable."

With a whopping three quarters of the area's growth based on defense contracts, transitioning service members with an active clearance have tremendous job prospects. Looking for a region where defense and homeland security permeates daily life? Then Hampton Roads and the surrounding areas are ready for you.

For the complete Gazelles Report, click HERE.

First Littoral Combat Ship Produced by Lockheed Martin

The littoral combat ship USS Freedom (LCS 1) arrives in Norfolk, Virginia, Dec. 15, 2008, after traveling for more than one month through the Great Lakes, Eastern Canada and the Northeast following its commissioning ceremony in Milwaukee, Wis. Freedom, the first littoral combat ship produced by Lockheed Martin, will undergo post-delivery tests and sea trials in Norfolk before transiting to its final homeport of San Diego, Calif., in early 2010.

(DoD photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Apprentice Joshua Adam Nuzzo, U.S. Navy/Released, VIRIN: 081215-N-4515N-158)

Commissioning at Northrop Grumman Newport News

Nearly 1,700 guests and crewmembers attend the commissioning ceremony of the Virginia-class attack submarine USS New Mexico (SSN 779) at Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding in Newport News, Va., Dec. 13, 2008. Cindy Giambastiani, the wife of retired U.S. Navy Adm. Edmund P. Giambastiani and the vessel’s sponsor, christened the submarine during the ceremony.

(DoD photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Todd A. Schaffer, U.S. Navy/Released, VIRIN: 081213-N-7705S-045)

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.

Carrier Debate: Economic and Strategic, Mayport v. Norfolk Naval Station

Frank Roberts, Executive Director of Hampton Roads Military and Federal Facilities Alliance (HRMFFA), provided a summary of key events and actions related to the potential loss of a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier from Norfolk Naval Station to Mayport:

Letter to President-Elect:
Read the joint letter from Representatives Wittman, Drake, Scott, Forbes and Representative-Elect Nye to President-Elect Obama spearheaded by Rep Forbes.

Letter to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates:
Read the joint letter from U.S. Senators John Warner and Jim Webb.

Mayport Impact Analysis Meeting:
Join HRMFFA on Monday, November 24th, from 1 – 2:30 PM in the ballroom at the Residence Inn at 1590 North Military Highway in Norfolk. Your feedback, expertise and support in developing the regional response to the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) is critical to influencing the ultimate decision and protecting the Hampton Roads region. Once the FEIS is released on November 21st the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires a minimum of a 30-calendar day waiting period before a Record of Decision (ROD) can be issued.

The official Executive Summary of the FEIS from Fleet Forces Command will be available Friday, November 21st:
Get the complete ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR PROPOSED HOMEPORTING OF ADDITIONAL SURFACE SHIPS AT NAVAL STATION MAYPORT, FLORIDA at http://MayportHomePortingEIS.com.

Mayport Homeport Strategically Flawed, Fiscally Irresponsible

SENS. WARNER & WEBB, SEN.-ELECT WARNER & GOV. KAINE
CALL NAVY’S PROPOSAL FOR NEW AIRCRAFT CARRIER HOMEPORT
STRATEGICALLY FLAWED, FISCALLY IRRESPONSIBLE

Washington, DC—Senator John Warner (R-VA), Senator Jim Webb (D-VA), Senator-elect Mark Warner (D-VA), and Virginia Governor Timothy M. Kaine today called the Navy’s announced preference to create a second East Coast homeport for a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier at Mayport, Fla. “strategically flawed and fiscally irresponsible.” They called on the Navy to delay its decision until a new administration is allowed to analyze the proposal’s strategic and fiscal considerations.

At a press conference in the U.S. Capitol, the four Virginia leaders cited the “fiscal irresponsibility” of creating a new homeport for the carrier in Mayport—a move that the Navy estimates will cost at least $600 million to complete. The costs may well approach $1 billion when the Navy’s preliminary estimates are refined and all projected expenses documented more thoroughly. They argued that this money could be better directed to the more than $4.6 billion in higher-priority, unfunded budget requirements the Navy has identified for fiscal year 2009.

Among other unfunded Navy priorities is a $791 million backlog in critical restoration and modernization projects at the nation’s four naval shipyards. The nuclear-capable Norfolk Naval Shipyard, which currently has the capacity for repair and maintenance of the Navy’s East Coast nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, has a backlog for such critical projects of $224 million alone.

“This proposal lacks the in-depth analysis normally expected in decisions of this magnitude,” said Senator John Warner, who will be retiring his seat this year to his successor, Senator-elect Mark Warner. “Moving a carrier to Mayport does very little to mitigate risk to the carrier fleet. And the tremendous costs associated with such a move merely duplicate existing capabilities at other naval stations and shipyards. Saddling the incoming administration with a bill for new naval nuclear facilities that could approach $1 billion is simply irresponsible.”

“Based on the briefing we received, we see no evidence that the Navy’s announcement was supported by either economic logic or strategic necessity,” said Senator Jim Webb. “There is no possible justification for the relocation of an aircraft carrier to the tune of an estimated $1 billion when the Navy has identified $4.6 billion in higher-priority unfunded requirements for its personnel, shipbuilding, aircraft procurement, and installations. This decision is fiscally irresponsible and contrary to the best interests of the fleet.”

Webb continued: “The Navy cannot show that homeporting at the Mayport base offers any significant strategic advantage over Norfolk. And the strategic dispersion argument made during the Cold War era is not applicable in today’s strategic framework. There are other suitable nuclear-capable repair and maintenance facilities available for emergency use on both the East and West Coasts, and in Hawaii.”

Senators John Warner and Jim Webb, both former Secretaries of the Navy and members of the Senate Committee on Armed Services, sent a letter Wednesday evening, November 18, to Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates requesting that the Navy refrain from publishing its Final Environmental Impact Statement as planned on November 21, and withold issuing any Record of Decision “until the new administration is able to evaluate the Navy’s decision with greater analytical rigor than the Navy has demonstrated.”

“Norfolk has long been the site from which Navy sailors have deployed to protect American interests, and it’s where our shipyard workers and naval aviators and military families have worked for decades to support the Navy. That’s why this effort to have a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier homeported in Mayport instead of Norfolk is so troubling," said Senator-elect Mark Warner. "We also owe it to the American taxpayer not to waste their money building unnecessary infrastructure in Florida when it already exists in Virginia.”

“We remain disappointed with the Secretary of the Navy’s recommendation to initiate the movement of a nuclear aircraft carrier to Florida in the President’s 11th hour. This proposal does not serve the strategic interests of the nation well,” said Governor Tim Kaine. “Moreover, there is simply not enough justification for prioritizing this change. Considering the impacts of the financial crisis on all budgets and the realistic costs of moving the nuclear carrier and developing the necessary infrastructure for a possible new placement, why should the nation incur an unnecessary cost? I will continue to work closely with Virginia’s congressional delegation to address this issue over the coming weeks.”

The lawmakers also noted that in 2006 the citizens of the City of Jacksonville, Fla., voted against returning Cecil Field to the Department of Defense so that it could be reactivated as the Navy’s East Coast Master Jet Base—a function now fulfilled by Naval Air Station Oceana, Va.

Video excerpts will also be posted on Senator Webb’s YouTube page.

Letter from Senators J. Warner and J. Webb to Secretary of Defense

The Honorable Robert M. Gates
Secretary of Defense
1000 Defense Pentagon
Washington, DC 20301

Dear Secretary Gates:

On November 18, we were briefed on the Navy's proposal, as part of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process, to base a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier at Naval Station Mayport. We have enclosed a copy of that briefing. In accordance with the regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act, we understand that the Navy's preferred homeporting alternative will be published in the Federal Register November 21 as part of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). Following this announcement, the Navy must wait a minimum of 30 days before issuing its Record of Decision (ROD), but may extend that period for as long as necessary before publicly announcing its final decision.

We ask that an opportunity be provided for the next presidential administration to analyze the strategic and fiscal considerations pertaining to this matter and contribute its views prior to the publication of the FEIS and any issuance of the Record of Decision. As Congress has considered issues associated with strategic homeporting for the last four years, it is inconceivable that an additional 90 days could not be given to ensure a proper decision is made.

Based on the briefing we received, we are extremely concerned that the Navy has made no compelling argument to justify its decision. We saw little or no evidence that the Navy's announcement was supported by either economic logic or strategic necessity. Indeed, according to the Navy's own assessment, the meager advantages attributed to Naval Station Mayport over Naval Station Norfolk are "slight" at best, while initial Navy estimates identify nearly $600 million in military construction costs and other expenses that would be incurred to enable Mayport to serve as a homeport for a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. These costs may well approach $1 billion when the Navy's preliminary estimates are refined and all projected expenses documented more thoroughly. This, Mr. Secretary, does not provide for a persuasive case given the scarcity of the Navy's resources.

Moreover, assuming that mitigation of strategic risk is a viable rationale for expanding nuclear-carrier repair and maintenance facilities, the Navy has not fully examined all alternatives short of establishing a second East Coast nuclear-carrier homeport, including the use of other nuclear-capable repair and maintenance facilities on both the East and West Coasts.

Given the extraordinary financial crisis facing our nation and the compelling need to overcome existing shortfalls and invest in higher-priority Navy budget requirements, the Navy's announcement enters the realm of fiscal irresponsibility. The Navy has identified $4.6 billion in fiscal year 2009 unfunded budget requirements. Within the last several years, it has already invested more than $400 million to improve and upgrade its infrastructure at Naval Station Norfolk to support the Navy's carrier fleet with adequate nuclear-capable piers and other support facilities. Before duplicating Norfolk's existing capital-intensive facilities in Mayport, the Navy should make the fiscally sound decision to optimize past investments at Norfolk and preserve scarce resources to address the near crisis in budget shortfalls for its people, shipbuilding program, aircraft procurement, and installations.

Good stewardship of taxpayer dollars demands that the Navy should fund its shortfalls in shore-readiness requirements rather than expand its shore footprint with duplicative facilities. Before creating excess infrastructure and nuclear-warship capacity in Mayport, the Navy should complete a large number of critical unfunded military construction projects. Owing to the Navy's chronic underfunding of modernization at its four public naval shipyards, there remains a $791 million backlog in sustainment, restoration, and modernization projects at these installations. The nuclear-capable Norfolk Naval Shipyard, which currently has the capacity for repair and maintenance of . the Navy's East Coast nuclear carriers, has a backlog for such critical projects of $224 million alone.

It is not in the taxpayer's interest for the Navy to render such an important and expensive decision at the very end of one presidential administration. The new administration should have the opportunity to assess its defense priorities in order to determine how best to address the defense budget's growing shortfalls. For these reasons, we request that the Navy withhold publication of its Final Environmental Impact Statement. Under no conditions should the Navy issue its Record of Decision before the new administration is able to evaluate the homeporting proposal with greater analytical rigor than the Navy has demonstrated. We respectfully note, Mr. Secretary, that the undersigned have had considerable experience as former Secretaries of the Navy in assessing matters of this nature.

Sincerely,

United States Senators John Warner and Jim Webb


cc:
Chairman and Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Armed Service
Chairman and Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Appropriations
Secretary of the Navy
Chief of Naval Operations

Letter to President-Elect Barack Obama from Hampton Roads' Congressional Members

President-Elect Barack Obama
Presidential Transition Office
Washington, DC 20270

Dear President-Elect Obama:

Congratulations on your hard-fought and historic election. We are writing you because of your announced intention to reform and cut waste in the Depal1ment of Defense. As Virginians, we understand first-hand the importance of a strong national defense, and we appreciate your stated commitment to maintaining one. We also share your concern that in the midst of a ballooning budget deficit, a declining economy, and continued growth in entitlement spending, we must ensure every defense dollar is spent on the most important national security priorities, such as providing benefits for our soldiers, working towards a 313-ship Navy, and restoring readiness in our aging aircraft fleet, rather than on unnecessary or wasteful interests. We can be confident in the urgency of the matter at hand when even defense industry leaders agree that, "Business as usual is not an option,"(1) for our defense budget planning.

For this reason, we wanted to offer a bipartisan suggestion as to how you can save half a billion dollars that could be directed towards more critical defense priorities as you prepare your Fiscal Year 2010 budget. Today, the Navy announced its preference to expand its footprint by investing $500 million to upgrade the Navy's port at Mayport, Florida to accommodate a nuclear aircraft carrier in addition to the existing East Coast port in Norfolk, Virginia. This cost does not include the additional annual expense of dredging in the harbor in Mayport or the personnel and operational impacts of starting up and shutting down the nuclear component of the port each time a carrier docks in Mayport.

Most importantly, this decision ignores the fact that there is no national security or strategic rationale requiring this buildup, unlike the decision in recent years to increase the proportion of the Navy's fleet in the Pacific from 50% to 60% to balance an expanding Chinese Navy. Some have suggested that our East Coast aircraft carriers must be strategically disbursed to avoid a Pearl Harbor-like attack. As any sailor can tell you, these carriers are dispersed around the world on a routine basis in times of peace, and in times of war. In fact, the last time all the carriers were in port at Norfolk for a matter of days, many pictures were taken because it was such a unique event.

Our concern remains that this would be an unwise use of taxpayer dollars in the face of a serious budget deficit. We are in agreement that we should focus on completing the ongoing consolidation of military facilities as prescribed in the 2005 BRAC law, not spending money to expand a footprint the Depal1ment of Defense asked Congress to reduce just three years ago. As Admiral Mike Mullen has stated, extensive analysis has demonstrated that we need a minimum of 313-ships in our Navy(2). We do not see how we can get there if we do not make the tough budget choices and the easy ones. We humbly suggest to you that choosing not to expand the number of nuclear ports on the East Coast is one of the easy choices.

We look forward to your support on this issue and learning more about your vision for the Department of Defense. Thank you for your consideration, and we wish you the best in your transition.

Sincerely,

Members of Congress
J. RANDY FORBES
BOBBY SCOTT
THELMA DRAKE
ROB WITTMAN
Congressman-Elect
GLENN NYE

cc:
The Honorable Ike Skelton
Chairman
House Armed Services Committee
2120 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

The Honorable Duncan Hunter
Ranking Member
House Armed Services Committee
2120 Raybul'l1 House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Admiral Mike Mullen
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
9999 Joint Staff Pentagon
Washington DC 20301

(1) http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssTechMediaTelecomNews/idUSN1048805120081110
(2) " Interview with Adm. Michael Mullen," Defense News, December 3, 2007.

Proposed Outlying Landing Field (OLF)

Proposed Outlying Landing Field (OLF)

View this presentation in a new browser window; click on "Full" to view full screen;
click on "Download" to download the presentation to your own computer.

Presentation by Rear Admiral David O. Anderson
Vice Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command to the Hampton Roads Partnership, Sep08

To see the video, visit the Hampton Roads Partnership YouTube Channel or follow this OLF Video LINK.