GovernmentExecutive.com

The top National Guard officers from eight states will argue their case Thursday against stripping all aircraft from 23 Air Guard facilities at a public hearing before the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission in Atlanta.

Adjutants general will use the opportunity to vent frustrations with the Air Force, which they say shut them out of base-closure discussions. Whether their states stand to gain or lose from this BRAC round, adjutants general have been united in their opposition to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's base closing recommendations. They argue that removing transport and fighter planes from Air Guard bases and consolidating them -- making them "enclaves" -- would hurt recruiting and retention, and ultimately could affect the Guard's ability to respond to emergencies and disasters.

The hearing will focus more on the consolidation of aircraft instead of the Air Force's decision-making process in a bid to sway the commission to keep Guard aircraft where they are, sources said.

One general will argue that the decision will force highly skilled pilots and crews into combat support jobs, potentially influencing their decision to re-enlist. Others will argue that the Pentagon's cost savings are exaggerated and not worth risking states' homeland security and defense missions. For instance, if the commission adopts the Pentagon recommendations, a large chunk of the Northeast will be without Air Guard C-130 transport planes, which could hinder their responses to emergencies in New York, Philadelphia and Washington, foes of the decision contend.

Whether the hearing will have any influence on the commission's final decisions, due Sept. 8 to the White House, is unknown. But foes of the closings contend the hearing at least will force commissioners to focus on Guard-specific issues for one afternoon. "We'll have to wait and see ... how commissioners react to the information given to them on Thursday," a source said.

Meanwhile, lawmakers whose states are hurt by BRAC decisions are in the middle of a letter-writing campaign to raise awareness. House and Senate members have written to the chairmen of the Armed Services committees, requesting hearings on the matter.

"Essentially, the 'air' is being taken out of the Air Guard that these individuals joined or look to join," according to a June 15 letter to Senate Armed Services Chairman John Warner, R-Va., from 24 senators.

Lawmakers also said they believe the enclave issue is a way to circumvent the base-closure process.

"Such bases would have shrunk so much that they could not accommodate the growth required for a follow-on mission," according to the letter. "So, in reality, these enclaves are closures that will happen slowly and without following the BRAC process."

Neither committee has scheduled hearings on the issue.

COMMENTS

• Dear Taxpayer You are losing it bad. The pilots DO NOT reenlist, they are officers. Your knowledge of military matters is limited to headline news. Keep to what you know and by the way it seems to be getting smaller each posting you make. GovExec.com reader Posted July 1, 2005 8:11 AM
• Taxpayer, If you were to do a little research, you would find out that moving airframes from the Guard to Active Duty Airforce would actually end up costing taxpayers more. Active duty units have a MUCH greater cost-per-flying-hour rate than Guard units. If you took a look at mission effectiveness ratings for both, you would see that Guard units are far superior to Active units. You would also see that the class-A mishap rating is 16 times greater for Active duty units than for Guard units for heavies and 8 times greater for fighters. Guard crewmembers maintain the same training and proficiency requirements as active-duty crewmembers but they are payed only for the days that they are actually on duty (averages about 10 days a month for guard crewmember or 1/3 of the amount it costs to maintain the proficiency of an active duty crewmember) You also have to take into consideration the cost of maintaining those airframes. Active duty units are authorized about the same number of positions, per airframe as the Guard, but in the Guard, the majority of those positions are weekenders. Most full-timers in the Guard are civil service, which means that the Guard payroll for personnel performing the exact same duties as their Active counterparts is considerably less. (Taxable income for Active, that portion that we taxpayers hear about, may be less, but that doesn't take into consideration BAH or BAS) All in all, Guard flying units are a bargain to taxpayers and they are just as deployable as their Active counterparts. GovExec.com reader Posted July 1, 2005 11:44 AM
• Sorry "Taxpayer", the Mississippi River runs between Lambert Field and Scott Air Force Base creating the state border between Missouri and Illinois. Explain how the "Missouri Air National Guard" would be flying out of an Illinois-based Air Force Base when they don't have any planes to fly? Remember the Air Guard flyes FIGHTERS and Scott's planes are "the big ones" like hospital planes and tankers. - Girl from St Lou GovExec.com reader Posted July 1, 2005 11:41 AM