These articles originally ran in the Fairbanks Daily News Miner. I'm sorry that this only takes us up through April 2002 ~ it became especially tedious when the News Miner website was down periodically and their archive system changed. Many of the articles since have appeared in email messages to the NNN list.
Local businesses may get missile defense contracts. April 18, 2002.
Corps awards NMD contracts. April 17, 2002.
Nuke-tipped interceptors a possibility. April 14, 2002.
Military takes environmental comment on missile shield. April 3, 2002.
Defense says Greely school can be reopened
Military seeks permit for Shemya Island work. March 5, 2002.
Missile site tour answers few questions. Feb. 1, 2002.
Missile defense contractors face tough job. Jan. 31, 2002.
Missile shield work expected to bring in up to $250 million. Jan. 22, 2001.
Safer Path: Letter to editor. Nov. 28, 2001.
Missile defense test goes awry. Nov. 10, 2001.
Activist: Keep Weapons out of Space. Nov. 2, 2001.
Kodiak rocket gets off the ground. Sep. 30, 2001.
Extremists use rhetoric, not facts. Sep. 26, 200. By REP. JOHN HARRISLimits on missile defense moved from spending bill. Sep. 20, 2001.
Missile defense questions remain. Sep. 10, 2001.
Missile defense activists converge on Delta. Sep. 9, 2001
Missile activists find little support in Delta. Sep. 8, 2001
Delta makes wish list for missile-related projects. Sep. 6, 2001
Fairbanks group fights missile defense system. Aug. 29, 2001
Clearing begins at Greely for missile site. Aug. 28, 2001
Fort Greely missile work gets under way. Aug. 24, 2001
Missile tests at Kodiak site proposed. Aug. 22, 2001
Native corporation gets Fort Greely contract. Aug. 18, 2001
Russia softens on treaty -- Delta Junction, Clear prepare for big changes. Aug. 11, 2001
U.S. eyes $300 million for missile work. Aug. 1, 2001.
Stevens still thinks Greely will get funds. July 27, 2001.
Senate panel questions ABM treaty, missile defense plans. July 25, 2001.
Perfecting the shield. July 22, 2001.
Testimony questions need for Greely silos. July 20, 2001.
Military to let $9 million contract for work at Greely. July 19, 2001.
Military maneuvering. July 15, 2001.
Pentagon lays out missile defense construction plan. July 13, 2001.
Pentagon set to start Greely clearing. July 12, 2001.
Pentagon revises game plan for missile system: Alaska sites take center stage. July 7, 2001.
Kodiak could host missile test launches. April 05, 2001
Clear Air Force Base pulls plug on a 'dinosaur' from the Cold War. February 01, 2001
Stevens hopeful of Shemya radar building schedule. January 17, 2001
Knowles moves to create missile system coordinator. January 17, 2001
Pentagon schedules next missile test. January 09, 2001
Sen. Stevens to meet with Bush in Texas. January 07, 2001
Delta community wishes for prosperity and peace. January 02, 2001
Knowles to push for $16.9 million more for UA, but not for museum. December 12, 2000
Army to launch four missiles each year at Kodiak complex. November 29, 2000
Next missile test not scheduled until 2001. November 23, 2000
AF sees no problems from Kodiak launches. November 21, 2000
Military presence in flux. November 20, 2000
State Guard could get expanded role. May 31, 2000
Local businesses may get missile defense contracts
April 18, 2002
By TOM MORAN
Staff Writerand VICTORIA NAEGELE
Correspondent
Several Fairbanks businesses are among the firms tentatively set to work as subcontractors in the construction of national
missile defense facilities at Fort Greely.The announcement of the firms came Wednesday, a day after the Army Corps of Engineers announced that the $250 million
contract to build the facilities had been awarded to Fluor Corp., a multinational corporation with a long history in Alaska but
with no office in the state now.The Corps of Engineers listed a dozen companies that tentatively will be hired by Fluor to do everything from build security
fencing to transport site materials by barge. Of these, four are based in Fairbanks.Corps spokeswoman Pat Richardson in Anchorage said the subcontractors have not reached final agreements with Fluor but
were listed as the proposed subcontractors when the company made its bid."In the final contract, it's not granted they'll all be included," she said.
The Fairbanks contractors are Denali Fenceworks, which would do fencing installation; University Redi-mix Inc., which
would do concrete work; and Grasle and Associates Inc., which would do electrical work. Doyon Universal Services Inc., an
Anchorage-based joint venture of which Fairbanks-based Doyon Ltd. is a partner, would provide Fort Greely site services.Denali Fenceworks is a 15-person firm that has operated for 18 years in Fairbanks. Owner Joe Vargas said he "absolutely"
intends to accept a contract when Fluor tenders one. "I'm excited to be a part of it, I think it's going to be a great project," he
said.Vargas said the firm will send six people to Fort Greely along with a crew of two more who will do regular site visits. He said
the firm will be building permanent security fencing and that he expects work to begin on June 15. He declined to speculate on
the value of the subcontract, saying the demands will likely change over the course of the project.University Redi-Mix anticipates adding six full-time employees, as well as some temporary help, all local, said Tom Williams,
production supervisor for the Fairbanks company. Payroll will rise about 25 percent, he said."This will put a larger seasonal work force in place for the next couple of years," Williams said. "We know we have X dollars
of work to keep a solid crew working."And it isn't just his company that will benefit, he said..
"For every yard of concrete we pour, there are dozens of people involved," Williams said. "It's going to be great for Delta. It's
going to be good for Fairbanks. It's going to be good for Alaska."Mick Manning, president of Grasle & Associate, is anxious to get official word that being named to the tentative contractors'
list for Fluor means his electrical contracting business will have a $3 million to $4 million job."It will be our largest single project," Manning said. "It's definitely a good thing."
Manning said Grasle & Associate would hire union members or second-tier subcontractors to bolster its work force for the
job.Although the company has not been contacted by Fluor since Fluor was given the prime contract, pre-bid meetings with the
contractor focused on construction of a building where high-voltage transmissions are reduced to usable levels."We plan to build a (power) substation for them," Manning said.
Mark Huber, vice president of Doyon Universal Services, estimates Doyon will add 50 workers to provide catering and
security at the site."We feel good about that," Huber said. "It's a great opportunity for us to diversify into government services."
Huber said he expects the culinary professionals, housekeepers and security workers to be hired from the Fairbanks and
Delta Junction areas. Doyon already has local employees providing services to Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. and Pogo Mine.
The company employs about 900 overall.Huber, like others, said the precontract planning between his company and Fluor laid the groundwork for a successful
working arrangement."We consider ourselves part of the overall team," Huber said. "We all worked very hard putting this (bid contract) together in
30 days."Over the next three years, Fluor will be expected to build several silos at Fort Greely to store test interceptor missiles
designed to shoot down incoming ballistic missiles. The company and its subcontractors also will build the various facilities
needed to communicate with and control the interceptor missiles, including an upgrade to a radar installation on Shemya Island
in the Aleutians.The Corps of Engineers estimates that, based on Fluor's bid, the Fort Greely contract will lead to several hundred
construction jobs. In the first part of that work, the agency said in a Tuesday news release that it expects Fluor to have the
exterior of four buildings completed at Fort Greely by October.The other subcontractors named Wednesday are Acme Fence Co. of Anchorage, which would do fencing installation;
AGLAQ, an Anchorage Native corporation firm that would do site civil work and information technology; AMI, an
Anchorage company that would be general contractor for projects on Shemya Island; ATEC, which would build shielding;
Watterson Construction, an Anchorage unit that would serve as general contractor for the readiness and control facility;
DOWL engineers of Anchorage, which would undertake material testing; Central Pre-mix Prestress Co., which would do
concrete work, and Samson Tug & Barge, which would provide barge transportation.Subcontractors on the list released Wednesday have yet to be notified officially of their involvement with the missile system.
Corps awards NMD contract
April 17, 2002
By SAM BISHOP
News-Miner Washington BureauWASHINGTON--Fluor Corp. has won a contract worth up to $250 million to build national missile defense test facilities at
Fort Greely, on Shemya Island and at other sites, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said Tuesday.The multinational construction firm has a long history in the state but closed its Alaska office in Anchorage several years ago,
said Lisa Boyette, director of corporate communications in Los Angeles. The company will do business here as Fluor Alaska
Inc.The work should create about 350 to 400 jobs at its peak, according to the Corps.
Boyette said she had no details on which Alaska companies are partnered with the firm. A few Alaska contractors called by
the News-Miner declined to confirm any association, referring calls to Fluor's public affairs office. Attempts to contact the
office, in Greenville, S.C., were not successful.John Killoran, spokesman for the Corps in Anchorage, said there are certainly Alaska companies involved. The Corps
weighted its scoring of the bids to favor participation by small and minority businesses, he said."It was the maximum as far as the Corps was concerned in requiring participation of small business and minority businesses.
I'm certain you will find those represented rather well," he said. He said he didn't have specifics.The U.S. Corps of Engineers' contracting office in Huntsville, Ala., which actually handled the bid work, could not be reached
Tuesday evening.The contract is worth up to $250 million. The basic work starts at $165 million, though, Killoran said.
The contract is a cost-plus arrangement, which gives a fixed fee to the contractor on top of the project cost. Fluor was not
necessarily the low bidder on the work.Over the next three years, Fluor will be expected to build several silos at Fort Greely to store test interceptors designed to
shoot down incoming ballistic missiles as they travel outside the Earth's atmosphere. The company will also build the various
facilities needed to communicate with and control the interceptors. At Eareckson Air Force Station on Shemya Island, it will
upgrade a radar.No interceptors are expected to be launched from Fort Greely. Rather, they would rise from the state-owned launch pad on
Kodiak Island and other sites around the Pacific Ocean. Although the Missile Defense Agency, which runs the test program,
expects to build more facilities on Kodiak as well, none of those are included in the contract work announced Tuesday.The Corps said in a news release Tuesday that it expects Fluor to have the exterior of four buildings completed at Fort Greely
by October."With the outside finished, construction can continue inside the buildings until the next spring," the Corps said. "The facility
should be fully operational in October 2004."The Fort Greely site will cover 260 acres, and the Shemya site will be a "small area," the Corps said.
Most of Fluor's past work in Alaska has served the oil industry. Fluor built the pump stations on the trans-Alaska pipeline, a
refinery in North Pole, and gas and water processing modules on the North Slope. It also built the pipeline terminal in Valdez
and more recently upgraded the vapor recovery system there.Work tapered off in recent years, though, Boyette said. The last manager of Fluor's Alaska office, George Wuerch, now
serves as Anchorage's mayor, Killoran noted.Fluor, with 50,000 employees, is one of the world's largest construction and engineering firms. It is owned by shareholders.
Article Last Updated:
Sunday, April 14, 2002 - 5:00:32 AM MSTNuke-tipped interceptors a
possibility
By SAM BISHOP
News-Miner Washington BureauWASHINGTON--An advisory board to the Department
of Defense is reviewing whether a national missile
defense system ought to be equipped with
nuclear-tipped interceptors.Critics of the missile defense system say the review
is evidence that the military is not confident about its
current "hit-to-kill" approach to stopping incoming
missiles. Nuclear-tipped missiles also would violate at
least one treaty, an arms control activist said.The Defense Science Board, an independent advisory
board, has been asked to review the idea of
nuclear-tipped interceptors, said Cheryl Irwin,
spokeswoman for Defense Secretary Donald
Rumsfeld."We're discussing different alternatives for the
shooting down of 'incoming' by our interceptors," Irwin
said. "As the president asked back in May and as the
secretary of Defense has taken that and carried it
through, we are looking at all sorts of technologies.
And I think the key word here is 'looking at."'No decisions have been made to develop such
weapons, and no programs are doing so, Irwin said.The science board is also looking at "directed energy"
and "blast fragmentation" techniques for stopping
enemy warheads, Irwin said.The review is part of the department's commitment to
explore the most promising and cost-effective ways to
defend the country, she said.The Missile Defense Agency may eventually locate
live missile interceptors at Fort Greely, 100 miles
southeast of Fairbanks. A contract to build six test
silos at the post should be announced next week. The
agency has said it will store, not launch, missiles
from the silos during the testing phase, unless the
nation is attacked.The Washington Post reported the Defense
Department's interest in nuclear-tipped interceptors on
Thursday, quoting the science board's chairman,
William Schneider Jr.Schneider, now a consultant, served as an
undersecretary of state in the Reagan administration.
He was a member, along with Rumsfeld, of a
government commission that in 1998 concluded that
ballistic missiles were a growing threat to the United
States.The United States deployed nuclear-tipped
interceptors in the 1970s around silos in North
Dakota. The Post said the Defense Department
dismantled those and canceled other nuclear-tipped
interceptor development programs.Irwin, however, said she knows of no official policy
that would prevent the department from developing
such weapons again.Stephen Young, a senior analyst for the Union of
Concerned Scientists, said the department's interest
confirms what his group has been saying for several
years--that there is no good way to deal with enemy
missiles that toss out confusing decoys or multiple
bomblets containing biological or chemical weapons."The nuclear interceptor solves that problem. You just
blow them all out of the sky," Young said.To deal with all the potential threats, though, a large
explosion would be needed, he said. The radioactive
fallout and electromagnetic damage to satellites could
be severe.Such effects still would be better than letting the
incoming weapons drop into the United States, he
said. However, "from our point of view, it's not likely
enough a threat to justify the expense," he said.Daryll Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control
Association, said that's because anyone intent on
delivering a weapon of mass destruction to the United
States has far cheaper and more effective means than
a missile.Missile Defense Agency officials have said critics
don't have all the information about how the U.S.
interceptors can distinguish between warheads and
decoys.And other missile defense supporters say the fact
that someone could smuggle a nuclear, biological or
chemical weapon into the United States doesn't
justify ignoring the ballistic missile threat.Beyond such strategic arguments, Kimball said
nuclear-tipped interceptors would violate the 1967
Outer Space Treaty, which prohibits nuclear weapons
in space.Young said he wasn't sure whether nuclear-tipped
interceptors would violate that treaty because they
wouldn't be stationed in space.However, he said, such interceptors would run counter
to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, signed by the
United States and about 160 other nations. The treaty
says the United States, Russia, China, France and
the United Kingdom will work to eliminate their
nuclear weapons, he said."If the U.S. is adding new roles for nuclear weapons in
this new weapons system, that certainly contradicts
the goals of the NNP Treaty," Young said.
Military takes environmental comment on missile shieldApril 03, 2002
By SAM BISHOP
News-Miner Washington BureauWASHINGTON--The military will take public comments through the end of the month on what environmental issues to
consider if it expands testing of the proposed ground-based missile defense system.Public meetings are planned in Kodiak on April 16, Anchorage on April 18 and in Lompoc, Calif., on April 25, according to
Lt. Col. Rick Lehner of the Missile Defense Agency.The military has decided to complete an environmental impact statement on a proposal to extend its testing range to include
the state-owned Kodiak Launch Complex and other facilities around the Pacific Ocean. The meetings and public comment
period, which were announced in the Federal Register last week, are part of a process designed to define the issues that must
be studied. The process lasts 30 days.The Defense Department developed the extended test range concept last year after internal review groups said the
ground-based system needed challenges that are more realistic. The system is intended to shoot down any ballistic missiles
that might be launched at the United States. The goal is to hit the missiles while they are in mid-course, traveling high above the
Earth's atmosphere.After being sued by several Alaska and national groups, the Defense Department agreed last month to conduct environmental
studies of the extended test range proposal.Since construction of missile silos at Fort Greely was part of the earlier, already-reviewed plans, that work won't be reviewed
in the new environmental impact statement. Construction at Fort Greely, costing between $100 million and $250 million, is to
start this summer. The military hopes to award the contract by April 12.Construction work and launch activities at Kodiak weren't part of the earlier plan and thus will fall within the scope of the new
environmental impact statement.The Federal Register notice roughly outlines the military's extended test range plans to date but also gives some indication of
where those plans have not yet gelled.The notice states that the alternatives to be analyzed in the environmental impact statement may include launching target or
interceptor missiles, or both, from the Kodiak Launch Complex.The military also may start launching interceptors from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California and from aircraft over the
ocean. To date, interceptors have only been launched from the Kwajalein Atoll in the mid-Pacific.Also, "the target and interceptors may be launched in sets of two under some testing scenarios from either (Kodiak) or
(Vandenberg)," the document states.Maj. Cathy Reardon, spokeswoman for the Missile Defense Agency, said that means testers could be launching up to two
targets at a time and two interceptors at a time.The enhanced testing "may also include use of new land-based radars in southern Alaska," the notice states.
At the Kodiak facility, the notice states, plans "could include construction of two interceptor launchers, one additional target
launch pad and construction or alteration of launch support facilities."The plans also could involve construction of in-flight data terminals and establishment of military and satellite communications
"in the mid-Pacific and at (Kodiak) or (Vandenberg)."Also, tracking and range safety radars would be added "in the vicinity of sites."
Testing in this extended range could involve use of a "battle management command and control" system proposed for
construction at Fort Greely as part of the original plans, according to the notice.The military noted that the Federal Aviation Administration will cooperate in the new environmental analysis because it licenses
the Kodiak complex. The Alaska Aerospace Development Corp.'s permit to operate the Kodiak site must be renewed in
2003, and the FAA may consider the missile work in the renewal decision, according to the military.
Military seeks permit for Shemya Island workMarch 05, 2002
By JAMES MacPHERSON
Alaska Journal of CommerceANCHORAGE--The U.S. Missile Defense Agency has applied for a wetlands permit with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to begin construction on a portion of the nation's new missile defense system at Eareckson Air Force Station on Shemya Island.
Proposed work at the U.S. Air Force installation includes upgrades to the existing Cold War-era early-warning radar system, utility extensions, housing and infrastructure improvements, dredging and land clearing.
Most important will be the installation of test equipment related to X-Band radar, the most powerful tracking and detection device in the world and the heart of the national missile defense system.
Lt. Col. Jim Balocki, deputy commander of the ballistic missile defense program for the Alaska district, said work will begin this summer, once a permit is in place and a federal environmental impact statement completed.
Companies from California, Washington and Alaska have submitted proposals to the Missile Defense Agency to do the planned work this summer. A contract should be awarded by April, and work will begin immediately thereafter, Balocki said. Barge shipments would have to come either from Anchorage or Seattle, 3,000 miles away.
Work related to the national missile defense system in Alaska also is slated for Fort Greely and Eielson Air Force Base. A test missile complex is set for construction this summer at Fort Greely, as is a transfer facility at Eielson for shipment of booster missile components. Missile launch facilities on Kodiak Island also are being considered.
The test facilities at Fort Greely and Shemya are expected to be completed by mid-decade, according to Department of Defense officials. About $198 million will be spent at Fort Greely this year, and $48 million at Shemya, Balocki said.
An estimated $12.5 billion is needed to fund the entire missile defense project, a top priority with the U.S. Defense Department.
On the tip of the Aleutian chain and only two miles wide and four miles long, Shemya Island is an important piece of defense real estate. It has long been used by the military to monitor missile tests in Russia and as a refueling stop for U.S. war planes.
The tiny island's location, while strategically significant, is one of the worst places on Earth to build anything, and it is a logistical nightmare. Weather on Shemya is brutal, even by Alaska standards. Calm, sunny days are rare. Earthquakes have rocked the island repeatedly over the years.
"It's awful out there but the location couldn't be better," said John Killoran, a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers spokesman in Anchorage.
Still, Air Force Capt. Heather Anderson said she loves the place. "It takes a special kind of person to work here because it's so remote," Anderson said.
To the 100 or so people who work on "The Rock" or the "Black Pearl," the incredible weather is known simply as the "Shemya Factor." For example, Anderson said, in the winter snow blows and swirls almost continuously, creating a sandblasting effect. And the warmer weather doesn't always bring better conditions. Last summer saw 122 consecutive days of fog.
"For 122 days it was as thick as pea soup. You couldn't see in front of your face," Anderson said. "We have hurricane-force winds--without there actually being a hurricane--on a regular basis."
The island also is home to about 18 Arctic foxes known locally as scruffys. The foxes earn their keep by keeping goose populations at bay, lessening the risk of aircraft-bird collisions, Anderson said.
Missile site tour answers few questions
VICTORIA NAEGELE, For the News-Miner
Friday, February 01, 2002 - The four buses that rolled through Delta Junction and on to Fort Greely Army Post Thursday afternoon might have carried tourists reveling in the glorious sunny day, so jovial was the mood. But the tour of the National Missile Defense test bed site was serious business involving as much as $250 million in government construction contracts.Beneath all of the camaraderie lay the prize--huge government contracts and the subcontracts they will spawn. But how to bid on those projects to make them profitable? Will there be enough construction workers in Alaska? How will workers be housed?
These were the kinds of questions that were bandied between riders, but not asked of officials. No one, explained one contractor, wants to tip his or her hand by asking too many questions.
But there are questions facing the contractors, the Department of Defense and the community. Some may be answered at a question-and-answer session this morning in Fairbanks, followed by one-on-one meetings with potential general contractors.
Mike Lewis, operations manager for Bechtel National, said one issue is how the project will impact the local economy, calling it a blip smaller than the trans-Alaska oil pipeline but with definite affects on the socio-economic climate.
"It's an aspect of the project that has not been managed by the government," Lewis said.
The site tour didn't answer many questions, nor was it designed to do so.
"It's for the construction contractors to try to get the flavor of the site," said John Romeo, project manager for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. "There's not a lot to see. It's what we call a 'green grass' site."
Representatives from major contractors like Jacob Engineering, Bechtel, Veco and Fluor Daniel jostled along on the tour with those from potential subcontractors. Even local workers took the chance to check out the site.
What they saw was a lot of nothing: Some land cleared; some still with burned-over aspen trees; a landfill, some topsoil piles and an access road. Those who brought cameras found little to photograph. Here was the site of the future inflight communications data terminal; there, the power substation site. The site will eventually include a missile assembly building, an exo-atmospheric kill vehicle assembly building, interceptor storage and support buildings. But for now it is snow and trees.
Romeo said that while this isn't the first trip to Delta Junction for many company representatives, the tour offered them equal exposure to the site prior to the Feb. 26 bidding.
It wasn't a wasted trip, said contractors from across the nation. Part of the trip was satisfying curiosity. Another facet was considering the logistics that construction will entail.
"I want to be familiar with the land," said Josh Morgan of Samson Tug and Barge of Seattle. "Everything's got to get up here somehow."
Positioning one's company to have a piece of the action was one of the chief underlying purposes for those on the tour. Businesses cards were traded like baseball cards, as potential subcontractors interacted with representatives of those few international companies who can handle the project, not only because of the scope, but because of the timeframe.
Lewis was one of those who chatted amiably, asking questions about life in Alaska. Lewis is from Alabama, but said he'd be moving to Fairbanks if Bechtel wins the major contract. He said the project has some unique challenges, and not because of the climate or location.
"It's a huge management challenge to put it together that quickly and monitor it the way the government wants it monitored," Lewis said.
"As it changes," added Gundar Clemenson of MWH in Anchorage.
Logistics of moving goods to the site were among the issues on the potential contractors' minds--none more so than people like Morgan of Samson Tug and Todd T. Wallace, vice president of sales and marketing for Northern Air Cargo.
When Lewis mentioned using trucks and barges to move materials to the site, Wallace was quick to point out his omission.
"Don't forget the planes," Wallace said, eliciting laughter from those around him.
After the tour some locals who were on the buses, including Delta City Councilwoman Susan Kemp and carpenters' union member Ray Shannon, joked that the tour may have already had an affect given a government decree that there will be no allowances made for weather in the project's timeframe.
Kemp said Delta's sunshine, mild winter temperatures and lack of wind on Thursday may have given contractors a false sense that the government mandate wouldn't be an issue.
The schedule calls for the site to be operational on Sept. 20, 2004.
Victoria Naegele is a freelance writer who lives in Delta Junction.
Missile contractors face tough job
DIANA CAMPBELL, Staff Writer
Thursday, January 31, 2002 - Construction contractors face a daunting chore to put together a $100-250 million proposal that will detail just how they will build a missile defense test site in Fort Greely.They have to read a foot-and-a-half-thick stack of paper detailing the project's specifications and requirements. They will have to make sure they are capable of getting their hands on materials--quickly--since they'll start building this spring if awarded the contract.
And they'll have to have to find sub-contractors--minority, veteran, or disabled-owned small businesses, to name a few.
The companies' final bids will require five volumes each with specific information outlining how the job will get done. Bids are due Feb. 26, less than four weeks from now.
Not many companies can do it but those who can will.
"In a military minute," said R.J. Parker, vice president of project development for Fluor Daniel, a multinational engineering and construction firm.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers intends to award the project on April 12, it announced. The project includes building five missile silos, a missile assembly building, an electrical substation and a control station at Fort Greely.
Representatives of at least a half dozen major engineering and construction companies, including one Alaska contender, were in town on Wednesday to hear the Corps of Engineers explain its proposal process. They were joined by nearly 300 more people, many representing Alaska businesses.
The Corps will take busloads of potential contractors to the site today. On Friday, the Corps will spend the day answering questions and holding one-on-one sessions with contractors.
It was the third such meeting held in the last two years, said Lt. Col. Jay Smith of the Air Force Missile Defense Agency. In all likelihood, firms have been preparing to submit proposals on the multimillion-dollar project since the first meeting two years ago, he said.
"These guys are pros," Smith said of firms attending the conference. "They know how to put together a project."
In addition to Fluor, some of the major companies at the conference included Bechtel National Inc., Jacob Engineering and Anchorage-based Veco Alaska Inc.
Fluor has been in Alaska before, Parker said. The company built all the pump stations for the trans-Alaska oil pipeline, he said. The company also has an Alaska Native business partnership with the Anchorage-based company Alutiiq. The two will likely refurbish the U.S. Embassy in Brazil this year, Parker said.
Another familiar name is Bechtel, which worked on the construction of the trans-Alaska oil pipeline in the 1970s. Bechtel has been working on its proposal for a while, said Mike Lewis, Bechtel's operations manager.
"We are ready," Lewis said after the three-hour Wednesday meeting. "We have been anticipating this (competing for the project) for two years from the original kick-off meeting."
Lewis said the company has already read the 2,500-page project requirements document, which even specifies the type of bolts that have to be used.
"It's highly complex," he said. It cost $245 to make one copy at a local copy store, he said.
The project was put out to bid Jan. 27.
During Wednesday's meeting, several key project staff members for the missile defense project emphasized important points for contractors.
"We will have every brick in place, the last microchip in place by 30 September, 2004," Smith said.
The missile defense project includes an infrared satellite system; space, air and land-based lasers; early-warning radars; interceptor rockets; and X-band, Smith said.
The project will work in conjunction with military stations in Clear, Shemya, Kodiak and other strategic locations along the Pacific Rim, he added.
The Boeing Company has been working on the design of the system including specifics at Fort Greely, Smith said.
"Boeing does the real rocket science," Smith said.
Potential contractors will have to adhere to several subcontractor and hiring stipulations, said Patricia Davies, a Corps contracting officer. A potential company's previous experience in those areas will be checked, she added. Another issue will be whether or not the contractor can deliver on time, she said.
"The schedule is so critical," Davies said.
A Corps attorney urged that contractors read every word of the project's requirements.
"I can tell you every word of this document has been reviewed by many people," said Steve Feldman, Corps attorney. Feldman instructed contractors to read the nondisclosure clauses, since the project is a high-security one.
Once the construction is completed in 2004, the missile defense system will be operational on a "limited, emergency" basis, Smith said.
"What we are going to have here is the whole enchilada to defend the whole United States," Smith said.
Missile shield work expected to bring in up to $250 million
January 22, 2002
By SAM BISHOP
News-Miner Washington BureauWASHINGTON--The military may spend up to $250 million on missile defense work in Alaska during the next two years,
according to pre-bid information released by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.The Corps will hold meetings in Fairbanks for interested contractors later this month. The Corps and contractors will also tour
the main construction site at Fort Greely, 100 miles to the southeast.A prime contractor for the job should be selected by April 12, the agency said. The Corps estimates the work to be worth
between $100 million and $250 million.Despite the impressive price tag, the project won't dominate the Alaska industry scene this summer, according to Dick
Cattanach, executive director of the Anchorage-based Associated General Contractors of Alaska.Other public and private construction spending will far exceed the spending on missile defense, he said. "When you look at all
sectors and all companies, you're probably looking at in excess of $4 billion."Nevertheless, he predicted, it will be a boost for the Fairbanks area. The project likely will produce 500 to 1,000 jobs, he
said.The $100 million to $250 million estimate reflects a standard range used by military contracting offices. The money will come
from the $7.8 billion Congress approved for missile defense work during this fiscal year. President Bush signed that
expenditure into law on Jan. 10.The Corps' engineering center in Huntsville, Ala., placed the Alaska missile defense pre-bid information on its Web site on
Saturday. A contracting officer on Monday referred questions to the public affairs office, which was closed for the Martin
Luther King Jr. holiday.The government's formal "request for proposals," with more details of the contract work, won't be available until Jan. 27.
Alaska's missile defense facilities will be part of a new North Pacific "test bed." The test bed will incorporate several launch
and detection sites designed to give the military a realistic simulation of incoming enemy missiles, system designers have said.The Bush administration has said the United States must develop a way to knock down a limited number of such missiles.
Bush announced Dec. 13 that the United States would withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Russia to remove
constraints on future testing of defense systems.Administration officials and members of Congress have differed over whether withdrawing from the treaty was a necessary
first step for the Alaska work.Defense officials have said they want to build about five silos at Fort Greely to house the missiles that would be used to shoot
down mock incoming missiles. They say they have no plans to launch such interceptor missiles from the post, though, because
testing rules don't allow flights over land and populated areas.Instead, they said last year that they hoped to use the state launch site on Kodiak Island, where the interceptors would fly
over the ocean. They said the Kodiak facility would need some upgrades, however.The Corps pre-bid information makes no mention of Kodiak.
Rather, the work is "primarily at Fort Greely, Alaska, with work also at Eareckson Air Station (on) Shemya Island, Alaska,
and likely other worldwide locations under options," the Corps information states.The Corps will meet with interested contractors Jan. 30 in Fairbanks. The next day, they'll go to Fort Greely, where land for
the missile silos was cleared last summer. Then, on Feb. 1, they'll hold a question and answer session.Cattanach, with the AGC, said such pre-bid conferences are a common practice, though a three-day session is unusually long.
"Pre-bid conferences are an opportunity for the owner, and in this case it's the Corps, to explain the scope of the project," he
said.Anyone who is interested in bidding on the project, or a portion of it, will show up, he said. That includes general contractors,
specialty contractors and suppliers. Union officials may also attend to see what kind of work might be coming.The contract, according to the Corps, will be "cost plus award fee." That means the Corps will pay all project-related costs,
Cattanach said."That's usually your labor, your materials, equipment rentals, building rentals, plus they will give you a fee or a profit," he said.
"That fee is usually part of the negotiations. On a project this size it's usually 2, 3, 5 percent."The fee is negotiated only with the prime contractor.
That company is likely to be an international firm, given the size of the project, Cattanach said.
"The government is going to be looking at getting a contractor that has done work like this, of this magnitude. There's only a
half-dozen companies in the world" who would likely qualify, he said.The Corps' statement alludes to that approach, saying that the final award will be based on management and technical
approaches, experience, past performance and price.Another factor listed, though, is "small business participation."
As a result, Cattanach said, he expects much of the work will go to Alaska contractors. Earlier missile defense proposals had
required that 60 percent of the subcontracting go to small firms, he said.Cattanach said union and non-union firms should have equal prospects. "I just don't think that will be a differentiation."
Wednesday, November 28, 2001
Safer pathNov. 21, 2001 To the editor:
Bruce Gagnon's recent lecture on the militarization of
space was chilling and eye-opening. According to his
well-documented research, missile defense is but the
first step in Pentagon plans for a flotilla of James Bondish space weapons,
including a massive space-based laser powered by nuclear reactors, an attack
version of the space shuttle and killer satellites.
The purpose of these weapons is not defensive at all, but domination of space by
the U.S. military. It sounds like some weird conspiracy theory, but the Pentagon
has put it in black and white for all to see. To quote from the U.S. Space
Command document "Vision for 2020":
"The globalization of the world economy will continue, with a widening between
the 'haves' and 'have nots."' To protect our national interests and investments, we
need to "dominate the space dimension of military operations," to assume
"control of space."
The cover of the document shows some of these new space weapons in action.
That our country is spending billions developing these weapon systems when the
rest of the world wants to sign a treaty banning space weapons is ludicrous. It
seems to be happening because our military planners have taken their mission
to an illogical extreme and because these systems are extremely expensive and
will keep our massive defense contractor industry happy for a long time. The
prominent missile defense researcher who revealed that test results were faked
has stated that missile defense "is not a defense of the U.S. ... it is a
conspiracy to allow them to milk the government. They are creating for
themselves a job for life."
Bruce noted that in his final address to the nation, Dwight Eisenhower warned
America to be on guard against the military/industry complex, which he said
wields undue influence on our political affairs. These grandiose and ultimately
dangerous and destabilizing schemes are a sign that this problem has spiraled
completely out of control.
As the famous saying goes, crisis creates opportunity. We should use the
turmoil of these difficult times to move our nation onto a safer and saner path.
Larry Landry
Fairbanks
Saturday, November 10, 2001 - 4:59:18 AM MST
Missile defense test goes awry
By MAUREEN CLARK
The Associated Press Reporter
ANCHORAGE--A rocket sent aloft from the Kodiak Launch Complex had to be destroyed seconds after liftoff Friday when trackers lost communication with the missile.It was the first time a rocket used in testing for the missile defense program had to be destroyed after launch, said Col. Rick Lehner, spokesman for the missile defense program in Washington, D.C.
The rocket was launched from the complex, operated by the Alaska Aerospace Development Corp., at 9:12 a.m. It was destroyed 52 seconds later when launch officials lost telemetry data and data transmission from the missile, Lehner said.
"It seems to be a telemetry problem and safety rules dictate that, if you lose that type of data transmission, you have to destroy the missile," Lehner said. Despite the loss of data, the rocket remained on course until it was destroyed. A board would be convened to investigate the problem, Lehner said.
"It could take weeks to figure out what caused the problem," he said.
The missile was 20 miles off the coast of Kodiak when the order came to blow it up. The pieces dropped into the ocean and were spead over an area 17 to 45 miles from the island, Lehner said.
The military had announced Wednesday that it planned to launch the rocket sometime between Friday and Nov. 21, but would not give the exact time and date, citing security concerns stemming from the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
The Coast Guard had been broadcasting a notice to mariners in the area, warning vessels to stay out of the launch clearance area due to safety hazards caused by falling debris between the hours of 7 a.m. and 10:30 a.m. from Nov. 9 through Nov. 21, said Coast Guard Petty Officer Douglas Green.
The rocket was launched to learn more about how ground-based radar systems in California would pick up the characteristics of a warhead and decoys in space, Lehner said.
"It's a strategic target system that carries a dummy warhead and various types of decoys and what we were trying to do is gather radar and sensor data on how the warhead and decoys flew," Lehner said.
The information would be used to help design missile defense technology, he said.
The rocket was the first of four scheduled to be launched from Kodiak over the next two years to test radar systems, Lehner said. If it had not been destroyed, the rocket would have flown south and fallen into the Pacific Ocean, several hundred miles off the coast of California.
Lehner described the rocket as the first two stages of a Polaris missile and the third stage of an Orbis rocket.
"These are all tried and true rocket missiles," Lehner said.
Activist: Keep weapons out of space
By SEAN COCKERHAM
Staff Writer
Friday, Nov. 2, 2001Bruce Gagnon travels three weeks out of each month, but wherever he is Gagnon looks at the moon.
The moon, Gagnon told an audience of about 75 people at the University of Alaska Fairbanks on Thursday night, is one symbol that connects all people despite their location and dissimilarities.
Now, the Florida-based peace activist continued, envision military bases on the moon and orbiting battle stations in the night sky.
"We together now stand at a historic moment," said Gagnon, the coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space.
Gagnon argued to the UAF audience that the proposed national missile defense system is not about defense at all, but is rather a "Trojan horse," designed to open the door for U.S. military control of space.
Judging by the nodding of heads and vocal expressions of agreement from the audience during his speech, Gagnon had a largely sympathetic audience at the Schaible Auditorium on campus.
The Pentagon proposes to make Fort Greely, outside of Delta Junction, the site for interceptor missiles that would be launched against a limited attack of nuclear missiles. The incoming warheads are to be shot down above the Earth's atmosphere.
There was an audience member on Thursday who opined that the proposed system is important for American security, a point of view that Gagnon took sharp aim at during his speech.
Gagnon argued that, not only would the proposed missile shield not work, there is no actual threat to justify an attempt at its construction.
Mentioning the North Koreans--often cited as one of the "rogue states" that the shield is designed to protect America from--Gagnon pointed out that North Korea does not have nuclear missiles and has suspended its testing program.
He added that China has only 20 such missiles while the United States has about 7,500.
"Go to Wal Mart," he advised the audience. "The United States is China's best customer. They are not going to bomb us with nuclear missiles."
The Pentagon and other missile defense backers, not surprisingly, espouse views of the proposed system that are completely at odds with those expressed by Gagnon.
They claim that North Korea is not far from developing a missile that can strike the United States, and that a technologically effective missile shield can indeed be created.
Building a missile defense system, the backers argue, makes sense for security in a sometimes hostile world of terrorists and unpredictable regimes with fledgling missile capabilities.
But Gagnon claimed that the proposed missile defense system is not about defense, since it cannot really provide it.
Rather, it is to open up the taps of government funding and lead the way for a series of weapons that can allow the U.S. to control space, he believes. Gagnon cited military statements regarding the importance of space capabilities to the future of successful warfare.
Gagnon repeatedly spoke of a slogan of the U.S. 50th Space Wing in Colorado, "The Masters of Space." An attempt at such control of space--whether it be for military purposes or to mine resource-rich planetary bodies--would lead to an arms race, he said.
"Other countries will not stand by and watch the United States become masters of space," he said.
The United States, Gagnon said, needs to sign on to a treaty that would ban weapons in space.
Gagnon had previously spoken in Anchorage and is now headed to Kodiak. His visit to Alaska is sponsored by Citizens Opposed to Defense Experimentation, a group that includes the Fairbanks-based No Nukes North.
Fairbanks Daily News-Miner
$1 million in funding set aside for DeltaOctober 08, 2001
The city of Delta Junction has its $1 million in federal money through the Office of Economic Adjustment, with another $13 million in federal requests still waiting for approval.
The $1 million will be used for maintenance of city facilities and streets, including the existing landfill and airport. The request included $350,000 for equipment, $578,000 for maintenance and $110,000 for salaries, according to Pete Hallgren, city administrator.
Of the maintenance money, $250,000 is earmarked for airport improvement, $128,000 for buildings and fencing, $100,000 for the airport and $100,000 for the landfill.
Hallgren's new city employment contract, which uses some of those OEA funds, gives him a new title. Hallgren was the city's director of economic development. He will continue to have those responsibilities as city administrator.
As for the $13 million requested of Title 10 funding, Hallgren said it is working its way through the system.
Those funds would be used to mitigate the impacts of the National Missile Defense Test Bed Project on the community. Included in the request is money for emergency vehicles and equipment, paving and a new landfill.
"We know it's been given proper consideration," Hallgren said.
Those funds are requested for fiscal year 2002, which began this month. If the missile defense project moves forward, the city would likely ask for more money next year.
The federal defense appropriations bill that includes funding for missile defense passed the Senate and went on to a conference committee last week.
Shower aids center
There is no concern about whether to buy something blue or pink for the baby shower Tuesday evening at First Baptist Church of Delta Junction. Baby items of all colors and descriptions are suitable.
The second annual community baby shower for the Pregnancy Resource Center in Fairbanks is 7 p.m. in the church basement.
The event is designed to draw attention to the services provided at the center, and collect items that can be used by the women and babies served there.
A speaker from the Pregnancy Resource Center will outline its programs.
Organizer Debbie Joslin said last year's event raised a Suburban full of baby items. Joslin said needed items include diapers (especially larger sizes), wipes, baby clothes, blankets, sheets, baby furniture and maternity clothes. New items, washed used items in good condition and cash donations are appreciated, Joslin said.
Items collected will be put in the Baby Isaiah Room at the center. The room is named for Joslin's infant son who died in June 1999.
Joslin said the center has served about 400 people so far this year, providing maternity and baby goods, confidential counseling and free pregnancy testing. Delta Junction residents also use the center.
"It does help people here, too," she said.
The Pregnancy Resource Center is a nonprofit organization supported by donations from churches and individuals.
For more information, contact Joslin at 895-4565.
Security tightened at post
The Sept. 11 terrorist attacks changed many things about American life--even in Delta Junction.
While the burned-over forests of Fort Greely Military Post have been a good source of firewood for local residents since the fire of 1999, new security measures mean many of those trees are off limits.
According to officials at Fort Greely, cutting is only allowed in the 12-Mile Crossing area by Donnelly Dome, away from the mothballed post and the new National Missile Defense Test Bed Site. There is no indication when that will change.
Phil Holbrook got that message when military personnel told him he had to stop cutting wood at the pipeline and power line easements just off the Richardson Highway.
Holbrook said he and his family have been cutting wood there to heat their home since the fire.
"I might actually have enough for winter," he said. That's a good thing, he said, since the area by Donnelly has skimpy trees.
Victoria Naegele is a free-lance writer who lives near Delta Junction.
Kodiak rocket gets off the ground
Athena deploys four satellites
By DAN JOLING
Associated Press Writer
Sunday, Sep. 30, 2001
KODIAK--Four satellites carried on board a Lockheed Martin Athena 1
rocket were successfully deployed Saturday night after a launch from the
Kodiak Launch Complex.
After weeks of delays due to travel interruptions caused by the Sept. 11
terrorist attacks, rain and high winds, and most recently, solar flares, the
rocket lifted off at 6:40 p.m.
The $38 million mission is the first orbital launch from Alaska.
"It couldn't have gone better," said National Aeronautics and Space
Administration spokesman George H. Diller. "It's been a very successful
mission. It's what we all hoped for."
The 144,000-pound, 62-foot rocket reached its prescribed orbit one hour
and five minutes after launch, and deployed three Department of Defense
satellites 500 miles above Earth.
Sixteen minutes later, the rocket changed orbits to descend to 300 miles
above Earth. A NASA satellite, Starshine 3, was deployed on schedule at
two hours and 10 minutes after launch, at about 8:50 p.m.
Diller said signals from two of the Department of Defense satellites were
picked up at a station in South Africa and all three were transmitting when
they made their first orbit over Kodiak.
Likewise, the NASA satellite sent a signal picked up by the Palmer Station by
a National Science Foundation contractor in Antarctica 10 minutes after it
separated from the rocket, said Gil Moore, director of Project Starshine,
The three Defense Department satellites include a technology demonstration
spacecraft built in Great Britain to test vibration isolation and polymer battery
characteristics, and for observations of the ionosphere.
A communications satellite built by students at the Naval Academy will be
used by amateur radio operators.
The third satellite is a microsatellite built by students from Stanford and
Washington universities to test infrared sensors. That satellite also holds a
digital camera and a voice synthesizer.
The Starshine 3 satellite is a three-foot sphere covered with 1,500 aluminum
mirrors polished by children in classrooms worldwide. It will gather
information about how the upper atmosphere reacts to solar radiation.
Students who helped polish the mirrors will track the satellite and report their
findings on a Web site.
"It's must the start," said Moore, who did not try to contain his excitement.
"Now we've got four years of data coming."
Extremists use rhetoric, not facts
September 26, 2001
By REP. JOHN HARRIS
It comes as no surprise that a coalition of leftist political organizations would file an environmental lawsuit opposing the
construction of facilities for the National Missile Defense system here in Alaska. Anyone who has observed the obstructionist tactics of these groups over the years would have expected them to target the missile defense system at some point.What this latest lawsuit shows most clearly, however, is that their objective is not the protection of the environment so much as it is to wield inordinate and misplaced political power they have gained through manipulation of the public process.
The fact is, each of the sites to be included in the NMD system here in Alaska have been studied and environmental assessment documents are available that detail the potential impacts for each of them. These environmental studies were the subject of public hearings in locations throughout the effected areas of Alaska. If the environmental organizations feel they didn't get enough opportunity to give their opinions during the public process, I don't think they will find much sympathy among Alaskans. It galls me to hear their spokesperson claim that Alaskans don't want the missile defense system here. Aside from the small circle of tree-huggers and left-wing radicals in their organizations, I haven't met any Alaskans who don't want NMD.
Furthermore, the environmental impact statement and other assessment documents support the construction of a 100-missile system. The current effort of the Department of Defense would construct facilities for five missiles, not 100. It is beyond logic that the environmental groups would advocate for new environmental studies when the project is 95 percent smaller than originally planned.
What's going on here? These left-wing groups are not using the court system and the National Environmental Protection Act out of concern for the environment, but for political purposes. They attempt to scare Alaskans by using superheated rhetoric, such as referring to Alaska as ground zero, implying that Delta Junction or Kodiak will be the first target of America's enemies. This is just more of the same kind of nonsense we heard when these same groups pushed the Nuclear-Free Zone on us a decade or so ago. And since the NMD system has won bipartisan support in both the Congress and the Alaska Legislature, the opponents take their spurious arguments to court.
My only conclusion is that, for some unfathomable reason, the left-wing extremists want to see America defenseless. If President Bush chooses to withdraw from the ABM treaty, which Russia has ignored countless times, then the environmental left will use the American court system and NEPA to try to stop missile defense. I am as opposed to war as the next guy, but the obstructionists seem to believe the best defense is not to have a defense. I think the lessons of history show that the best way to defend your country is to make sure the world knows you are willing to fight for it. And in the post-Cold War world we are living in, a missile defense shield simply makes ultimate sense.
It is my hope and expectation that the court will recognize this lawsuit for what it is--a political ploy to delay NMD and throw itout.
John Harris, a lifelong Alaskan, represents Prince William Sound, Glennallen and Delta Junction in the state House
of Representatives.
Limits on missile defense moved from spending bill
By SAM BISHOP
News-Miner Washington Bureau
Sep. 20, 2001WASHINGTON--Seeking to avoid a floor fight that could delay the Defense
Department's budget, Democratic Sen. Carl Levin has split out into separate
legislation his controversial language that would limit missile defense testing.Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, on Wednesday
night introduced a new Defense authorization bill. The new version drops
language, approved by the committee Sept. 7, that would have required
congressional approval of any missile defense tests that violate the
Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.Levin put the dropped language in a new bill, which he also introduced
Wednesday night.Kathleen Long, Levin's spokeswoman, said the Michigan senator separated
the missile language in order to avoid a protracted debate over the main
Defense authorization bill."They wanted a bill they could vote on right away," Long said.
The move appeared to be a compromise with Republicans, who had
objected to Levin's attempts to limit the administration's testing plans.Sen. John Warner, R-Va. and the ranking minority member on the committee,
objected Wednesday night on the Senate floor to Levin's attempt to move the
revised bills to a second reading. However, he said he did so only for
"technical reasons.""It should not be interpreted--my objection--as animosity or anything
between the chairman and myself," Warner said. "It's just part of the
procedure, arcane though it may be."The fiscal 2002 Defense authorization bill, which describes the military
programs on which the government may spend money and caps the amount,
had been expected to come up on the Senate floor as early as Thursday.Instead, nearly half the Senate went to New York to meet with survivors of
Sept. 11's hijacked jet crashes and with rescue workers picking through the
rubble of the World Trade Center.Levin was among the senators, along with Sen. Frank Murkowski, R-Alaska.
Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, visited New York on Tuesday.Long, Levin's spokeswoman, said the main Defense authorization bill could
see a Senate floor vote as early as today. It's unclear when the separate bill
proposing to limit the missile testing will come to the floor.The main authorization bill would limit missile defense spending to $7 billion.
That's $1.3 billion less than President Bush wants.Meanwhile, the House may vote today on its own version of the Defense
authorization. There, too, missile defense has been a sticking point. The
House Armed Services Committee cut the president's request by $135
million, but some Democrats said that didn't go far enough.Early this month Reps. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., and John Spratt, D-S.C.,
proposed cutting an additional $919 million. Unlike the Senate's Democratic
trimmers, they specifically targeted the work proposed for next summer at
Fort Greely, 90 miles southeast of Fairbanks.However, Skelton and Spratt dropped their amendment after the Sept. 11
attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, according to an aide to
Spratt. He said it was no longer a tenable strategy to oppose something billed
as homeland defense.Instead, House Republicans and Democrats were likely today to agree on a
bill that calls for a compromise $400 million cut in the president's authority to
spend on missile defense work.The Senate and House must appoint a conference committee to work out
differences, and the result must be approved by both houses.The House bill contains no limitations on missile testing.
Levin and other Democrats will try to pass those at some later date in the
Senate. Toward that end, Levin's new bill takes four sections from the original
Armed Services Committee bill and makes them into a new document.The bill, S. 1439, would bar the administration from spending missile defense
money on "any activity that would be inconsistent with the requirements of the
Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972." The treaty, signed with the Soviet
Union, prohibits the deployment of systems to defend against ballistic missile
attack but allows some limited testing.Congress could lift the prohibition on tests that violate the treaty by passing a
joint resolution. That resolution could come only after the president has
certified that he has attempted to modify the ABM Treaty and that the
proposed testing is in the country's national security interest.The bill also would create a long list of reporting requirements to Congress
and a prohibition on moving money between different missile development
programs unless Congress is notified.
Delegation: Attack doesn't defuse missile defense
September 13, 2001
By SAM BISHOP
News-Miner Washington BureauWASHINGTON--Alaska's senators say they don't think the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon undermine the
logic behind a proposed system to defend the United States against intercontinental ballistic missile attack.Critics have long argued that the proposed missile defense system is too expensive for the benefits. Part of the system could be
based in Alaska, and the military wants to start building test facilities next summer in Fort Greely and on Kodiak Island."All the billions and billions of dollars that (President) Bush wants to throw at the missile defense program wouldn't have been
able to save those thousands of people yesterday," said Stacy Studebaker of the Kodiak Island Rocket Launch Information
Group, a 100-member organization that opposes the use of the state-owned facility on Kodiak for missile defense testing."I'm hoping it's a wake-up call to Congress to re-evaluate our plans. It's such an unrealistic scenario to defend against," said
Studebaker, a marine biologist, teacher and 22-year resident of Kodiak. "I hope that our congressional delegation will also be
reasonable in this, too, and support a change in this focus and get the ballistic missile defense program out of Alaska."That doesn't appear likely, based on statements Tuesday and Wednesday from Alaska's Republican senators.
Sen. Frank Murkowski acknowledged Wednesday afternoon that there has been "some debate" about "where you put your
priorities."But, in his view, the attacks haven't weakened arguments for a national missile defense system. "I think there's as much
justification today as there was before," he said.Defending against the variety of threats to the United States is in the national interest, he said. The only difference between a
missile attack and an anonymous terrorist attack is that a missile can be tracked back to its origin, he said.Sen. Ted Stevens said Tuesday evening that the jet attacks simply bolster what he and other missile defense proponents have
been saying."I think it proves the case that the threats against the United States are not those of a monolithic superpower like the Soviet
Union anymore," Stevens said."The threats are the threats from terroristic organizations, from rogue nations."
Since some of those groups and nations now have or could soon have missiles, he said, we need a way to defend against them.
The most controversial portion of the U.S. missile defense system proposal would seek to knock down a limited number of
intercontinental missiles as they fly through space in their "mid-course" phase.But Stevens said the several missile defense systems being developed by the military would try to meet a variety of threats, the
potential breadth of which were demonstrated by the jet attack."How do you protect against that?" he asked. "You protect against it with a whole system."
This fall, the military hopes to obtain money from Congress to start building silos next summer at Fort Greely, 90 miles southeast
of Fairbanks, to store missiles being tested as part of the proposed "mid-course" missile defense system. The military also wants
to build silos to help launch those interceptor missiles from the state facility at Kodiak Island.Democrats on a key Senate committee, though, last week refused to authorize the military's full missile defense funding request
and voted to put restrictions on its testing.Clearing for the silos at Fort Greely began late last month using money appropriated by Congress last year.
Maj. Bryan Hilferty, spokesman for the U.S. Army in Alaska, said Fort Greely is receiving "increased force protection" since the
terrorist attacks.Hilferty wouldn't elaborate on what that phrase meant. Since the base closure in early July and prior to the attacks, the entrance
to the abandoned base was not guarded, he said.Missile defense questions remain
Guest opinion, Stacey Fritz
Sep. 10, 2001Brochures put out by the Kodiak Chamber of Commerce usually feature a glossy cover picture of a Kodiak Brown bear, salmon-packed streams, or whales passing in front of the 'Emerald Isle' and its fishing fleet. The most recent brochure from Kodiak, however, depicts a rocket blasting off into space from the increasingly controversial Kodiak Launch Complex.
The Alaska Aerospace Development Corporation's rocket launch facility, despite its original promises to host commercial satellite launches and diversify Kodiak's economy, was recently selected by the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) to launch mock-ICBMs in hit-to-kill missile defense tests. Before that news had been digested, the BMDO announced its fast-paced "test bed" proposal last month and Kodiak residents learned they are slated to host silos and launches for ground-based interceptor missiles.
Three military representatives came to Kodiak on August 20 for a public meeting that concerned citizens demanded through the Chamber of Commerce. A growing number of islanders, many of whom originally supported the launch complex, are worried about the effects missile defense tests will have on tourism and the fishing industry.
Protest signs welcoming people to the meeting read: "Presenting now: Story time by the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization ~ sure to be a real fairy tale, bring the kids!" One resident wore a t-shirt depicting a green map of Kodiak Island half-covered with a large red target in response to a statement made by Chris Nelson, Alaska coordinator for national missile defense: "You've always been a target. How can you possibly be a bigger target than you already are?"
Lt. Col. Rick Lehner, spokesman for the BMDO, had help from David Hasley and Eric Sorrels of the US Army Space and Strategic Defense Command as the trio fielded questions, comments, pleas and insults from the approximately 250 residents who attended the question-and-answer session in the local high school auditorium. The session started with a brief presentation outlining the BMDO's plans for the launch facility at Narrow Cape and was broadcast over local radio. A total of two residents called in to thank the officials for their role in defending the country, providing the only positive feedback the military representatives received during the four-hour long meeting.
Residents focused most questions on the shortfalls they found in the previous environmental assessments that had been done for the complex and its launches. They are worried about the environmental effects of the chemicals involved in the Kodiak launches on sensitive fisheries and about the "special exclusion zones" of the missile defense rockets' trajectories, which include the villages of Akhiok and Old Harbor. Kodiak Natives in attendance spoke forcefully of their mistrust of the military's activities, a sentiment exacerbated by the recent developments. When the new launch trajectories were announced earlier this year, members of the Kodiak Rocket Launch Information Group questioned the BMDO officials and were told that underground shelters would be constructed for villagers to use during launches in the new flight-path.
Lt. Col. Lehner reassured the audience at the meeting that the BMDO would adhere to all the guidelines of the National Environmental Policy Act. Two days later, residents learned that Lehner's bosses back at the Pentagon appear to have a completely different plan. Worldcatch News Network, a fisheries related news reporting service, circulated an article on August 22 entitled "Military may seek exemption from Endangered Species Act {and} fisheries laws." While local fishermen are bound by the dictates of the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act, the military would prefer to ignore these laws. If the Pentagon has its way, missile silo construction and launches at the Kodiak Launch Complex (and all military activity everywhere in the country) would be exempt from the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act, the National Marine Sanctuaries Act, and the Coastal Zone Management Act.The ultimate irony for Alaska is that Senator Ted Stevens' promotion of missile defense in the state may result in a total disregard for the Fisheries Act he co-wrote in order to sustain and enhance the state's commercial fishing industry.
Apparently unconvinced by the BMDO's promises, the Kodiak group has joined other Alaskan and national organizations in a lawsuit opposing the Department of Defense's missile defense "test bed" proposal.
Stacey Fritz is a graduate student at UAF and the coordinator of a local group promoting educated opposition to missile defense in Alaska. Links to the Worldcatch article mentioned above and more information on the group and related activities are available at www.nonukesnorth.net.
Greely projects set stage for missile treaty battle
September 10, 2001
By JOHN J. LUMPKIN Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON -- It hardly seems the stuff of geopolitical significance: In forested flatlands about 100 miles from Fairbanks,
contractors are taking down 135 acres of fire-scorched spruce and birch trees on a closed military post.When they are done, they also will improve a few roads near Fort Greely and dig wells.
Next spring, given congressional approval, the Bush administration intends to dig some deep holes there, then fill them with five
interceptor missile silos.At some point during the work--precisely when is open to debate--the United States likely will come into conflict with the 1972
Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Russia. It is one of the fundamental arms control treaties of the Cold War.The administration says it will either withdraw from the treaty to avoid violating it, or it will reach a modified accord with Russia
allowing the work to go forward.Even during the Clinton administration, Fort Greely was a flashpoint for ABM treaty issues. Clinton considered using the fort as
the home for 100 interceptors that would serve as the nation's sole missile defense.The Bush administration has changed that. It is opting to test several missile defense technologies, including the ground-based
interceptor program backed by the Clinton administration.To do so, the military envisions a missile range spanning most of the north Pacific Ocean. Sites at Fort Greely, Kodiak Island
and Shemya would augment the existing test range that runs between Kwajalein in the Marshall Islands and Vandenberg Air
Force Base, Calif.Ballistic target missiles would be launched from one part of the range, either from a ground-based site or from an airplane. New
radars would track the missile as it arcs toward space, shedding boosters and possibly dropping decoys.Around 200 miles above the Earth, the targets would tip over and fall back toward the surface. One or several experimental
missile defenses--ground-based or naval interceptors, airborne lasers, or possibly orbital weapons--would try to shoot it down.The ABM treaty has provisions against testing many of those defenses. Even using certain ship radars, or several radars in
tandem, to track missiles during flight tests could create problems with compliance, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz
acknowledged in congressional testimony in July.The giant range is necessary to give the programs adequate testing, said Lt. Col. Rick Lehner, a spokesman for the Ballistic
Missile Defense Organization, the Pentagon agency running missile defense.He said there is only one trajectory for missiles flying between Kwajalien and California; with the multiple launch sites, there
would be several.Building the range will cost $800 million, much of that for a new, high-resolution radar in Hawaii, Lehner said.
Fort Greely would be an interceptor missile base. Crews there would practice loading and unloading interceptor missiles from
silos. Others would run an operations center and conduct launch drills, but no plans are in place for missiles to take off from
Greely, Lehner said.Those five silos, however, would be operational, and nothing would prevent the missiles inside from being used in an emergency,
officials said.Should the interceptor program go forward, Greely likely would be the site for the real thing. The 135 acres being cleared at
Greely would provide enough space for 100 silos, Lehner said.Greely was shut down in the 1995 base closure round. Its virtue as a base was its arctic conditions. The Army tested equipment
performance in temperatures that regularly dip below minus 50 degrees Fahrenheit.Now, much of its 750,000 acres serve as a bombing range for military aircraft.
When the base closed, Delta Junction, a community of about 3,000, lost about half of its job base. The town's economic
development director is happy to see the military return."They will have an awful lot of construction people, and they will have a lot of rocket scientists working out there and living in the
community," Pete Hallgren said.For all the activity planned for Greely, Delta residents do not expect to see missiles overhead anytime soon. During tests,
interceptors ordered launched from Greely would take off from Kodiak Island, hundreds of miles to the southwest.On the island is the Kodiak Launch Complex, opened by the state in 1998 as a commercial space venture. Because Kodiak,
unlike Fort Greely, is already cleared for rocket launches, the military would simply rent the launch facilities and build two
interceptor silos, and fire between two and four interceptor shots a year, Lehner said.Kodiak might later be used to launch target missiles for airborne laser and naval interceptor tests, but the site is not suited for
deployment of any ABM systems, he said.A number of island residents have protested the planned launches, saying they want the complex used solely for civilian
purposes.A coalition of environmental and arms control groups sued the Defense Department last week to force a fresh round of
environmental studies for the test range.The Pentagon argues that studies performed under the Clinton administration are adequate. An additional study for the Kodiak
operations has been ordered.
Missile defense activists
converge on DeltaSides find some common
groundBy VICTORIA
NAEGELE For the
News-Miner
Sep. 9, 2001There were no battle lines drawn as
groups both for and opposed to
National Missile Defense
converged on Fort Greely near
Delta Junction early Saturday
afternoon.Instead, supporters and opponents
of a missile test bed at the shuttered Army base swapped points of view on
the controversial Department of Defense project. Surprisingly, the two groups
found common ground. The sticking points were often how to accomplish
common goals of peace and economic prosperity.Anti-NMD adherents faced Deltans concerned about jobs; Deltans faced
protesters who see the NMD project as both a waste of money and a threat
to global peace.About 50 people carpooled from Fairbanks to Delta for a peaceful protest of
missile defense organized by Stacey Fritz, coordinator of No Nukes North.
About 40 Deltans greeted the protesters there. The exchange provided more
illumination than sparks."We really realize it is a critical jobs issue," said Philip Marshall of Fairbanks,
who came to protest the long-term allotment of tax dollars for a what he calls
a problem-ridden technology.Rena Case, a Deltan in favor of the project, said she believed there are some
flaws to be ironed out with the missile shield. But Case said some sort viable
defense for Alaska is critical."There's got to be an answer," Case said.
"Let's hope we don't find out the hard way," added Jan Lokken of Fairbanks.
Some in the crowd quickly agreed to disagree, and shared ideas in the
shadow of the Fort Greely entrance sign.Suzanne Rich of Fairbanks suggested the Delta economy could be boosted
by a wind generator that provides an alternative energy source."I'm sure Delta needs money and that's why it likes missile defense," she said.
But Deltans indicated their endorsement of the plan is about more than
money--it is about national security and patriotism.Fourteen-year-old Luke Bowdre said the project is about keeping America
safe."I want us to keep the American flag over our nation," Bowdre said. "Right
now, the only way to do that is to have missiles that would stop nuclear
warheads."People like Holly Beck and Anna Stitt see national missile defense as a
precursor to an arms buildup."Nuclear war scares me," Beck said, calling for a new peace movement to
restore the country's peaceful image.One of the most divisive points was how the United States should deal with
North Korea. Deltans like Nat Good and Nancy Kennedy, and Kaelin
Mahnke of Juneau, argue Alaska, especially, needs a strong defense against
an attack from the Far East. Lynn DeFilippo of No Nukes North said she
believes such fears are not rational, since North Korea is not a nuclear threat.Many of the discussions centered on how the United States will spend its
money--billions on missile defense instead of on environmental cleanup,
education, social programs, etc."My main deal for being here is the NMD system is not the best way to
protect Alaska and to stimulate the economy," said Jay Strange of Fairbanks.His position didn't sway Stormie Mitchell of Delta.
"He's entitled to his own opinion," Mitchell said. "We've agreed to disagree."
Strange and others didn't find many arguments with calls to spend government
funding wisely.When Ester retiree Bill Fuller strolled by with a sign that read: "It's our money.
Don't let the politicians waste it," Mahnke, who came out in support of NMD,
nodded his head. "I agree with that sign."Others found themselves agreeing where they had not expected. It was, Rich
said, a refreshing forum for ideas."People are talking to each other instead of just drawing lines," Rich said.
"We're just ordinary people talking."Soren Wuerth of Alaska Action Center stressed National Missile Defense is
an issue that transcends Delta Junction, the region, Alaska and even the
United States. As the demonstration drew to a close, Wuerth urged everyone
to keep an open mind."We have to learn as much as possible from the local folks, as well as from
people in the U.S. government," Wuerth said. "Everyone has a stake in it."The world is going to be looking at Delta," he said.
Democrats query missile defense blueprint, budget
September 06, 2001
By SAM BISHOP
News-Miner Washington BureauWASHINGTON--Several Democratic senators criticized a proposed $3 billion increase in missile defense spending during a
subcommittee hearing here Wednesday, though their fellow Democratic chairman staunchly defended the Pentagon's plan.The Senate Appropriation Committee's subcommittee on military spending invited Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to
offer some final comments on his proposed $328.9 billion budget for the coming fiscal year.Several of the panel's Democrats expressed skepticism about the cost and wisdom of developing a system to shoot down
enemy intercontinental ballistic missiles.Research on that system would receive about $4 billion in Rumsfeld's budget.
The Pentagon's current missile defense proposal envisions placing a battery of missile-intercepting rockets in Alaska several
years from now. In the meantime, several test rockets would be stored at Fort Greely and launched from Kodiak, with work on
the necessary silos to start next summer.Sen. Daniel Inouye, the subcommittee's chairman, told Rumsfeld that he fully supported the administration's military spending
request, which he described as a $26.3 billion boost from the current year.But Rumsfeld needs "to convince these skeptics," Inouye said, referring to his fellow Democrats. "Many of my colleagues believe
your request is excessive," he said, and listed missile defense as one of the sticking points.Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said she was "greatly concerned" about the cost of and strategy behind the missile defense
system. The cost could run into the several hundreds of millions, she said. When she talks to military personnel, she said, they
are far less concerned about a missile threat than a terrorist attack.Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said such an attack could come from a "small ship" carrying a "large nuclear bomb." Sen. Herb Kohl,
D-Wis., told Rumsfeld he couldn't understand the justification for a missile defense.Rumsfeld said he, in turn, had trouble understanding Kohl's view. "To say 'If we can't defend against everything, why should we
defend against anything?' is a leap of logic I can't make," Rumsfeld said.With Democrats controlling the Senate, the skepticism expressed by that party's members could pose problems for Rumsfeld's
request.Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich. and chairman of the Armed Services Committee, is holding closed hearings all week on legislation
authorizing expenditures on defense for the coming year. Levin has made no secret of his opposition to the program, and the
authorization level his committee approves theoretically isn't supposed to be exceeded by the Appropriations Committee when it
crafts the actual spending bills.But Inouye, a missile defense supporter, is in charge of the defense appropriations and he made his views clear Wednesday.
"I for one believe it is essential that we provide the resources necessary for defense," he said. "If we want to prevent war, we
must prepare for war."Inouye acknowledged, though, that the proposed military spending increase was more difficult to defend since the federal budget
surplus has disappeared with the current economic decline and passage of Bush's tax cut.Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M. and chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, said he thinks there is enough surplus left to cover
the Bush administration's budget without dipping into funds collected to pay for Social Security and Medicare."For this year, I believe you can get by," Domenici said.
Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska and the ranking member on both the Defense subcommittee and the full Appropriations
Committee, agreed with Domenici. "We're dealing with estimates," Stevens said, and a person "could easily conclude" that there
is still a surplus. "I intend to support the chairman (Inouye) in his remarks."Inouye also said during the hearing, though, that the administration's request exceeds the amount Congress approved for military
spending in the budget caps it set this spring. Ignoring the cap could make the spending bill vulnerable to a "point of order" on
the Senate floor that would require 60 votes to overturn, Inouye said.Inouye asked Rumsfeld if the Bush administration would object if Congress waived the budget cap. Rumsfeld said he had no
specific answer from the White House, other than to note that Bush has said defense and education are his highest priorities.Domenici said the point of order poses a problem only if the total spending approved by Congress in the coming months, not the
spending in individual bills, goes over the total approved in the budget resolution last spring. The limit on overall spending won't
kick in until the last spending bill is on the floor, he said. That bill may or may not be the defense spending bill, he said.
Delta makes wish list for missile-related projects
By VICKI NAEGELE
For the News-Miner Sep. 6, 2001The city of Delta Junction plans to ask the federal government for more than
$13.5 million in Title 10 funding to mitigate the impacts of the National Missile
Defense Test Bed Project at Fort Greely.Capital projects account for $9.58 million, while programs and salaries total
$3.97 million of the fiscal 2002 request.The amount is about $4.5 million more than the $9 million figure recently
bandied about in discussion between National Missile Defense officials and
Mayor Roy Gilbertson. If all or part of the money is included in a federal
appropriations bill, it could become available later this year.The council's request, expected to go to U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens by Friday,
will include $3.5 million for a new landfill and $2.8 million to study and design
new city buildings, including a public recreation center, fire station, city hall
and library.The city is seeking another $1.5 million to pave 20 miles of the city's 29 miles
of roads; $500,000 would be used to keep Fort Greely School heated and
maintained.Other requests include $130,000 for a new ambulance, $493,112 for a fire
station with foam capability at the city's airport and $175,000 for
improvements at Delta's Visitors Center. Another $75,000 would be used to
convert the building at the old city landfill into a heated garage to house a fire
truck.The plan, finalized by city council members on Tuesday, includes a ballpark
figure of $1.5 million to be channeled through the state Division of Health and
Human Services. State officials were finalizing that wish list Wednesday.According to Pete Hallgren, economic development director for the city, the
federal funds may be passed through the state, which will also be largely
responsible for a 10 percent match. City funds and in-kind commitments--like
land--will likely make up the remainder, Hallgren said.The request, which was completed with the help of consultants with Hegarty
and Associates of Fairbanks, includes long-range funding requests through
fiscal year 2005. Because this request had a short turnaround time, input from
state, school and other officials is limited.The request is prefaced by information designed to show how the funds will
be used to meet needs that have cropped up in the community because of the
National Missile Defense project. That is another reason city officials said
they will concentrate first on roads, emergency services and the landfill. The
U.S. Army has specificially requested a new city landfill because the old
landfill at Fort Greely will be closed.City officials pared their draft request by pushing back construction of a $14
million community recreation center and other new city buildings.Mayor Roy Gilbertson urged the council to start with what he called the
essentials."We need to be realistic," Gilbertson said.
The other council members and consultant Kelley Hegarty agreed.
"They (the Department of Defense) could decide not to proceed with NMD
and (fiscal 2002) would be the only year you'd see anything," Hegarty said.If that happened, cautioned Councilwoman Mary Dowling, the city could be
stuck with new facilities for which it had no operating funds.With that in mind, the council delayed most of the request for the $14 million
recreational center funding. The bulk of that request would be split between
fiscal years 2003 and 2004. Left in the fiscal '02 budget is $1 million for
recreational center planning, as well as $1.8 million to design some
combination of other city buildings. Council members indicated they envision
one or two new multi-purpose city buildings, including a library twice the size
of the current one.Other expenditures on the long-term plan include $7.2 million for city
buildings in fiscal 2003 and $11 million for a new school in 2005. But
Delta/Greely School Superintendent Dan Beck said the school building figure
is just a marker and does not reflect with any accuracy what request may be
made after the school district assesses its building plans."We're still in the process of trying to identify what our capital needs are,"
Beck said Wednesday.The city also intends to ask for another $500,000 in fiscal 2003 and $1
million in 2004 for paving.Besides the capital improvement projects and equipment needs, the city is
also asking for money to spur economic development, for studies and training,
and for salaries.City council members were leery of offering grant money to local businesses,
but requested $1.5 million each year for a revolving loan fund, which could be
administered through Delta Regional Economic Development Council.Councilwoman Susan Kemp noted economic assistance is a priority on the
request guidelines given city officials by the Department of Defense."It's the biggest item in there," Kemp said.
Councilman Mark Weller urged the council to use strict criteria for the loans.
"We would not want it to turn into an ag project boondoggle," Weller said.
Feasibility studies and capital project planning get a $250,000 line item in the
budget request, with a community water project earmarked for $150,000.
Emergency training is slated for $10,000 each year.The city is requesting $512,350 for wages and benefits for city employees: an
administrator, planner, support staff, finance officer, fire employee and
dispatchers. Nearly half of that would cover the pay, benefits and liability
insurance for emergency services dispatching.While the request for funds is about 27 times the usual city operating budget
of $500,000, city officials have no qualms about expecting the federal
funding."There has not been anything done to mitigate this whole BRAC (base
realignment and closure) thing to Delta," Kemp said.But Hallgren cautioned that even if the high-end development scenario for
missile defense is realized, the city will have to wean itself from the federal
dole."We have to come up with our own funding source here," Hallgren said. "We
can't expect the Feds to be coming up with the money forever."
Fairbanks group fights missile defense system
Staff and wire reports, Aug. 29, 2001
A Fairbanks-based group is among a coalition of environmental and public
interest groups that has sued the Defense Department in federal court
Tuesday to require a fresh round of environmental studies.The groups worry about the potential hazards of missile defense testing on the
West Coast.They contend in a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.,
that the 1969 National Environmental Policy Act requires the Pentagon to
conduct new studies of the effects that the proposed Star Wars test range
would have on the Pacific Ocean region between Alaska, Hawaii, California
and the Marshall Islands."I think it is illegal for them to try and construct this test bed in the Pacific,
including Alaska, using that old (Environmental Impact Study) which is for
something completely different," said Stacey Fritz, founder of No Nukes
North, the plaintiff based in Fairbanks.A new supplemental environmental impact study on the Pentagon's missile
defense program and a second, more specific study on how the program
would affect localities are required, the groups say. That is because the testing
would have a significant environmental impact and the studies in 1994 and
2000 were for old programs that the Bush administration replaced with a new
proposal and testing schedule, they say.The administration proposal includes plans for an emergency anti-missile
system with five missile silos operating from Fort Greely near Delta Junction
by 2004."By its own admission, the Bush administration has radically revised the
missile defense program," said David Adelman, a senior attorney for the
Natural Resources Defense Council, in Washington, D.C. "It can't do that
without reassessing the potential environmental damage and providing for
public comment. Otherwise, it's breaking the law."Steve Cleary of the Alaska Public Interest Research Group said at an
Anchorage news conference Tuesday that the new plans include involving
Fort Greely in the National Missile Defense System test bed, plus sea-based
interceptors and airborne lasers that were not mentioned in the first two
environmental impact statements."They're putting the cart of missiles before the horse and they're endangering
Alaska and the ecosystems that we all depend on," Cleary said.The Pentagon has been planning to start construction early next year. If the
Defense Department does not agree to a new study, the Natural Resources
Defense Council plans to ask the federal judge for an injunction to require the
study in advance of any construction, said NRDC senior researcher
Christopher Paine.The new study could take from six to 18 months and could affect the
administration's plans to withdraw from the 1972 Anti-ballistic Missile Treaty,
he said.Along with the NRDC and AkPIRG, groups filing suit were Physicians for
Social Responsibility, Greenpeace USA, Alaska Action Center, Alaska
Community Action on Toxics, Kodiak Rocket Launch Information Group,
and No Nukes North: Alaskan and Circumpolar Coalition Against Missile
Defense.Melanie Duchin, an Anchorage activist with Greenpeace, said the proposed
testing is immoral as well as illegal."Alaskans or anybody else who cares about the planet and the threat of a
new nuclear arms race are not going to sit by while this administration
threatens Alaska's environment with a program that endangers the entire
world."Fritz, of the Fairbanks-based group No Nukes North, said that Alaska is
being into made the heart of a dangerous Star Wars program."Star Wars threatens to ignite a new nuclear arms race as well as directly
jeopardizing the people of Alaska, which is why Alaskan groups have joined
to take the lead in stopping this dangerous and unnecessary weapons
programs," she said.The suit lists environmental impacts associated with the expanded missile
defense program: construction of new facilities and testing programs in Alaska
and other places; disruption of pristine ecosystems from laying cable and from
test launches; space debris from planned interception tests in low earth orbit;
deposits in the atmosphere of large quantities of ozone-depleting chemicals
from rocket launches.Lt. Col. Rick Lehner, spokesman for the Pentagon's Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization, said the previous environmental studies are adequate. A study
completed last year analyzed how missile defenses would affect parts of
Alaska and North Dakota, based on a Clinton administration plan to base
100 missile interceptors at Fort Greely."We spent the past three years doing an environmental impact statement for
Alaska and North Dakota, and it's an extremely comprehensive document
and it covers operations at Fort Greely," Lehner said. "Now, we're not
looking to do 100 interceptors, just five silos."Lehner said the groups are using the environment as subterfuge to try to halt
the missile defense program and keep the United States in the ABM pact,
which the administration has argued would conflict with its testing schedule in
the Pacific range."Their obvious, true agenda is to try to cancel missile defense, for political
reasons and not for environmental concerns," he said. "NEPA was not
envisioned as a means of political opposition."The Pentagon plans to do a study, however, for Alaska's Kodiak Island since
the military proposes to use a state-operated missile launch site there. The
state has been trying to attract businesses hoping to launch commercial
satellites, and the military also would use commercial boosters there, Lehner
said.
Clearing begins at Greely for missile site
August 28, 2001
Staff and wire reports
A contractor for the Army began clearing land at Fort Greely Monday
for an anti-ballistic missile site.Workers will spend at least a couple days of clearing with a hydro ax, a
huge mower that can splinter brush and small trees, then start grading the
area to prepare for the missile silos, according to the Army Corps of
Engineers.Contracts haven't yet been issued for any silos or buildings, said John
Killoran, a spokesman for the Army Corps of Engineers."That whole issue is in Washington," he said, where Congress and the
administration will decide what development takes place.If the Army gets the go-ahead, Killoran said told The Associated Press,
"the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization will then move as fast as they
can to get contracts out to do the actual site construction. But no one
knows at this point when and if" that will happen.The Pentagon is hoping to start work on that next spring if the money
comes through. Killoran said the contract for the site preparation work
calls for it to be completed by the middle of December.The ground work is being done through a nearly $5 million contract
awarded to Aglaq Construction Enterprises, a subsidiary of Point Hope
Native Corp. Brice Inc. of Fairbanks is the subcontractor for much of the
work.The contractor will clear the land, build an access road, and dig a couple
of wells for the future construction of missile silos and associated facilities
in an area about a quarter-mile south of Fort Greely's main post. The fort
has been essentially vacant since July.In the first phase, missiles would be stored in up to five silos at Fort
Greely, then shipped to Kodiak for test launches for the proposed missile
defense system. The military hopes to have the Fort Greely and Kodiak
facilities ready for those tests to begin in two years.After that, test launches might be conducted from Fort Greely itself.
Eventually, the post could be the main site for a full-blown national missile
shield with up to 100 interceptor missiles launched from there in case of
an attack. But that is many years and many billions of dollars down the
road.The goal behind the system is to counter accidental launches, terrorism,
or attacks from "rogue nations," rather than an all-out nuclear assault
from Russia or China.Meanwhile, federal spending on missile defense systems has yet to be
decided by Congress, which returns from its annual August recess next
week.That means the Pentagon's proposed work for next summer in Alaska
could still face some hurdles.The Pentagon has asked for $7 billion for research and development
work to be conducted by the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.That money would pay for work on a variety of missile systems, including
the interceptors that military planners hope to store at Fort Greely and
launch from Kodiak Island.The ground-based system would receive the largest chunk of the
money--about $3.2 billion. That's up from about $2 billion in the current
fiscal year.According to testimony at a congressional hearing in late July, about 10
percent of the money for the ground-based system would be used for
construction. Patricia Sanders, the BMDO's deputy for testing, told the
Senate Appropriations military construction subcommittee that much of
the requested $300 million would be spent in Alaska. The proposed
work includes the following:* At Fort Greely, five silos for the interceptors designed to shoot down
mock enemy missiles, along with a battle management "control node" and
two systems to communicate with the interceptors during flight. No test
launches from Fort Greely are planned.* A missile transfer facility at Eielson Air Force Base.
* Two launch silos and an in-flight communications system at Kodiak.
* New radar software and a power plant on Shemya Island in the
Aleutians.Pentagon officials have said they hope start work on at least some of this
by April. The military spending bills have been delayed by Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's intensive review of Pentagon programs,
though.Last year, the spending bills for Defense agencies and military
construction were among the first passed by Congress and signed by
then-President Clinton. This year, the military spending bills lag behind
nearly all other spending bills on the congressional calendar.Besides the construction, the military wants the money to continue its test
launches, some of which are likely to occur at Kodiak.News-Miner Washington reporter Sam Bishop contributed to this
report.© 1999-2001 MediaNews Group, Inc. and Fairbanks Publishing
Company, Inc.
Fort Greely missile work gets under wayAugust 24, 2001
By SEAN COCKERHAM
Staff WriterThe expected arrival of a survey crew at Fort Greely today will mark the
launch of a venture with major global significance.The scope of the work itself is unremarkable--build a road, clear some
trees, dig a couple of wells, do a few other assorted tasks.But the Fort Greely site preparation job represents a milestone in the
controversial proposal to eventually create an anti-ballistic missile field at
the post just outside Delta Junction.The ground work is being done through a nearly $5 million contract
awarded to Aglaq Construction Enterprises, a subsidiary of a Point Hope
Native corporation. Brice Inc. of Fairbanks is the subcontractor.The Army Corps of Engineers gave the final go-ahead for the work to
begin after a Thursday morning meeting in Fairbanks with representatives
from the construction firms."Early next week they will be moving hydro ax equipment onto the site
along with a work trailer and other equipment," said Pat Richardson, a
spokeswoman with the Army Corps of Engineers. "And begin clearing
with the hydro ax equipment."A hydro ax is an 8-foot mower that cuts brush and small trees down to
5-inch stubble.The hydro ax work is designed to clear the land for the future
construction of missile silos on Fort Greely in an area that is located
about a quarter-mile south of the main post.The Pentagon hopes to secure congressional funding to start building silos
there in April.The plan is for missiles to be stored at Fort Greely as part of an
expanded Pacific "test bed" for the proposed missile defense system. The
missiles would be shipped to Kodiak for test launches.But the Pentagon is also considering possible test launches from Fort
Greely itself sometime in the future and eventually hopes to make the post
into the core of a full-blown national missile shield.The proposal has generated international interest in the shuttered post
outside the small Richardson Highway community. A crew from a
Japanese television station traveled to Fort Greely to film recently, noted
Maj. Bryan Hilferty, an Army spokesman.The Army has discussed the possibility of beefed-up security measures
on the post, where only 11 soldiers have been stationed since it was
largely shut down earlier this summer."We have had meetings," Hilferty said. "We realize that we don't have
that many people there, and it is a (location) of international concern
now."Much of the concern centers around the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile
Treaty with the then-Soviet Union.Pentagon lawyers have ruled that this summer's site preparation work at
Fort Greely does not violate the treaty. But U.S. Undersecretary of State
John Bolton said this week that missile defense research was
approaching limits imposed by the treaty.The treaty effectively bans national missile shields through the logic that
no nation will launch a nuclear strike if it cannot defend itself against the
counterstrike that is sure to follow. Russia has stated that the treaty is
vital for global security.The U.S. argues that the proposal is just for a limited missile shield
designed to block accidental launches, terrorism, or attacks from
so-called rogue nations such as North Korea and Libya.Talks with the Russians about possible joint development of a missile
system have so far failed to bear fruit, and U.S. officials have indicated
that they will withdraw from the 1972 treaty rather than let Russian
objections halt the missile defense program.
Missile tests at Kodiak site proposedAugust 22, 2001
The Associated Press
KODIAK--Missiles used for mid-range interceptor missile tests would
be headed to the Kodiak Launch Complex under the newest proposal by
the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.The missiles would be safely shipped inside metal canisters, said Lt. Col.
Rick Lehner, among the military representatives who spoke during a
four-hour, animated town meeting in Kodiak Monday night.Lehner and other officials were on hand to answer questions on how a
proposed missile defense test-bed program announced last month might
affect the launch facility at Narrow Cape. "The missile goes inside the
canister and the canister goes inside the silo," said Lehner, spokesman for
the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization in Washington D.C.The Pentagon's plan is to store the interceptor missiles at Fort Greely,
then ship them to the Kodiak Launch Complex for the test launches. The
hope is to have the Fort Greely and Kodiak facilities ready for those tests
to begin in two years.Fort Greely is the Pentagon's choice for the full-blown missile defense
system should the test bed phase be completed and it is ever deployed.The plan still needs congressional approval.
Most of those who spoke from the audience in Kodiak expressed doubts
about the new plans, the Kodiak Daily Mirror reported."I knew this would be a fairy tale and it started six years ago," said Vicki
Jo Kennedy, one Kodiak's most visible public opponents of the missile
defense proposal. "If you came here with all this then, we would have run
you off the island."Under the proposed program, the test missiles would be used to shoot
down test missiles headed from California or Hawaii.Colliding with a test warhead would destroy the other missile, and ensure
that there is nothing left, according to Lehner. "There will be no nuclear
weapons, no explosives, just hit-to-kill technologies," he said.The goal is to create an integrated missile test bed that can realistically
simulate incoming missiles, and that can perform simultaneous intercept
tests from a variety of locations, Lehner said.Kodiak was selected because it was immediately available for use, he
said. Launches from Alaska also would most realistically resemble
incoming missiles sent from a country like North Korea, he said.Eric Sorrells, from the Army's Space and Strategic Defense Command,
downplayed concerns that Kodiak eventually would be used as a
deployment site."It's a good place for testing, but is a bad place for deployment," Sorrells
said, adding that many aspects of the Kodiak facility fail to meet
expected performance requirements. Even the Fort Greely site barely
meets those requirements, he added.Fort Greely is the preferred location, however, because it has all the
support infrastructure needed for deployment, Sorrels said.The military initially plans to launch between two to four interceptor test
missiles a year, and would like to test as many as seven or eight from
Kodiak, Lehner said.
Native corporation gets Fort Greely contractAugust 18, 2001
By SEAN COCKERHAM
Staff WriterThe Department of Defense on Friday awarded an almost $5 million
contract for a Point Hope Native corporation to prepare Fort Greely to
become a national missile defense test site.The award is the most concrete step thus far in the proposal to transform
the shuttered base outside Delta Junction into the eventual core of the
Pentagon's desired missile shield.The Army Corps of Engineers awarded the site preparation contract to
Aglaq Construction Enterprises, which is a subsidiary of Tikigaq Native
Corp. of the northwest Alaska village of Point Hope.Aglaq, which has offices in Point Hope and Anchorage, will subcontract
with a Fairbanks company, Brice Inc.The contract is to clear trees to allow for the future installation of
interceptor missile silos, build a main access road, drill two water wells,
and conduct other work including soil excavation and grading.The Army Corps of Engineers plans to issue a formal notice next
week--after which the work could start immediately. The contract calls
for the site work to be completed by mid-December.The Pentagon hopes to subsequently construct up to five missile silos at
Fort Greely as part of an expanded Pacific "test bed" for the proposed
national missile defense system.Proposed funding for that work awaits congressional approval.
"We're looking to do possible silo construction and other stuff next April
at Fort Greely," said Lt. Col Rick Lehner, spokesman for the Ballistic
Missile Defense Organization in Washington D.C.The Pentagon's plan is to store the interceptor missiles at Fort Greely,
then ship them to the Kodiak Launch Complex for the test launches. The
hope is to have the Fort Greely and Kodiak facilities ready for those tests
to begin in two years."There is no present intent to test fire interceptor missiles from Fort
Greely," according to a notice placed in the federal register this week.
"Any potential future decision to test fire at Fort Greely would only occur
after a thorough environmental and safety analysis was performed.""In the event of a missile attack on the United States, the test bed at Fort
Greely could potentially be used for ballistic missile defense," the
Department of Defense notice added.Fort Greely is the Pentagon's choice for the full-blown missile defense
system should the test bed phase be completed and it is ever deployed.
That could mean up to 100 interceptor missiles eventually based at Fort
Greely and launched from there in case of an attack.Initially basing the smaller-scale test bed at Fort Greely, even though the
test launches are to be conducted in Kodiak, allows the military to test
the infrastructure and work on design for an eventual larger system, the
Department of Defense said.The goal behind the national missile defense system is to counter
accidental launches, terrorism, or attacks from "rogue nations," rather
than an all-out nuclear assault from Russia or China.But the proposed missile shield has drawn much fire from critics abroad
and in the United States. Missile test results so far have been mixed and
critics note that the technology is far from proven.Detractors also argue that the proposal could spark a new arms race by
violating the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with the then-Soviet
Union. The treaty prohibits deployment of such national missile shields.Recent talks have thus far failed to convince Russia to budge on its
opposition to modifying or abandoning the treaty. But U.S. officials
intend to proceed despite Russian objections.A top Russian general has indicated that tests alone would not encroach
on the 1972 pact, and Pentagon lawyers have ruled that the imminent site
preparation work at Fort Greely is not a treaty violation.The Army Corps of Engineers awarded the site preparation contract to
Aglaq Construction Enterprises through a Small Business Act program
for awarding contracts to Native-owned firms.The corps evaluated all firms that qualify under the act and determined
that Aglaq is the best choice.
Russia softens on treaty
Delta Junction, Clear prepare for big changes
August 11, 2001
By SEAN COCKERHAM
Staff WriterA top Russian general indicated this week that construction of a missile test
system in Alaska could be done within the bounds of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic
Missile Treaty.His statements reflect an apparent softening in the Russian position regarding
the proposal to create an expanded missile shield testing program that
includes Fort Greely near Delta Junction.Meanwhile, the Alaska National Guard is moving forward to prepare for the
possibility of an eventual missile defense system deployment. That includes
the likelihood of its taking over the manning of Clear Air Force Station from
the Air Force.General Yuri Baluyevsky, deputy chief of the Russian General Staff, told
reporters in Washington, D.C. that missile defense testing alone would not
violate the ABM treaty as long as Russia was notified beforehand.The Washington Times reported that Baluyevsky even said that the
proposed creation of infrastructure in Alaska for missile shield tests could be
within the ABM treaty limits."Automatically, it would not mean violation of the treaty," the Times quoted
the general as saying. "Under the treaty, testing can be carried out, but only
with notification."Less than a month ago the Russian foreign minister said planned construction
of silos at Fort Greely as part of a missile shield test system would be a
violation of the ABM treaty between the United States and the then-Soviet
Union. That, he warned, could spark a new arms race.But in the meantime President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin
agreed to link U.S. missile defense with discussions of large cuts that the
Kremlin wants in both nations' nuclear arsenals.The series of international developments are being closely tracked in the
Richardson Highway community of Delta Junction.Pete Hallgren, economic development director for the city of Delta Junction,
said the missile shield backers in Delta are enthused by the recent turn of
events."All the rumors going around town are good these days," Hallgren said.
"Which is a whole lot better than we've seen in the past."The Pentagon hopes to put up to five missile silos at the recently shuttered
Fort Greely as part of an expanded Pacific "test bed" for the proposed
national missile defense system.Those missiles would be stored at Fort Greely then shipped to Kodiak for
test launches. Fort Greely has been identified as the preferred location for a
full-blown defense system that could include around 100 missiles should it
eventually be deployed.That proposed full defense system would still be a limited shield designed to
stop accidental launches or attacks from "rogue nations" rather than an
all-out Russian or Chinese nuclear assault.The military has announced plans to issue a contract of up to $9 million for
land clearing and road improvement at Fort Greely this summer to prepare
for its missile defense program.There has been sparring in Congress over that expenditure, and it is unclear
when the work would start. U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens' office said Friday that
the Alaska Republican is traveling during the congressional break and needs
to be briefed before assessing the current situation.Influential missile defense critics in Congress note that the technology for the
system is far from proven and argue that scuttling of the 1972 ABM treaty
for the deployment of a limited missile shield would make the world a more
dangerous place.The Russian general Baluyevsky, while saying this week that the tests alone
would not violate the treaty, added that he doubted it will prove
technologically possible to build an effective missile shield.Should the missile defense system be developed through the tests and
eventually deployed, it would likely be manned by full-time members of the
Alaska National Guard.Some members of the Alaska Guard have already been involved in
simulated missile defense training in Colorado, said Maj. Gen. Phil Oates,
commander of the Alaska National Guard.Oates also said that the Alaska Air National Guard expects this fall to
receive a green light from the Air Force to gradually take over the staffing of
the Air Force's Clear Air Force Station near Anderson.Following software upgrades to the current radar at Clear, the air station
would serve as a part of an early warning radar for use as part of the
national missile defense system, Oates said.The idea is that the National Guard would gradually assume the staffing
responsibilities at Clear over a six-year period. Some 100 full-time members
of the National Guard would be stationed at Clear by the end of that time
frame, Oates said.The Guard members could live with their families in the Anderson area or
reside elsewhere in Alaska and commute to shifts at the air station, Oates
said, similar to the work shifts on the North Slope oil fields. The Guard
would need to recruit and train for the jobs.Even if the National Missile Defense System is never deployed, Oates said,
he expects the Alaska Air National Guard would take over the staffing of
Clear as part of its overall expanded mission.
U.S. eyes $300 million for missile work
August 01, 2001
By SAM BISHOP
News-Miner Washington BureauWASHINGTON--The Pentagon is defending its plan to clear land and
improve roads at Fort Greely for work on a missile defense program this
summer by using money Congress has already given it for the system.Meanwhile, a missile defense official said Tuesday the Pentagon wants $300
million for missile defense-related construction work during the coming fiscal
year. Most of the construction would occur in Alaska.Undersecretary of Defense Dov Zakheim told a Senate Appropriations
subcommittee that money in the current year's budget should pay for $9
million of land clearing and roads at Fort Greely.The Pentagon hopes to put up five missile silos there as part of an expanded
Pacific "test bed" for a missile defense system. It gave Congress notice in
mid-July that it planned to issue a contract for just the land clearing and road
work, not construction of the silos.But Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. and chairwoman of the military
construction subcommittee, challenged the $9 million in a July 20 letter to
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. She questioned whether the money
could be spent under the terms Congress approved.Congress approved the money because then-President Clinton was
pondering whether to start building a national missile defense system, "and it
was necessary to authorize and appropriate funds for construction to permit
that option if it were chosen," Feinstein wrote in her letter. "However, the
President (Clinton) decided to defer a decision rather than to proceed
toward deployment."The Fort Greely work planned for this summer would build silos to store
missiles until they are hauled to Kodiak for launching. That differs from the
work for which Congress approved money last year, "namely for initial
deployment of a National Missile Defense system," Feinstein wrote.She received an answer to her questions Tuesday in a letter from Deputy
Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz.Wolfowitz noted that Congress approved $85 million last year for "NMD
Initial Deployment Facilities (Phase I)" in its Defense appropriations act."The construction of a test bed facility at Fort Greely is consistent with and,
indeed, is a necessary and prudent intermediate step toward the ultimate
construction of an initial deployment facility at Fort Greely," Wolfowitz
wrote.Feinstein, at the committee hearing, called this an "interesting" justification
and asked Zakheim several times to clarify whether the $9 million was
intended to create a testing facility or an operating missile defense facility."I believe right now it is for a test bed," Zakheim said. "A test bed is not
operational, but it could become operational sometime in the future.""It is not out of line with the intent of Congress when the funds were voted,"
Zakheim said. Neither does the work violate the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty
with Russia, he said.The $9 million contract for work this summer represents just a small part of
the Pentagon's plans for work in Alaska.Later at Tuesday's hearing, the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization's top
testing official told Feinstein that the military wants to spend about $300
million on building and buying missile defense facilities in the coming fiscal
year. Much of the material would end up in Alaska.Patricia Sanders, the BMDO's deputy for testing, outlined the Alaska work
in her official testimony to the committee. The work includes the following:* Five silos at Fort Greely housing ground-based interceptors designed to
shoot down mock enemy missiles, though no launching would be allowed
from the site "because these missiles would fly over land in violation of
current flight test safety restrictions." The five silos would allow testing of
communication between parts, testing of fuel degradation in the cold and
development of maintenance procedures.Greely would also receive a "battle management command and control
node" that will allow the missile defense system "to test its ability to control...
components in a variety of locations." It would also host two "in-flight
interception communication system data terminals" that will allow the missile
defense system "to test its ability to communicate information about the
target location and characteristics to the (ground-based interceptor) to effect
a successful interception."* A missile transfer facility at Eielson Air Force Base.
* Two launch silos at the Kodiak Launch Complex operated by the
state-owned Alaska Aerospace Development Corp. An assessment of
environmental impacts would be needed. Kodiak would also receive an
in-flight interception data terminal.* Upgraded software for the existing radar on Shemya Island near the
western end of the Aleutians, as well as rebuilding of the power plant there
and "test support infrastructure."Sanders said the Pentagon plans to spend the money for all this work out of
its research and development account rather than its military construction
account.Feinstein asked why. Sanders said using research money better reflects the
"reality that this test bed is a research and development effort."Feinstein also asked whether the work would violate the ABM Treaty.
Sanders said she wasn't qualified to answer.At a news briefing earlier Tuesday, Navy Rear Adm. Craig Quigley said the
Pentagon had determined that some aspects of the missile defense plans
would in fact violate the treaty. However, he would not reveal which ones.The Bush administration has said it wants to convince Russia to drop the
treaty.Also Tuesday, the GOP-led House Armed Services Committee authorized
$8.16 billion for missile defense in the coming fiscal year. That's $135 million
less than President Bush wanted. House Democrats want to cut the budget
by $1 billion.
Stevens still thinks Greely will get funds
By SAM BISHOP
News-Miner Washington Bureau, July 27WASHINGTON--Sen. Ted Stevens says he won't fight Democratic attempts
to stop military construction money from being spent on missile defense work at
Fort Greely this summer.He'll just try to get the money from a different pot, he said.
Stevens, in a meeting with Alaska media late Thursday afternoon, said he isn't
concerned "so far" about a letter from Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of
California and several Democrats from the House.The letter questioned whether the Defense Department could spend $9 million
on land clearing, road building and well drilling at Fort Greely."We're not going to argue with that," Stevens said.
The money, he explained, was originally provided in last year's military
construction spending bill. But expenditure of that money was always contingent
upon a presidential decision to proceed with actual deployment of a national
missile defense system, he said.Then-President Clinton decided Sept. 1 not to deploy the system, and
President Bush has also declined to do so.Feinstein is chairwoman of the Military Construction Subcommittee of the
Senate Appropriations Committee, Stevens noted.Stevens said he thinks the clearing and other work can instead be funded using
the research money that Congress approved for the current fiscal year. He said
he thinks there is enough money left to do so."In view of the decision that was brought about by President Clinton, we are
still in a research and development mode," Stevens said.Congressional spending is a two-step process that includes not only
appropriation but also authorization. Stevens said that posed no problem either.
"We have authorization for that, don't forget that," he said. "President Clinton
signed the bill..."The Fort Greely money was part of a larger package in the military construction
spending bill approved last year. The bill provided $85 million, a figure
advocated by Senate Appropriations Committee members. House
appropriators had sought only $65 million, saying they didn't think the military
could spend the higher figure.A conference committee working out differences between House and Senate
versions of the bill picked the higher number.Most of the money was to go toward building a new X-band radar on Shemya
Island in the Aleutians. That work was expected to cost between $100 million
and $250 million over several years, and the Pentagon's "request for proposals"
drew interest from many of the nation's largest construction firms. At the time,
though, the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization's spokesman said "several
hundred thousand dollars" would be dedicated to land clearing and other work
at Fort Greely. Those plans were put on hold with Clinton's decision.The New York Times reported Thursday that Pentagon lawyers were still
looking at Feinstein's letter.Cheryl Irwin, spokeswoman for the Office of the Secretary of Defense, said
she couldn't immediately comment on the matter.
© 1999-2001 MediaNews Group, Inc. and Fairbanks Publishing Company,
Inc.
Senate panel questions ABM treaty, missile
defense planJuly 25, 2001
By SAM BISHOP
News-Miner Washington BureauWASHINGTON--Sen. Joseph Biden on Tuesday opened a series of
hearings into national security threats and how to respond to them, and he
led off by questioning the wisdom of building a system to stop enemy
missiles when the military has described them as the least likely threat.Two top Bush administration officials told Biden that the missile threat
nevertheless should be met. The United States should get out of or modify
the treaty that constrains its ability to do so, they said.Under the administration's missile defense plan, Fort Greely, the recently
closed Army base southeast of Fairbanks, is the prime candidate to host
rockets designed to knock down incoming enemy warheads. Land clearing
and road improvement work at Fort Greely could start as early as next
month using money already approved by Congress, and the administration
has asked for more money to start building at least five silos there next
summer.Biden, D-Del., is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relation Committee. He
took over from Sen. Jesse Helms, R-N.C., when the Senate control shifted
to Democrats last month.Helms, at Tuesday's hearing, agreed with the two administration witnesses,
saying the U.S. should "dispense" with the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of
1972 with the Soviet Union, which prohibits development of a national
missile defense system.The president could withdraw from the treaty with six months notice, but any
proposed changes to it would have to go to the Senate for approval, and
their first stop would be Biden's Foreign Relations Committee.John Bolton, under-secretary of State for arms control and international
security, told the committee Tuesday that the ABM Treaty was signed at a
time when no countries outside the United States and the Soviet Union had
nuclear missiles. In such a situation, the treaty made sense.But two things have changed, he said. First, the Soviet Union is gone and its
successor--Russia--is in no way an enemy. Second, numerous other
countries, including a few openly hostile toward the United States, are
developing intercontinental ballistic missiles armed with weapons of mass
destruction.Biden, though, said the military Joint Chiefs of Staff's own assessment
ranked attack by ICBM as the least likely threat facing the United States.Proponents also justify a missile defense system as a way to stop other
countries from effectively threatening nuclear attack on the United States if it
intervened in some overseas conflict to protect allies or other interests.Biden, repeating arguments he has offered in presentations to private groups
over the past few months, declared that idea "preposterous" Tuesday.The problem, he said, is that no missile shield will provide 100 percent
protection. He got the other witness on the day's opening panel, Gen.
Ronald Kadish of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, to confirm that
for him.So even if, for example, the U.S. could reliably stop 17 out of 20 nuclear
missiles--an 85 percent kill rate--the president would still face an
unimaginable threat from nuclear warheads atop the remaining three missiles,
Biden said.The president couldn't just write off San Francisco, Dallas and Miami, Biden
said. So the missile defense system hardly offers a defense against nuclear
blackmail, he said.Biden also sparred with Bolton and the other administration
witness--Douglas Feith, under-secretary of Defense for policy--over
whether the missile defense system would start an arms race among other
countries.Bolton said the administration's job is to "disabuse" other countries of the
notion that a U.S. defense system represents a threat. It simply would be too
limited "to negate Russia's strategic missile capability, even at much lower
Russian force levels," he said. Bolton said President Bush and Secretary of
State Colin Powell are making much progress on that front.But Biden, in a brief hallway interview after the panel, said the problem isn't
just Russia. China, desiring to keep the U.S. at bay in any potential future
conflict over Taiwan, might build more missiles in response to the U.S.
defense system, he said. That in turn could prompt a nuclear buildup from
India, he said. And that in could prompt other countries to build up.If this occurs, a U.S. missile defense system will have made the world a less
secure place, he argued.Despite such critical assessments, Biden said he supports continued research
on long-range missile defense. (Kadish said the administration plans to
spend about $3 billion on long-range defenses in the coming fiscal year, out
of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization's requested $8 billion budget.)In the interview, Biden said his support for research is not incongruent with
his criticism of the basic premises that the administration uses to justify the
program. There may be missile defense systems that make more sense than
the long-range interceptors, he said.Kadish, in his testimony, narrated a four-minute collage of radar, infrared
and visible light videos documenting two successful hits on mock enemy
warheads in space, one of which occurred just 10 days ago. He also
described video of successful strikes by shorter-range missiles, such as the
Patriot, development of which his office also oversees.Biden effusively complimented Kadish's successes and his straightforward
manner. After the panel, Biden came down to the witness table to pat
Kadish on the back and share a joke.© 1999-2001 MediaNews Group, Inc. and Fairbanks Publishing Company,
Inc.
Perfecting the shield
July 22, 2001
Last Saturday night an interceptor missile thundered 144 miles above the
Earth from an obscure atoll in the Central Pacific.Navigating by the stars and information transmitted from technicians on the
tiny isle, the interceptor hunted a mock nuclear warhead launched almost
5,000 miles away from a California air force base.A white flash erupted in the vast haystack of space as the two needles
slammed into one another at an astonishing combined speed of 4.5 miles per
second.From a purely gee-whiz perspective, the interceptor test was a smashing
example of modern technology.But, while impressive, this second succesful test does not mean the
proposed National Missile Defense System is ripe to play the role of
America's shield against a small-scale missile attack.Two previous tests were described as "spectacular failures." And the
Pentagon needs to prove that the interceptors will not be fooled by the array
of decoys that would likely accompany a real-world attack.The Bush Administration has therefore moved in the right direction by
dropping its pursuit of a full system deployment by 2005 in favor of a
stepped-up test schedule.The administration, however, is still pushing to have a limited "emergency"
missile defense system in place by 2005. Perhaps that will turn out to be
technologically feasible.But if a National Missile Defense System is to be successfully deployed, the
focus must be on creating a system that indeed works rather than on meeting
political deadlines.Any rapid-fire undertaking that eventually requires change orders is bound
to be much more expensive than a well-researched project. The goal here is
not a federal boondoggle, even one that would be such an economic shot in
the arm for Delta Junction and all of Interior Alaska.Delta Junction still plays a critical role in the Bush Administration's revamped
test facility plans, through the planned construction of five to 10 missile
storage silos at Fort Greely. The missiles would be shipped to Kodiak for
test launches.Those Fort Greely silos, however, could be the decisive violation of the
1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with the Soviet Union--a treaty that will
eventually have to be scrapped or overhauled if a missile defense system is
to be deployed.The Soviet bear has staggered off toward what appears to be eternal
hibernation. But Russia nonetheless threatens that a unilateral treaty
withdrawal could trigger a new nuclear arms race, rhetoric that is difficult to
ignore.The missile defense discussions with the Russians will be a critical
statesmanship test for our new president. America needs to tread with care
in light of the treaty implications while researching and designing a defense
system that is technologically sound.© 1999-2001 MediaNews Group, Inc. and Fairbanks Publishing Company,
Inc.
Testimony questions need for Greely silos
By SAM BISHOP July 20, 2001
News-Miner Washington BureauWASHINGTON--Sen. Carl Levin on Thursday questioned whether building five national missile defense silos at Fort Greely was worth the expense to the U.S. government and annoyance to other nations.
Levin, the Michigan Democrat who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, used testimony from a former Pentagon official to support his line of inquiry during a four-hour hearing.
Phil Coyle, former director of testing and evaluation, told Levin that he didn't see why Fort Greely needed five silos, as has been recently proposed by missile defense developers. The clearing work could start next month, with construction next summer.
Coyle, now a senior adviser to the Center for Defense Information, said launching interceptor missiles from Alaska is an important step in the testing process. In fact, he was one of the first to suggest it while working at the Pentagon, saying that using the state-owned launch site on Kodiak Island would help conduct more realistic encounters between mock enemy missiles and the defensive interceptors envisioned for Alaska.
Testing at Fort Greely also could give the system useful exposure to extreme cold, he said Thursday.
"But since they don't plan to launch any missiles from there you can question whether the investment in five silos is necessary just to give them the experience with cold weather," Coyle said. Fort Greely isn't considered an ideal test launch site because rocket stages could fall on Alaska's mainland, he said.
But the Pentagon has in fact suggested, Levin said, that the Fort Greely five might be used as a "rudimentary" defense system even while testing continues.
"Judge for us the operational capability of the testbed at Fort Greely," Levin asked Coyle.
"If it only had five interceptors and it didn't have the ability to deal with countermeasures, it would not be effective," Coyle said.
So, Levin concluded, the Pentagon plan is a "rush to gain an ineffective capability."
At the same time, it would erode relationships with other countries from Asia to Europe, he said.
Regardless of whether China, Russia and other countries should feel threatened by the system, they say they are, Levin said. So their likely responses range from increased missile production to placing existing missiles on greater alert status, he said.
A proposal that offers no improvement in the nation's defense and encourages more armaments elsewhere, Levin said, doesn't meet his bottom line standard--making the country more secure.
Levin's logic, however, was challenged by Richard Perle, the former arms control negotiator who the committee invited to testify as well.
Perle said it is patently obvious that a limited national defense system designed to respond to a small number of enemy or accidental missile launches poses no threat to China or Russia. Acting as if Russian and Chinese perceptions are more important than reality is a "particularly unwise line of argument," Perle said.
"In psychiatry it would lead to humoring paranoids by accepting their paranoia and acting to accommodate baseless fears," he said. "In science it would mean the abandonment of rigor and discipline, pretending instead of proving. And in international politics it would mean nurturing rather than finding ways to correct false and dangerous and even self-fulfilling ideas."
The U.S. must explain its system to Russia and be prepared to sharply reduce its nuclear arsenal "to lend credibility to our new approach," Perle said.
Perle, now at the American Enterprise Institute, said the U.S. should withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972 with the Soviet Union. The treaty prohibits a national missile defense as well as mobile anti-missile systems in the air, on sea and in space.
The treaty is a relic of the Cold War, Perle said. "We are more likely to send Mr. Putin (Russia's president) a check than a barrage of missiles," he said.
Much of the hearing also focused on whether the work proposed for Fort Greely would violate the treaty.
Coyle said that building silos at Fort Greely would not violate the treaty if their purpose were truly testing. The treaty allows up to 15 missiles to be stored at a test location. Fort Greely would have to be declared a test site, under treaty rules.
But top Bush administration officials have said that their plans for Fort Greely "bump up" and are potentially "in conflict" with the ABM Treaty. They cast this not as a reason to scale back the plans but as a reason to modify the treaty.
Perle said all the legalistic wrangling over what is a treaty violation could be avoided by withdrawing. That's permitted under treaty terms, with a simple six-month notice from the administration.
***************************************************************************************
Military to let $9 million contract for work at Greely
July 19, 2001
By SAM BISHOP
News-Miner Washington BureauWASHINGTON--The Pentagon's missile defense office has told Congress that the military plans to issue a contract for up to $9 million of construction work at Fort Greely. The work could proceed within 30 days.
In a letter sent to the House and Senate Appropriations and Armed Services committees, the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization said it was hurrying so it could have a new Pacific "test bed" ready by fiscal 2004.
Lt. Col. Rick Lehner, spokesman for the missile office, said the law requires that Congress be notified of such contracts at least 30 days in advance.
The notification was sent Monday night, so the work could begin as early as mid-August, he said.
According to information provided by Lehner, the construction will have several facets.
"The scope of work includes installing and developing two water wells; clearing trees and debris; preparing sites for test bed facilities including a missile field; and installation of the Main Access Road," according to the description.
"The site preparation includes cut, fill, grading, and earthwork operations to the top of sub-base for all vehicle traffic areas and top of finish grade for all other areas excluding the building footprints, which shall be graded to drain."
"The construction contract is not expected to exceed $9 million," the letter to Congress states.
The money will come from funds already appropriated for missile defense work in this fiscal year, the letter states.
*****************************************************************************
Military maneuvering
July 15, 2001
The news of last Wednesday seems almost laughable now. The front page headline read, "Hospital funds said key to fort survival." But we shouldn't count those funds before they're hospital rooms and beds.
The story was about Sen. Ted Stevens' efforts to boost funding for our stalled Fort Wainwright hospital project by $82 million.
The project ground to a halt earlier this year when bids came in well over the $133 million Congress had already approved for the project.
Stevens said that if the new $215 million proposal were to fail, it could mean bad news. "If we lost that hospital, we'd lose the base," he said.
The statement seems logical enough. Adequate medical services are a key piece of infrastructure for the local bases.
To boot, Pentagon officials said recently that they hope to close more bases around the country. And, of course, just this past week we saw the date of the completed downsizing of Fort Greely.
But we barely caught wind of these possibilities before they were blown away in a rush of activity at the week's end.
The Ballistic Missile Defense Organization announced a new focus, and the possibility of billions of dollars spent, on testing missile defense systems--lots of testing. The range would now include Kodiak Island and, you guessed it, Fort Greely. An $8 million contract for preparatory work could be awarded as early as Aug. 15 at Greely.
Pentagon officials said the new testing plan includes a storage area for five to 10 missiles at Greely. The missiles would be shipped from Greely to the Kodiak Island launch complex.
Concurrently, the U.S. Army announced plans to revamp the 172nd Infantry Brigade in Alaska, consisting of 2,800 soldiers at Fort Wainwright and 700 at Fort Richardson near Anchorage.
The unit will become one of six "Interim Brigade Combat Teams" intended to become lighter-weight, faster-moving and more lethal units. More than a simple replacement of equipment, the plan appears to be a nearly complete revamping of the brigade mission. These changes won't come cheap.
President Bush's latest budget contains $158 million for military construction in Alaska during the coming fiscal year. That includes $12 million for new family housing at Fort Wainwright, $23 million to address ice fog problems caused by the power plant and $18.5 million for the new hospital.
None of this goes to guarantee those hospital funds, but the picture looks much more positive than just six days ago.
No doubt Sen. Stevens saw these possibilities on the horizon even as he made the comment about the hospital funds early this week.
We should take note of that. If Stevens, informed as he is, keeps up his guard where military cutbacks are concerned, so should we all.
***********************************************************************************
Pentagon lays out missile defense construction plan
July 13, 2001
By SAM BISHOP
News-Miner Washington BureauWASHINGTON--A top Pentagon official told a Senate panel Thursday that the military plans to start construction next spring on a new set of missile defense testing facilities, some of which would likely be in Alaska.
The plan was challenged, however, by a Democratic senator who wondered why the administration was proceeding with such work when it could violate the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Russia.
Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the new "test bed" is "currently scheduled to begin construction in April 2002."
Pentagon officials have said the new testing plan includes a storage area for five to 10 missiles at Fort Greely, about 90 miles southeast of Fairbanks. From there, the missiles would be shipped to the state's Kodiak Island launch complex, which would also need some additions. The location would allow more realistic testing, they say.
However, Sen. Carl Levin, Armed Services chairman, challenged Wolfowitz and the head of the ballistic missile office, Gen. Ronald Kadish, over the wisdom of the construction.
Levin noted the administration announced recently that some planned missile defense work would come "in conflict" with the ABM treaty within months. So the senator asked Kadish to specify all such actions that would be funded in the fiscal 2002 budget.
Kadish declined, saying "that's not my responsibility to determine."
So Levin turned to Wolfowitz.
"That's also not my responsibility," Wolfowitz said. "It's a legal issue."
The construction work over which Wolfowitz and Levin sparred is separate from missile defense-related work reportedly proposed for Fort Greely in August. That work apparently isn't expected to violate the ABM treaty.
Administration attorneys are reviewing the Pentagon's plans to identify conflicts with the treaty, he said.
Pressed further by Levin, Wolfowitz said one potential conflict would arise from the April 2002 construction of the new test bed. "That raises questions," Wolfowitz said.
Levin said there was a difference between the administration statements. "In conflict" is stronger than "raises questions," he said.
The administration hopes to convince Russia to accept changes to the ABM treaty, changes that would allow construction of a missile defense system.
Wolfowitz said experience shows that success in such negotiations depends upon firm actions demonstrating that the U.S. has "some determination to move forward."
Levin said the U.S. determination was well demonstrated by the billions already spent researching the systems.
The ABM Treaty, signed in 1972, generally prohibits national missile defense systems.
Lt. Col. Rick Lehner said his office hasn't received direction from the Office of the Secretary of Defense to solicit bids for work at Fort Greely this summer, but The New York Times reported Wednesday that unnamed sources said the decision had been made and would be announced officially on Monday.
A contract drafted last year called for clearing out some trees in a burned area and for grading, asphalt and road reconstruction, Lehner said. The draft is not public yet, he said.
The money could come from an appropriation made by Congress last year, Lehner said. The Times report said the total contract value was over $8 million.
Wolfowitz, in his testimony Thursday, said a missile defense system is necessary to protect U.S. options and interests across the globe from "unfriendly regimes" that are developing nuclear, chemical or biological warheads on intercontinental missiles.
On Thursday, Levin said the U.S. plans could provoke a new arms race, which in turn would reduce U.S. security. And security, in the end, must be the goal, he said.
"That's the moral obligation, not to respond to the least likely threat," he said. He said a nuclear bomb delivered by truck with no return address is a far more likely threat than a missile.
Wolfowitz responded: "It would be a little harder to deliver by truck I think."
*****************************************************************************************
A dark Friday?
July 13, 2001
Here we are on Friday the 13th, observing the official date of the "downsizing" of Fort Greely and, lo and behold, we read about a top Pentagon official saying millions will be spent on construction at Greely for national missile defense system testing.
So much for the "unlucky" 13th.
But on this day it wouldn't be right to just jump right up and celebrate.
We should mourn the passing of Fort Greely as we knew it. A virtual ghost town stands where once an economic heart pumped lifeblood into nearby Delta Junction.
The fort was home to 390 soldiers and 612 military family members, and it employed 365 civilians in 1995 when Congress decided to strip it down.
Only 11 soldiers, without families, and 55 civilians will remain busy on base. Another 30-some civilians will keep the cold weather test facility in operation.
With the downsizing, residents of Delta Junction who worked at the fort for many years suddenly faced the reality that their workplace was going away and that few if any similar career opportunities existed near the place they call home.
Recreational opportunities that bolstered the quality of life for Delta residents are lost. The Greely school, an invaluable community asset, is shuttered.
Make no mistake. The impact of this loss has been great.
But is it truly a dark Friday for Delta Junction?
Somehow it doesn't completely feel that way.
Remember this is a town born of a river crossing along the Valdez-Fairbanks trail. True to its tough Alaska character, the community of Delta is looking ahead and considering its options.
Pete Hallgren, the economic development director for the city of Delta Junction told the News-Miner that Delta is, "one of those places that has little going on right now but has unbelievable potential."
On the horizon looms the economic potential of missile defense, the proposed natural gas pipeline from the North Slope, and of course the Pogo gold deposits along the Goodpaster River. Agriculture is still a key economic element in Delta Junction.
Pogo alone, should it be successful in securing permits, is projected to employ 500 people during construction and more than 300 for continuing operations.
While Greely is essentially gone, with any luck at all this landmark date simply marks a period of change for Delta Junction--but by no means an end.
**************************************************************************************
Pentagon set to start Greely clearing
July 12, 2001
WASHINGTON--The Pentagon will notify Congress on Monday that it plans to begin preparatory work in mid-August on a new missile-defense test site at Fort Greely, in Alaska, the first step in a more aggressive testing program.
Pentagon officials said Wednesday that they would award a contract of more than $8 million by Aug. 15 for preliminary work on five missile silos.
Senior Pentagon officials also said the Bush administration wanted to have an emergency antimissile system in operation by 2005 or earlier. That rudimentary system, the officials said, might include not only missile interceptors based in Alaska but also lasers and interceptors launched from ships.
Deploying any kind of system intended to protect the entire nation against long-range ballistic missiles would violate the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Russia.
For that reason, arms control advocates have called the Alaska test site a ploy to abrogate the treaty. The Pentagon denies that, saying the new site will allow for more realistic tests than currently possible.
The preparatory work at Fort Greely, which would initially involve little more than clearing trees, would not violate the ABM treaty, Pentagon officials said.
But the Pentagon has devised a new test schedule for antimissile technology that is far more aggressive than the plan under the Clinton administration, the senior Pentagon officials said Wednesday. Many missile defense critics have said they expect this new schedule to speed up tests that are likely to violate the treaty.
Indeed, new tests are likely to come into conflict with the treaty "in months, not years," according to a Bush administration official.
Senior Pentagon officials said Wednesday that they could not precisely predict when the new tests might conflict with the treaty because the schedule was still being studied by the compliance review group, which evaluates the legality of military activities.
Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld said Wednesday night in a meeting with reporters that "we have no plans at the present time to deploy." Rumsfeld said that given the short summer construction season in Alaska, it would be all but impossible to do the kind of work this year that would violate the treaty.
*****************************************************************************************
Pentagon revises game plan for missile system: Alaska sites take center stage
July 07, 2001
By SAM BISHOP
News-Miner Washington BureauWASHINGTON--The Pentagon has abandoned a firm timetable to build the kind of full-blown national missile defense system that was expected to bring 100 or more rockets to Alaska within a few years.
However, Fort Greely and the state-owned launch facility on Kodiak Island are taking prominent places in the latest national missile defense testing plans announced by the Pentagon.
The Pentagon has been trying to both prove and build, by 2005, a system to protect the United States from a limited missile attack from overseas. Fort Greely, a base located about 100 miles southeast of Fairbanks on the Richardson Highway, has been a prime candidate to host the missiles necessary to shoot down incoming enemy warheads.
After much criticism during the past few years and a few failed tests, the Pentagon is switching the emphasis to more research and away from actual construction.
"We're no longer focused on a deployment date," Lehner said.
While that may seem a blow to those Delta Junction residents who hoped their community would see a quick economic boost from missile defense construction on nearby Fort Greely, the shifting emphasis is not without potential economic benefits.
In a recent briefing on the Pentagon's budget request for the coming year, officials said they hope to bring about five missiles to Fort Greely as part of a redesigned testing program. From there, the missiles could be trucked and shipped to Kodiak Island, where they would be launched from the state's pad against mock incoming enemy missiles.
Still, the timeline for this work is not yet clear.
Although Pentagon officials made this announcement in the context of the budget request for fiscal 2002, which begins in October, a spokesman for the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization said Friday that there are no firm plans to build anything in Alaska in the coming year.
"We don't have that authority yet," said Lt. Col. Rick Lehner. The revised Defense Department budget request for fiscal 2002, submitted to Congress on June 27, contains no construction money for work at Fort Greely or Kodiak, he said.
However, Lehner noted, the fiscal 2001 budget approved by Congress last year contained some money for "site preparation" at Fort Greely. That money was never spent because President Clinton declined to sign off on building the national missile defense system.
"We could probably use some of that money, if we're directed, for site preparation at Greely," Lehner said.
News reports last week said the Pentagon has prepared a contract for site clearing and concrete platforms, but Lehner said Friday that it was just last year's proposal. The Wall Street Journal said the Pentagon would have to notify Congress 30 days before awarding the contract.
Delta Junction Mayor Roy Gilbertson, in a telephone interview Thursday, said he understood that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had asked the head of the missile defense program, Gen. Ronald Kadish, to move ahead with the contract.
"There's a lot going on. People just have to be a little patient," he said, referring to economic concerns among Delta residents. "There's no question where it's (Fort Greely) going."
Last year's federal budget also contained tens of millions of dollars to upgrade a radar facility on Shemya Island at the western end of the Aleutians.
"That was necessary for deployment, but not for testing," Lehner said, so the money likely won't be spent under current plans. He said he didn't know what would happen to the appropriation.
Using Fort Greely and Kodiak is part of a North Pacific "test bed" concept proposed earlier this year by the former head of the Pentagon's testing and evaluation division, Phil Coyle. He said the missile defense system could be better analyzed if its elements were arranged more realistically, and suggested the missile defense developers look into the idea.
"We have, and it's pretty good," Lehner said.
In tests to date, mock enemy missiles have been launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California and attacked by interceptors from the Kwajalein Atoll in the South Pacific. That's geographically backward from any real-life scenarios.
Under the new thinking, mock enemy missiles could be launched from either Vandenberg or planes to the west and intercepted from the north by rockets from Kodiak. In addition, a control center could be built at Fort Greely, Lehner said.
"It would definitely make it more realistic than what we have now," Lehner said.
Kadish gave the first hint of what might be in store for Kodiak at a hearing before a House Armed Services subcommittee on June 14.
He said current test ranges limit the missile defense program and need to be "geographically expanded." He then noted that "while facilities are somewhat austere, Kodiak Island in Alaska has been used to benefit our missile defense programs." In 1999, the Air Force launched two rockets from Kodiak that released "multiple objects" as they traveled down the West Coast, part of a early warning radar test.
Nevertheless, Kadish added, "Kodiak would need site improvement to support future mission work." That might include a silo or other buildings, Lehner said.
"I don't think we'll have any tests there next year," he said.
Pat Ladner, executive director of the Alaska Aerospace Development Corp., said Friday he was "a little taken aback" by such specific talk. The corporation, which runs the Kodiak launch site, has been providing information to the missile defense office but has no formal agreement, he said.
"The Kodiak Launch Complex belongs to the state of Alaska and we control that operation and we're going to have to work together toward whatever goals they have in mind," he said. "It's a matter of opening up a dialogue."
The budget request announced last week, a revision of President Bush's original proposal, would put about $7 billion into the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization in the coming fiscal year. That would be an increase of about $2.2 billion from this year's budget.
The money would cover several different types of missile defense research, including airborne and space-based lasers. Research on the kind of ground-based defense system being discussed for Alaska would see about $3.2 billion under last week's revisions. That's up from President Bush's original $2.4 billion request.
The revised budget requests now go to the committees in the House and Senate. Democratic Sens. Joseph Biden, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee and Carl Levin, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, have said they support further research but have criticized previous plans to push construction forward.
News-Miner reporters Victoria Naegele and Sean Cockerham contributed to this report.
***************************************************************************************
Kodiak could host missile test launches
April 05, 2001
By SAM BISHOP
News-Miner Washington BureauWASHINGTON--A Pentagon test evaluation office has made
recommendations that could bring some of the national missile defense
system test launches to Kodiak's rocket facility.Phil Coyle, who retired in January as director of operational test and
evaluation for the Department of Defense, said Wednesday he
recommended before he left that there be a greater separation between
launch and radar sites during tests of the national missile defense system.To date, the mock enemy missiles have been launched from Vandenberg Air
Force Base, on the California coast north of Santa Barbara. They have been
tracked by an early warning radar at Beale Air Force Base, 300 miles north
near Marysville.The relative proximity of the launch and radar sites doesn't provide ideal
information on how well the missile defense command and control system
would respond to a real enemy missile coming from thousands of miles
away, Coyle said.Using the Kodiak launch site, he said, is one way to overcome that.
Mock enemy missiles could be launched from Kodiak and tracked from
Beale, he said. Or, he said, the mock missiles could be launched from the
Kwajalein Atoll in the western Pacific Ocean toward North America, and
the test intercepting missiles could be launched from Kodiak. Again, the
Beale early warning radar could track their paths.In tests to date, all three intercept rockets have been launched from
Kwajalein. The first struck the target missile, but the most recent two
missed. One, in January 2000, had a bad sensor, while the other, in July,
failed when the booster rocket didn't release from the guided kill vehicle.Air Force Lt. Col. Rick Lehner, Pentagon spokesman for the National
Missile Defense Program, said Coyle's suggestions are being considered.Kodiak has advantages as a test launch site for interceptors in particular,
Lehner said. Currently, tests have been geographically reversed from the
perceived real-world scenario, where an enemy missile would come from an
Asian country and interceptors in the United States would try to shoot it
down. If the system is built, the interceptors may be based in Alaska at Fort
Greely, near Delta Junction, 90 miles southeast of Fairbanks.Lehner said there are no specific plans to use Kodiak for testing at this
point. However, about 20 more launches remain, under current plans, in the
national missile defense system testing plan, he said.Pat Ladner, executive director of the state government's Alaska Aerospace
Development Corp., said he had talked in the past with Coyle about
Kodiak's potential. The AADC runs the Kodiak launch site, located on
Narrow Cape about 25 miles south of the city of Kodiak.Ladner said Kodiak's location makes it an ideal spot to participate in missile
defense tests. Jets crossing the Pacific between the U.S. West Coast and
East Asia fly just off the southern Alaska coast because it is the shortest
path, Ladner said. So, too, would an enemy missile originating in Asia, he
said."Kodiak is right in the middle of the flight path of a threat launch," Ladner
said.The Kodiak site has successfully launched three rockets for the Air
Force--in 1998, 1999 and just last month, Ladner said.Lehner, with the Pentagon's missile defense office, said those launches were
mostly designed to test the West Coast radar and weren't directly related to
the missile defense program. The early warning radar at Beale is one of three
in the country, Lehner said. The others are at Clear Air Force Station, 70
miles southwest of Fairbanks, and on Cape Cod in Massachusetts, Lehner
said.
Clear Air Force Base pulls plug on a 'dinosaur'
from the Cold WarFebruary 01, 2001
By BETH IPSEN
Staff WriterCLEAR AIR FORCE STATION--It only took about 30 minutes to shut
down a 40-year-old Cold War relic for good on Wednesday."It's kind of a sad thing," David Leavy told about 100 people, mostly
workers from past and present, who gathered to watch the old radar at
Clear Air Force Station powered down for the last time. Leavy, a civilian,
has been employed the longest at the Clear Air Force Base Ballistic Missile
Early Warning System--39 years, seven months and 17 days. He was
present when the missile tracking system was first activated in October
1961.In October 1957, the Soviet Union launched a rocket into space, kicking off
the space race, explained Lt. Col. Jeff Vance of the 13th Space Warning
Squadron. "Just months after that launch, they started building this site."Gordon Comings was in Iceland when one of the two sister radar sites was
started up in October 1960 and was on hand when the last of its kind was
turned off at Clear. He worked at the radar site during the Cuban Missile
Crisis in October 1962 when all workers were on heightened alert in
preparation for war."That was a tough one," Comings said.
The old radar was officially shut down Wednesday, but it hasn't been
needed since a new missile warning radar became fully operational on Dec.
15.The new radar not only doubles the size of the area monitored, but it also
can monitor multiple objects simultaneously, instead of one at a time like the
old radar did."We're moving from the vintage mechanical radar system to a more modern
phased-array radar system," Vance said.The new radar cuts the operational crew from five to three people, reducing
the staff by 22 people. But as Vance explained, that reduction will be
absorbed by attrition, because many workers, such as Leavy, are retiring
after a long career at the radar site.Clear's mission is to detect Intercontinental Ballistic and Sea-Launched
Ballistic Missiles aimed at North America. The radar evaluates whether the
object is a threat and sends the information to the North American
Aerospace Defense Command headquarters in Colorado Springs. The
radar also tracks satellites and some 9,000 objects floating in space for
collision avoidance for both manned and unmanned space missions."It's our interest to know what's up there," Vance said.
If a National Missile Defense System is built, the Clear radar will feed and
cue the interceptor's radar. After the initial warning, the defense system's
own radar would take over to shoot down whatever is launched, Vance
said.The new radar is considered state of the art, although it's 20 years old. It
was dismantled and shipped from southwestern Texas and placed in a new
building at Clear. Work on the new radar site began in April 1998 and was
completed a year ago. The radar had to go through a year-long checklist of
qualifications before it was deemed fully operational in December."The system is actually performing extraordinarily well," Vance said.
The entire project cost $110 million, but saved $140 million by having the
the radar moved up from Texas, Vance said.The equipment uses about half the power and takes up one-fourth the space
of the old radar. The old equipment, with its three football-sized upright
panels and large golf ball-looking tracker, dwarfs the new triangular radar
that sits in a small clearing in the woods.Maintenance costs were also reduced because special contracts were
previously needed to build parts that were no longer being made for the old
radar, Vance said.Two crews were working simultaneously on the two radar sites until
Wednesday.Sid Michaels was one of the civilians whose job switched from the old radar
to the new one. He came up from Huntsville, Ala., in 1968 to work on the
missile warning system. He now works on a more computerized and digital
radar, but he still has a soft spot for the old radar, which was the last of its
kind for the Air Force."This is the last of the large mechanical radars. I hope they'll preserve all or
part of it as a relic of the Cold War," Michaels said.What will become of the old radar is unknown. The facility still houses
equipment that provides other functions for the base, about 78 miles
southwest of Fairbanks. Once that equipment is transferred to other
facilities, Vance said some of the equipment will be sold to other government
agencies, some of which have already traveled to Clear to see what the still
capable relic can offer.Vance was the first employee to start flipping switches to power down the
"dinosaur" at 3 p.m. After a countdown, he turned a crank counterclockwise
45 degrees, until a meter reached a certain point that told him to punch a big
red button and flip an "emergency off" switch on a transmitter-control
mechanism. The first one of five mechanisms refused to power down."This type of stuff is temperamental," worker Bob Vaughn said. After
continually operating for 40 years, the radar refused to go down easily, he
explained.Then in the command center, a flip of the switch and the red lights on a
monitor blinked out."In real life, that's something we never wanted to see," said Murray Price, a
central switching room monitor for the last 5[1/2] years. "In real life, it was
panic status."Afterwards, warning chimes sounded, telling those in the control room
something was amiss.Then Vance made a symbolic phone call to inform headquarters that the
remnant from the Cold War era was now extinct.Back to Home Page
***************************************************************************************
Stevens hopeful of Shemya radar building schedule
January 17, 2001
By SAM BISHOP
News-Miner Washington BureauWASHINGTON--Barges could still embark this year to Shemya Island carrying
material to begin construction on a national missile defense system radar site,
Sen. Ted Stevens said Tuesday.Stevens said the incoming Bush administration, if it approved contracts by April
15, could nearly restore the national missile defense system's original construction
schedule.That schedule, which called for the system to be running by 2005, was
jeopardized in September when President Clinton decided not to approve
construction of the overall system before he left office. The Pentagon had issued
a request for proposals for the Shemya work, but Clinton declined to award the
contract.President-elect George W. Bush supports a missile defense system, though not
necessarily the same one developed during the Clinton administration.And for that reason, according to one missile system critic, the Bush
administration is unlikely to send the barges to Shemya this year."They're not prepared to put forward a program," said Daryl Kimball, executive
director of the Coalition to Reduce Nuclear Dangers, in Washington, D.C.Stevens, who just returned from a trip out of Washington that included a meeting
with Bush in Texas, said he is pushing for work to begin."We're trying to get it back on schedule," Stevens said. "If Clinton's decision is
reversed by somewhere around April 15 or before, it's possible for the materials
to be shipped so it can be done for the winter construction season."Winter weather is so bad and the docking facilities so inadequate that landing
material in that season is not possible, said Stevens, who visited the island with
top defense officials in August. But if the materials can be delivered to the island
next summer, construction could proceed next winter, he said.Lt. Col. Rick Lehner, spokesman for the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization
at the Pentagon, said Stevens was correct about the possibility of some winter
construction, though that hasn't been in the plans to date."All the planning had been to get the work done during the warm weather
months," Lehner said.The materials, which would likely go out of Seattle, include steel, concrete and a
small power plant, Lehner said. The material weighs about 4 million pounds
altogether, he said.Kimball, of the coalition opposing the system, said Bush has advocated a
different, sea-based missile defense system for the country. While the Shemya
radar might still be useful in such a system, the broader choices could delay its
construction, Kimball said.Other factors in the debate remain as well, he said.
"If the Bush administration were to make a snap decision to begin construction at
Shemya, it would mean by any reasonable person's interpretation of the 1972
Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (with the Soviet Union) that the United States
intends to withdraw," Kimball said.To avoid formally withdrawing, Bush might decide, as Clinton pondered doing,
that some limited work at Shemya wouldn't violate the ABM Treaty, Kimball
said.Stevens said he takes that view, arguing that the Shemya work "would only
violate ABM Treaty--if it does at all--if it is integrated" with other elements of the
missile defense system.Kimball said justifying construction in such a manner would set of a "diplomatic
and political firestorm.""That I think would be very transparent tactic that would not be looked upon
favorably by those in Congress or our allies, let alone the Russians," Kimball
said.The Pentagon's preferred missile defense system would initially place about 100
interceptor missiles at Fort Greely, about 100 miles southeast of Fairbanks.**************************************************************************************
Knowles moves to create missile system
coordinatorJanuary 17, 2001
By SEAN COCKERHAM
News-Miner Juneau BureauJUNEAU--Gov. Tony Knowles introduced legislation Tuesday to create a
high-level position within the Alaska National Guard to coordinate the
deployment of a national missile defense system."The position will not be filled until there is a presidential decision to deploy a
national missile defense system in Alaska," said Maj. Gen. Phil Oates, adjutant
general of the Alaska National Guard. "But the change in statute now will allow
us to be ready to accept this responsibility."The Pentagon envisions a missile defense system that would probably place an
initial spread of about 100 interceptor missiles at Fort Greely, just outside Delta
Junction.In September President Clinton decided not to approve construction of the
system before he leaves office. President-elect George W. Bush supports a
national missile shield, but it is unclear when he would make a decision on
deployment or what form his preferred system would take.Under the Pentagon's current plan, more than 300 members of the Alaska
National Guard would be assigned to operate the system. Along with the Fort
Greely missile site there would be radar on Shemya Island near the western end
of the Aleutian Islands."As the nation considers a missile defense program based in Alaska as part of
our national security, the Alaska National Guard must be ready to take on this
important mission," Knowles said. "This is an important responsibility that
requires specific leadership that can see to the planning, development, and
consultations that will make it work."The role of the Alaska National Guard's new assistant adjutant general for
missile defense would be to ensure smooth planning, development and
subsequent operation of the system in Alaska, Oates said.The federally funded position would be filled by a brigadier general, initially as a
traditional part-time national guard job but perhaps later as a full-time
responsibility, the governor's office said.The Alaska National Guard currently has two assistant adjutant generals--one
who heads the Army National Guard and the other who is commander of the
Air National Guard.Obstacles remain before the proposed national missile defense shield could be
deployed. The system remains under development, and two of the last test
intercept attempts failed. The next test is slated for sometime between March
and June.A group of scientists has said that the proposed system could not distinguish
between incoming nuclear warheads and simple diversions such as enemy
balloons.System developers say the scientists are wrong, but they decline to offer
specifics, citing classified information.The system also raises the prospect of being in conflict with the 1972
Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty that the United States signed with the then-Soviet
Union.**************************************************************************************
Pentagon schedules next missile test
January 09, 2001
By SAM BISHOP
News-Miner Washington BureauWASHINGTON--The Pentagon has become slightly more specific about plans
for the next test of the proposed national missile defense system. The launch will
occur sometime between March and June, according to a Pentagon spokesman.A report in the "Washington Whispers" column of U.S. News and World
Report's latest issue says the Pentagon has put off the test until June, "possibly
giving Defense Secretary-designate Donald Rumsfeld time to devise the more
comprehensive missile umbrella George W. Bush wants."Lt. Col. Rick Lehner, spokesman for the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization,
said Monday that the magazine report mischaracterized the Pentagon's schedule."You can't delay something that hasn't been set," he said. "All we said
(previously) was that we wouldn't have a test any earlier than the end of January.
The current plan is to conduct a test sometime between March and June."Much of the missile defense system would be housed in Alaska under current
designs. A radar in the Aleutian Islands would detect approaching enemy
intercontinental missiles, helping guide U.S. interceptor missiles launched from
Fort Greely near Delta Junction.On Sept. 1, President Clinton declined to approve construction of the system,
but Congress approved $1.88 billion for testing and development this fiscal year.The next test will be similar to two previous tests, with a mock enemy missile
launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California and an interceptor
launched from Kwajalein Atoll in the western Pacific Ocean. Two of the last
intercept attempts have missed.On Dec. 22, the Pentagon announced that Boeing Co. had won a contract worth
up to $6 billion to continue development of the system through the end of fiscal
2007.Boeing has been the lead designer on the system since April 1998. The initial
contract, which expires in April, also didn't allow for some necessary changes in
the program, according to a news release from the missile office.Those changes include some "more extensive" efforts to deal with potential
countermeasures that enemy missiles might employ.Lehner said the countermeasure challenges were outlined last year in two
reports--one independent review from retired Air Force Gen. Larry Welch and
another report from Phil Coyle, director of testing and evaluation at the
Pentagon."Both of them recommended that we initiate an advanced countermeasure
mitigation program and look at the possibility of adding more tests or modifying
them," Lehner said.So the new contract calls for changes in the trajectory, speed and altitude of the
mock enemy missiles, Lehner said.Those changes won't answer criticisms raised last summer by a group of
scientists who said the proposed interception system had no way to distinguish
between incoming nuclear warheads and simple diversions such as empty
balloons. In the weightlessness of space, where the interceptions are designed to
occur, warheads and balloons can look and act the same, presenting an
insurmountable problem, the scientists said.Missile developers say the scientists are wrong, though they have declined to
detail why, saying the information is classified."The Union of Concerned Scientists says you can never, ever develop a NMD
system that can deal with countermeasures, and of course we don't agree with
that," Lehner said.The missile defense office released its final environmental impact statement on the
proposed system in the Dec. 15 Federal Register. Comments on the final
document will be taken until Jan. 16.Lehner said the final document didn't change substantially from earlier versions.
No significant environmental effects are expected from the construction and
operation of the system, he said.The military's "preferred alternative" would put up to 100 interceptor missiles on
Fort Greely near Delta Junction and "X-band" radar on Shemya Island near the
western end of the Aleutian Islands.
Sen. Stevens to meet with Bush in Texas
January 07, 2001
The Associated Press
ANCHORAGE--Sen. Ted Stevens will be joining a bipartisan group of seven
lawmakers for a meeting with President-elect George W. Bush next week.The meeting is set for Monday at Austin, Texas, and the agenda will be centered
around national defense issues."... We're going to talk about the deployment of forces in the Pacific," Stevens
said. "And Sen. (Daniel) Inouye (D-Hawaii) and I are going to sort of present
our case that the Pacific is normally overlooked in terms of defense strategy."... Six of the seven largest armies in the world are in the Pacific. The threat to
the world is in the Pacific, and I do not think it ought to be taken lightly in the
future."Stevens said his topic list also will include plans for a national antiballistic missile
defense shield, portions of which would be installed in Alaska. Stevens already
has talked missile defense with Defense Secretary nominee Don Rumsfeld.The Alaska Republican believes the Bush administration will follow through with
Clinton adminstration plans to base at least an intermediate missile interceptor
system in the state's Interior and the Aleutians."I think we're going to see, really, a broad-scale review now of what this
administration has done," Stevens said. "I expect it to be validated as far as the
system that affects Alaska."From Texas, Stevens and Inouye will head for Hawaii to visit members of the
Pacific Command.AP-WS-01-05-01 1317EST
Delta community wishes for prosperity and peaceJanuary 02, 2001
By VICTORIA NAEGELE
A new year always brings new hope, and an informal survey of Delta Junction
residents shows great hope the community will pull together both economically
and socially in 2001.Top on the list of wishes for the community is a reuse for Fort Greely Army Post.
Residents expressed more interest in reuse than concern about the new role for
the post, which is slated for realignment in July. Top contenders are a national
missile defense system and a privately owned prison."We could use a missile system here," said Frank Whiteside, an AT&T/Alascom
worker. "We could use a railroad here."Whiteside, whose wife owns Chena Pets & Card Shop, said help for the local
economy tops his list. That could come from Allen Army Airfield's reuse, he said.
"There's a lot of potential here," Whiteside added.At Alaska 7 Motel, Nick Wingfield seconded Whiteside's motion for missile
defense. "We need NMD or something to boost the economy," said Wingfield, a
senior at Northern Arizona University.Gayle Parsons at Barb's Video echoed the sentiments, calling for reuse of Fort
Greely as a missile base. "General prosperity and jobs" top Loretta Schooley's
list, too. "What the route to that is going to be, I don't know," Schooley said.Schooley, school bus contractor and editor of the Delta Wind, doesn't cross out
"prison" on her wish list."I'd like to see NMD," she said. "I think everyone would. I'd also like to see the
prison."While city officials have indicated the two are incompatible, Schooley
disagrees--assuming the city still has friends in the state Legislature after some
bridge burning over the issue. The legislation enabling the prison here requires it
to reuse base buildings, which might not be possible if the missile defense system
is located at Fort Greely."Perhaps we still have enough friends in the Legislature to make the change (in
legislation)," Schooley said. "Hopefully, the new millennium will bring great things
to Delta Junction."The tug-of-war over reuse of the base has driven a deep wedge in the
community in the past three years. For many residents, healing those wounds is a
top priority on their wish list for the new year.Karen Andreassen's wish is for community members "to settle their differences
and become a united community again.""To work together," added Andreassen, who with her husband, operates the
Family Medical Center in Delta Junction.Peace is what Edward Richards wants. "I'd take peace compared to what's
going on with the prison issue," said Richards, taking a break from his duties at
the Buffalo Center Diner. "A peaceful resolution to this Fort Greely issue."Lisa Sturgis sees the divisions as going beyond bruised feelings in the community.
Sturgis, who owns Acacia Floral & Gifts, said the divisiveness has hurt the
community in many ways, including the annual Deltana Fair."I'd like to see the fair become something more than it is--something fun," Sturgis
said.She applauded last year's Fourth of July celebration, organized as a
community-healing event, as what a fun community event should be."We need to get back to being our small community," Sturgis said.
There were other wishes. Lloyd Gerry, who works at Alyeska Pump Station
No. 9, said he not only wants an economic boost for Delta, but a spiritual one."My greatest desire for Delta would be to see all the churches filled up," Gerry
said.Lyall Brasier at Brasier Farms, too, called for something to stabilize Delta's
economy. But Brasier is also hoping for something that everyone would likely
appreciate, but no one more so than Brasier and his fellow farmers."We definitely need to have a summer," Brasier said. Gold mine plans move
aheadSnow covers the mountains but that doesn't mean work isn't moving forward on
Teck Resources Inc./Sumitomo's plan to open the Pogo Gold Mine in the future.
The mine is about 38 miles northeast of Delta Junction.But at this stage of the game, there is a lot of waiting along with the planning.
Karl L. Hanneman, Alaska regional manager for Teck, said the draft of the
environmental impact statement is being prepared, with no clear indication from
the Environmental Protection Agency when it will be released. There are public
hearings on the draft tentatively slated for May.That draft will include the access route to the mine. Teck proposed several
possible access routes, including Quartz Lake Road or Shaw Creek Road as
entry points for an all-season road, or using winter roads and relying on air
support for the rest of the year.Hearings in September drew comments from people both in favor and opposed
to what was then Teck's route of choice--the Shaw Creek Road all-season
route. Other possible routes also had their supporters and detractors, who cited
such factors as environmental and economic impacts, as well as quality of life
issues in the rural area.Hanneman said he has been busy answering questions for the EPA and
environmental impact statement team. Meanwhile, engineers are working on
plans for the mill, processing operation and underground mine design, Hanneman
said. Others began work last month on a final feasibility study to determine if the
mine will be profitable. The report won't be released until late September."That will really be our first good look at the economics," Hanneman said.
The prefeasibility studies have been encouraging so far, he added.
Victoria Naegele is a free-lance writer in Delta Junction.
Knowles to push for $16.9 million more for UA,
but not for museumDecember 12, 2000
By SEAN COCKERHAM
Staff WriterGov. Tony Knowles announced Monday that he will campaign for a $16.9
million boost to the University of Alaska operating budget, but not the funds
requested for expansion of the university museum.Knowles, speaking at a tele-conferenced Anchorage press conference, said he
will endorse the full operating budget hike for next year desired by the
university's president and board of regents.The governor, however, did not support the bulk of the capital funds that the
regents wanted for projects to construct and upgrade facilities.The regents in November had moved $8 million for expansion of the University
of Alaska Museum on the Fairbanks campus to the top of their capital budget
priority list."We are very grateful for the governor's full support of the operating budget,"
said Mike Burns, chair of the board of regents. "He did not support all of our
capital requests and that will probably be an ongoing discussion."Last year the governor asked the Legislature to fund a similar operating budget
increase for the university, and lawmakers ended up fulfilling most of the request.Knowles asserted Monday that instituting the $16.9 million operating budget hike
for the university next year will help reverse previous years of legislative
under-funding."With new dynamic leadership here at the university and some serious arm
twisting in the Legislature, we are turning the corner on re-energizing Alaska's
university and making it truly world class," Knowles said.Interior Republican lawmakers--who object to the assertion that the Legislature
has shortchanged the university system over the past decade--have already told
the regents that they will fight for the proposed $16.9 million operating budget
increase."I think you'll find the Interior delegation firmly behind that number," said Sen.
Gary Wilken, R-Fairbanks. "We need to look for support elsewhere around the
state to help us make it."Wilken also expressed disappointment that Knowles' capital budget request did
not contain funding for the university museum. Inclusion in the governor's budget
would have made it much easier to push the museum money through the
Legislature, Wilken said.Thus far, an aggressive fund-raising campaign has collected $23 million from
private and federal sources for the museum expansion.Project supporters hope the effort will still convince legislators to forward the
final $8 million for the project."We've done such a good job raising money from non-state sources," said
museum Director Aldona Jonaitis, noting that the museum is a state building that
serves students. "We hope the Legislature realizes we've done our share and we
hope the Legislature does its (share)."Knowles spokesman David Ramseur said there was simply not enough money to
go around in the capital budget for items like the museum."The university submitted an $87 million capital budget request and we pared it
down to $39 million," he said. "(The governor) just didn't feel, given the limited
overall state capital budget, that he could support the entire university request."Knowles' $39 million capital budget proposal largely consists of non-state funds.
That includes $30 million in federal money earmarked to cover the cost of
supercomputer upgrades at UAF. (emphasis added)The largest state-funded item in the governor's proposal for capital spending is
$4 million for dormitory sprinkler systems, lighting and other safety upgrades.The regents had recommended $14.3 million in that category, according to the
Associated Press.Top capital budget requests, other than the museum, that did not make it include
$8.5 million for new classrooms at community campuses and $12.1 million for
classroom and lab improvements.The regents's $16.9 million operating budget increase-- supported by Knowles
on Monday--includes $4.2 million for job training in the areas of education,
health care and information technology.Another $2.5 million would go toward preparing the university system to
produce workers for a gas pipeline or missile defense system. (emphasis added) About $1 million
would go toward areas such as student advising and support. (emphasis added).Some $9 million would go toward maintaining university services, such as
meeting labor contract increases, paying for distance education and repairing
equipment.
Army to launch four missiles each year at Kodiak
complexNovember 29, 2000
The Associated Press
KODIAK--The Army plans to launch up to four missiles a year over the next
five years from the Kodiak Launch Complex, the Kodiak Daily Mirror reported
Tuesday.The Army plan, which will be unveiled Thursday, is in addition to the Air Force's
recently announced plans to send up eight missiles in as many years from the
Kodiak site.The new proposal is a project of the Ballistic Missile Targets Joint Project Office
of the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command. Army Environmental
Protection Specialist Thomas Craven, with an entourage of some eight technical
and program representatives, will be on hand Thursday at Kodiak High School
to answer questions."It's an open house meeting," Craven said. "It's an information session for the
public to come and look at what we're proposing. "We'll talk about ground and
air safety."The Army's North Pacific Targets Program is proposing up to eight launches
yearly, with up to four from the Kodiak site and the others from the Kauai Test
Facility, according to Pat Ladner, director of the Alaska Aerospace and
Development Corp., which runs the Kodiak facility.The launches are to test sensor equipment and interceptors on targets with
realistic trajectories and large, diverse payloads."This target system provides targets for a variety of programs, including the
missile defense program," Craven said.The KLC was built with the dual purpose of accommodating both military and
commercial customers. To date, there have been two military and no commercial
launches from the facility.The Air Force launches are to be part of an annual military war exercise in
Alaska held in late winter.********************************************************************
Next missile test not scheduled until 2001
November 23, 2000
By SAM BISHOP
News-Miner Washington BureauWASHINGTON--The next test of a missile in the proposed national missile
defense system will come sometime after the new year, according to a missile
office spokeswoman.After the last test in July, military officials said they hoped to send up the next
interceptor as early as October or November. That hope was never translated
into an official time line, however."With a test as large as this, a couple months one way or another is very, very
hard to identify," said Pam Bain, spokeswoman for the Department of Defense's
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization. "So, no we're not characterizing this as a
delay at all."President Clinton on Sept. 1 declined to approve construction of the missile
defense system, saying he would leave the decision to the next administration.
But he didn't halt the testing program.Fort Greely near Delta Junction is considered a prime site for housing the missile
system.Jacques Gansler, undersecretary of defense acquisition, told reporters on July 8
that the next test could come as early as October or November. Gansler spoke
at the Pentagon immediately after an interceptor launched from Kwajalein Atoll
in the Pacific Ocean missed a mock intercontinental ballistic missile launched
from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.Gansler was asked at the time whether the miss would force a delay in the
president's deployment decision, since the launch had failed to test integration of
the new ground-to-missile guidance technology. The interceptor missed because
a rocket stage failed to disengage--a relatively low-tech task in a system used
hundreds of times previously.Gansler indicated the test of the integration system wasn't absolutely necessary
for the president's decision.The military wanted a decision so it could proceed with construction on Shemya
Island in Alaska's Aleutian Islands. It needed the OK from Clinton in order to
meet earlier time lines.With neither a decision nor a flight, the fate of the program will fall to the next
president and Congress.GOP candidate Gov. George W. Bush, in campaign literature, vows to
"accelerate research on, and deployment of, both national and theater missile
defenses, as soon as possible." He says if Russia objects, based on the
Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, the United States should withdraw from the treaty.Democratic candidate Vice President Al Gore, in a Sept. 1 statement, said he
supported Clinton's decision to defer construction. That will give additional time
for testing and cost analysis. He also, though, "would not be prepared to let
Russian opposition to this system stand in the way of its deployment."Congress approved more than $4.7 billion for the Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization for fiscal 2001, which began Oct. 1.About $1.88 billion of the total goes to national missile defense, up from $836
million in fiscal 2000, according to a budget summary from the agency. Estimates
of the total construction cost range from $30 billion to $60 billion.The next test will follow the same basic plan as the July 8 flight, Bain said, with a
mock enemy missile launched from Vandenberg and an interceptor launched
from Kwajalein.
AF sees no problems from Kodiak launchesNovember 21, 2000
By SAM BISHOP
News-Miner Washington BureauWASHINGTON--The Air Force says its plan to launch eight rockets from
Kodiak Island during the next eight years shouldn't have significant effects on
local sea lions and eider ducks.The Air Force published its environmental assessment of the proposed launch
program last month.The first flight from the Kodiak Launch Complex is planned for March 2001.
Future launches would occur between Feb. 1 and April 30. Public comment on
the environmental assessment is due by Dec. 1.Populations of both Steller's eiders and Steller's sea lions in the region have
declined from historic levels. They are considered "special status species" by the
Air Force.The sea lions have a haulout on Ugak Island, located just a few miles from the
launch complex and almost directly under the expected rocket path. The sea
lions do not bear or raise pups on the island.The Air Force tried to monitor sea lion reactions during a previous rocket
launch at Kodiak, but a remote video failed. Observers in a helicopter 90
minutes later saw the animals rafted up in the water, where they remained at
least another 90 minutes. The next morning, all the animals were hauled out on
the island again."Disturbances of this kind, occurring infrequently and accompanied by
protracted harassment, are not known to result in abandonment of favored
hauling areas, as animals usually return within a day, and often within a few
hours," the Air Force report said.Eider flocks with hundreds of birds have been seen near Ugak Island in
February and March. They do not breed near Kodiak.The Air Force expects the birds will fly when a rocket leaves, "perhaps for
substantial distances." It acknowledged that eiders could abandon the area and
burn off fat reserves while flying.However, the assessment said, other studies indicate occasional noise doesn't
permanently chase ducks from preferred areas, and the birds get used to it
easily. A missile launch would be like a predator attack, and "only when a bird
is attacked repeatedly at the same site would abandonment be expected," the
Air Force said.Also, "due to the rarity of ... launches, energetic effects would be negligible," the
report said.No changes in water or air quality have been detected after previous launches,
the report said.The Kodiak complex, located about 40 miles south of the city of Kodiak, is
owned by the Alaska Aerospace Development Corp., a state entity. Two
rockets have already been launched there.The planned eight new launches are not part of testing for the proposed national
missile defense system, said John Ryan, spokesman for the Space and Missile
Systems Center in El Segundo, Calif.Rather, they will test the Air Force's ability to operate missiles in the region,
referred to as the "Alaska theater." The Kodiak launches will "provide a theater
missile defense scenario for the Northern Edge 2001 exercise," according to the
environmental assessment.Northern Edge is an annual military war exercise in Alaska held in late winter.
The eight rockets to be fired from Kodiak are called "quick reaction launch
vehicles" and include two types of single-stage Minuteman missiles, a two-stage
Minuteman and a two-stage Castor. They carry solid rocket propellant, installed
before the rockets arrive in Kodiak. The propellant can burn but isn't explosive.
Some of it, however, can change into an explosive form, the report said.The Air Force assessment is available on the Web at
http://ax.laafb.af.mil/axf/announce.htm. Copies are also be available at the
Kodiak college, high school and public libraries.
Military presence in fluxNovember 20, 2000
By BETH IPSEN
Staff WriterThere's no arguing the strategic importance of Alaska to the defense of the
nation."We'll beat anybody to Europe from here by flying over the North Pole," Capt.
Carl Alvarez, spokesman for the 168th Air Refueling Wing out of Eielson Air
Force Base said. And the fastest way to get to the Far East is through Alaska.But it's the future of the military presence in the Interior that may be more
noteworthy than its past.In 1995 Fort Greely was placed on the U.S. Army's Base Realignment and
Closure list, which means that by July 2001 only a skeleton crew will run what's
left of the post.The post, which has been the center for the Northern Warfare Training Center
and Cold Region Test Activity, has moved its headquarters to Ft. Wainwright,
but is keeping its training at the Black Rapids Training Site near Delta Junction.The future of Fort Greely rests on the fate of the National Missile Defense
system, which is in limbo.Another attraction to Alaska is the large air and land training ranges that draw
many military units up from the Lower 48.Eielson Air Force Base spokesman Sgt. Elton Price said the training flight space
is roughly the size of Kansas.The base has hosted several exercises, especially since Clark Air Force Base in
the Philippines closed in 1991.But the military is modifying to tackle a new threat after the end of the Cold War
in 1989."It was a neat, clean world when we had to just deal with the Soviets," Maj.
Gen. Jim Lovelace, commander of the Army in Alaska said at a September
Greater Fairbanks Chamber of Commerce board of directors luncheon.After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, countries like China, Iraq, Columbia,
Pakistan and North Korea have emerged as new military foes.To adapt to these new threats, the U.S. Army will undergo a transformation to
make troopers more agile, versatile and lethal by the year 2025, according to
Lovelace.This plan to lighten Army troops was developed by Army Chief of Staff Gen.
Eric Shinseki who took over in June 1999.Eventually the changes will reach Alaska and Ft. Wainwright and Ft. Richardson
will be "just colored a little differently on the inside," Lovelace said.By 2007, the Army hopes to have six to eight of the updated brigades and the
172nd Battalion at Ft. Wainwright has the 3,500 soldiers needed to adapt to the
new look, Lovelace said.The objective is to have a brigade combat-ready in 96 hours, a division in 120
hours and five divisions in 30 days.But adaptability seems to be the key for the military.
The number of soldiers at Ft. Wainwright has gone from 6,000 soldiers in the
1980s to around 4,600 today, according to post spokesperson Linda Douglass.
That influx of soldiers has occurred as units like the 6th Infantry Division moved
down to Ft. Richardson.During that ebbing of the number of soldiers, Douglass said the post has
undergone some housing facelifts and construction to make it easier for those
stationed in Alaska.Since 1987, 400 new housing units were opened on post, another 359 have
been constructed off post and more are on the way.But the biggest project the post is undergoing is the medical hospital that will
replace 47-year-old Bassett Army Community Hospital in 2005.The $133-million facility will have only 33 beds, 22 fewer than the current
hospital, but will house all of the clinics, administrative and training facilities in
one building, according to post officials.Because of the military adaptation, soldiers and airmen in the reserves and guard
are taking a more active role in the military in Alaska and overseas.According to Maj. Mike Haller, spokesperson for the Alaska Army National
Guard and Air National Guard, more than one-half of U.S. soldiers are in the
guard or reserves.Currently, about 950 guard airmen and 500 guard soldiers are stationed in the
Interior, Haller said.Like the rest of the military presence in Alaska, Haller said the Army National
Guard has been downsizing since the end of the Cold War in 1989.The Army National Guard has trimmed numbers from 3,500 soldiers to roughly
2,000 soldiers and 110 until locations or villages down to only 74, Haller said.
And only six of those are accessible by road, Haller said."That's a really daunting challenge to us," Haller said.
But the future of the Alaska Army National Guard also rests with the National
Defense Missile program, Haller said, which he believes the guard will have a
large role in.He said one reason the Air National Guard has grown is because most of
Alaska is accessible only by air or boat, "and we prefer air."Unlike the Army National Guard, the Air National Guard has grown in Alaska.
In 1986, the 168th Air Refueling Squadron was born with only 10 personal to
support it, according to Alvarez.Since then, the squadron has grown into a full-fledged wing with roughly 700
airmen, Alvarez said. They are one of only three refueling wings in the Pacific
Theater.IN 1994, a detachment of the 201st Rescue Squadron joined them out on
Eielson. The 201st was originally an active duty unit, Haller said.The 201st has a rescue coordination center at Camp Denali with 12 airman that
specialize in plucking lost souls from cliff sides or wilderness throughout Alaska.In 1999, the squadron won the MacKay Trophy which for the rescuing a crew
of a downed airplane off Mount Porbert under adverse conditions. The trophy
is awarded yearly by the U.S. Air Force for the "most meritorious flight" by
airmen."It's not surprising that they did this," Haller said. "It's a credit to their bravery,
their courage and their airmanship."
State Guard could get expanded roleMay 31, 2000
By T.A. BADGER
Associated Press WriterANCHORAGE--The Alaska Air National Guard may soon be taking on
more tasks now handled by the Air Force.The state agency could find itself in charge of watching for enemy aircraft in
Alaska air space, monitoring for incoming missiles and other support tasks in
the next few years as the Air Force continues to shrink in size.The new missions could add more than 200 people to the air guard's
full-time ranks, according to its Anchorage-based commander, Brig. Gen.
George Cannelos."It's fortunate that we've developed over the years missions that complement
each other," Cannelos said last week.In the past decade, the air guard has taken over several key jobs that used
to belong to the Air Force.The guard's 210th Air Rescue Squadron at Kulis Air National Guard Base
responds to distress calls across the Alaska mainland; the 11th Rescue
Coordination Center at Camp Denali manages search and rescue
operations; and the eight tanker planes of the 168th Air Refueling Wing,
based at Eielson Air Force Base, pump fuel into active-duty Air Force
planes while airborne.The next five years could see the 611th Air Control Squadron at Elmendorf
Air Force Base come under the guard's control. The 611th runs a network
of 17 Air Force long-range radar sites across the state that monitor Alaska
air space.Cannelos said it's still just a proposal, but across the nation such radar
operations have been spun off to Air National Guard units. The 611th, with
about 150 uniformed personnel, is the last one still being operated by the Air
Force."The guard and reserves are taking on additional missions and are becoming
an even more important part of the total force," said Maj. Les Kodlick,
spokesman for the Alaskan Command at Elmendorf.Defense Secretary William Cohen recently recognized the guard's growing
value."I would say that now more than ever our national security strategy depends
upon the National Guard and reserves," Cohen said in a May 20 speech in
Torrance, Calif."This is a reflection of our new military, a more mobile, a much more flexible
military... We couldn't carry out our duties without the full integration of the
guard and the reserve."In Alaska, discussions are under way to transfer the 13th Space Warning
Squadron at Clear Air Force Station to the air guard over a four-year
period.Clear, about 80 miles southwest of Fairbanks, is one of the Air Force's two
sophisticated radar sites set up to provide early warning of incoming ballistic
missiles.Cannelos said the air guard could run the radar site more efficiently because
its staffing would be more stable. Rather than a steady rotation of personnel
and high retraining costs, the 85 full-time guard members would live in the
state, he said.
© 1999-2001 MediaNews Group, Inc. and Fairbanks Publishing Company,
Inc.