Defense Depot Ogden may be the most unlucky of all bases proposed for closure this year.
First, it was most cost-effective of all Defense Logistics Agency depots in a 1993 Peat Marwick accounting firm study - but the DLA didn't consider the study when it made its decision to close the depot."That Peat Marwick study is a definite plus for us," said Mike Pavich, president of Hill/DDO '95, a group working to save Hill Air Force Base and Defense Depot Ogden. "There needs to be a lot more discussion about it within the (Defense Base Closure and Realignment) Commission."
Second, even without the study, Ogden's ratings were higher than two sister depots that managed to escape the closure list.
Third, a main reason it was targeted anyway just happens to be essentially the same reason that made the Air Force, in a different situation, choose to spare Hill Air Force Base.
That is, the Defense Logistics Agency figured shutting down two entire stand-alone depots (Ogden and Memphis) would save more than simply downsizing all its six depots or closing the two lower-ranked depots instead, which are tenants of other bases.
Meanwhile, the Air Force decided shutting down an entire air logistics center or two - such as Hill - would cost more than keeping them all open with reduced operations by avoiding huge up-front costs of closing bases.
In short, characteristics that saved other bases managed somehow to target Defense Depot Ogden for death - and the loss of 1,113 jobs directly, and 1,834 more indirectly in the community.
Pavich said there may have been some method to the apparent madness of closing stand-alone bases in some situations but not others.
"There are unique workloads in the ALCs, whereas there aren't in the depots," he said, which makes downsizing and consolidating air logistics centers more appealing. "Basically, (depot) warehouse space is warehouse space - one warehouse is about as good as another."
Pavich added that shutting down an air logistics center involves a lot more than shutting down a depot, such as the amounts of sundry equipment required to be moved from an air logistics center.
"That's one of the major cost drivers," he said.
Ogden also had bad luck in the results of ratings of its value by the Defense Logistics Agency, ratings that Pavich is planning to exploit before the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission.
Four of the DLA's six depots had almost identical rating scores - with a "variance of only 37 points out of a possible 1,000 between third and sixth place," Pentagon documents say.
Ogden was tied for third with a depot in Memphis (which is also targeted for closure). Ranked lower were depots in Columbus, Ohio and Richmond, Va.
However in the part of rankings looking just at military value, Columbus finished the highest. Ogden finished fifth and Memphis sixth. And officers said facilities at Richmond are the best maintained of any in the DLA. Based on the final results, the DLA heavily emphasized military value and geographical location.
"The issue is DLA says, `Where do we have to be to do our mission? If we have to be there anyway, then that's where we're going to stay,' " Pavich said.
Ogden supporters plan to focus on the DLA's assumption that the west coast depot at San Joaquin, Calif., which will remain open, doesn't need backup capability from Ogden.
"It's a concept of operation issue, and that's what we have to attack," Pavich said. "It's important to have surge capacity for backup for the West Coast depots."
The DLA said it figured that "closure of an entire installation (such as Ogden and Memphis) will allow DLA to reduce infrastructure significantly more than disestablishment of a tenant depot (like Columbus or Richmond)" or keeping all bases open but reduced.
It said closing Ogden would cost $110.8 million - but savings would recoup costs after 10 years (four years after the six-year implementation period). The Pentagon said that over 20 years, closing Ogden would save $180.9 million, money that it would have had to expend if the base were open.
Air Force officials found differently for its separate depot system. Deputy Defense Secretary John Deutsch said that "solidly reducing civilian employment at all depots - rather than fully close one or two of them - leaves greater savings for the taxpayer. That is information we had not anticipated."
He said keeping them all open would save $2.9 billion over 20 years, compared with saving only $699 million if it closed one or two of the bases because of the up-front costs involved.
Rep. Jim Hansen, R-Utah, a senior member of the House National Security Committee, says he isn't sure he buys those arguments.
He said many put more faith in rumors that the Clinton administration pressured to keep McClellan Air Force Base open to help Clinton's re-election chances there, even though the base has much lower rankings than the other four logistics centers.
Hansen said the military couldn't fairly propose closing any other logistics center without also closing McClellan, so it ended up proposing to keep them all open.
Hansen said last week the prospects of saving Ogden may not be great. He noted that Ogden and Memphis are farther away from their "customer" depots on the two coasts than the other depots.
Still, he and his aides pointed out many high ratings and Ogden's overall efficiency in a Tuesday hearing of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission, and say they will continue to do so.
And through it all, people at the depot itself are simply sitting tight.
"We're all just holding our breath here, hoping things will turn out all right," said depot spokesman Charles Freeman.