With all the pain it has inflicted on affected communities, closing military bases has not yet saved the nation any money. It has cost billions of dollars instead.
That's not a misprint. It's according to Pentagon figures.Of course, the Pentagon says the savings will come, that it just takes time to recoup the huge upfront costs of closing bases.
For the first three rounds of closures in 1988, '91 and '93, upfront costs of closures were $13.1 billion. Pentagon figures show their costs have not been recouped through savings from avoided maintenance and other operation costs.
However, over a statutory six-year implementation period for each round, the Pentagon figures the total net savings from those three rounds will be $7.1 billion - with an additional $6 billion saved per year thereafter by avoiding annual extra upkeep costs.
Of course included in those early closure rounds were Utah's Fort Douglas and Tooele Army Depot's North Area.
This year's proposals - including closing Utah's Defense Depot Ogden and reducing operations at Dugway Proving Ground and the Utah Test and Training Range - will also take awhile to recover costs.
The Pentagon figures that the upfront costs for this year's new closures nationally will be about $3.8 billion - but that it should lead to a net savings of $4 billion within six years.
But that doesn't include some costs - such as accelerating the cleanup of environmental contamination at closing bases. The Pentagon says such restoration would have to be completed whether a base is open or closed, so it is not counted as a closure cost.
So if bases aren't saving any money right now, why close them? The answer is a bit complicated. But as Defense Secretary William Perry explains, cuts after the Cold War will reduce defense budgets by 40 percent by the end of the century, and cut forces by 34 percent.
But bases will have been cut by only 15 percent. So if the military doesn't want to see bigger chunks of its remaining money going to operate unneeded bases, it must spend money now to close them.
Perry would like to see more bases cut - but said the Pentagon is moving as fast as it dares so that the upfront costs won't rob too much money now from current training, weapons or other needs.
The Pentagon also said it is trying to close bases that will bring a quicker financial return - which helped save Hill Air Force Base but likely hurt Dugway and the Utah Test and Training Range. Returns on closure of Defense Depot Ogden won't be fast but didn't spare it from the list anyway.
The Pentagon had considered closing one or two of the Air Force's five air logistics centers - one of which is at Hill. But it found that the upfront costs of closing an entire base made it cheaper - even over the long run - to reduce operations at all the centers, and keep all open. So Hill won a reprieve.
The Pentagon figures that removing test operations - and leaving only training - at the UTTR will cost $3.2 million but will save a whopping $62.4 million over six years. The savings over 20 years is estimated at $179.9 million.
The cost of moving most missions out of Dugway is estimated at $25 million - but would save a huge $61 million over six years and $307 million over 20 years.
The Pentagon isn't expecting a very quick return from closing Defense Depot Ogden. In fact, it estimates it will take 10 years to recoup the $110.8 million upfront cost to close it - but it figures total savings over 20 years to be $180.9 million.
In short, Utah has or soon will lose thousands of jobs from base closures - and the nation really hasn't saved any money from them yet. But the sacrifice of those jobs now should make the future (maybe the far future) more livable for Pentagon budgets.