AIMING TO SAVE EDWARDS SUPPORTERS MOUNT INFORMATION CAMPAIGN.

Byline: Jim Skeen Staff Writer

EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE - Unity and a level playing field will be the keys to California bases surviving the upcoming round of military base closures, according to Edwards Air Force Base supporters.

Edwards supporters, such as the Edwards Community Alliance and the Southwest Defense Alliance, say they are continuing their push to educate and unite the state's congressional leaders. Supporters are hopeful that a commission formed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will aid those efforts.

``We're going to continue to get the congressional delegation to unite,'' said Bob Johnstone, executive director of the Edwards Community Alliance and a former Edwards executive. ``We're still in the education mode.''

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld will issue his proposal for which bases to close on May 16. A base closure commission, called the Base Realignment and Closure Commission, will hold hearings through the summer and issue its recommendations to President George W. Bush in September.

The previous four rounds of base closures since the 1990s have saved the Defense Department an estimated $28.9 billion, Pentagon officials said. Another round could save as much as an additional $7 billion annually, federal officials said.

At stake are California's 36 major and 25 minor facilities - the most of any state. Previous closures hit California hard, axing 29 major installations and cutting 100,000 defense-related jobs.

Edwards supporters are hopeful California's political leaders will promote what they call the Southwest Defense Complex, with the idea that military training and test and evaluation missions could be consolidated at bases in California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico and Texas.

A possible component of the Southwest Defense Complex is a joint aerospace research, development, test and evaluation center composed of Edwards Air Force Base and the Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division sites at China Lake in Kern County and Point Mugu in Ventura County.

Backers of the concept argue that Edwards, Mugu and China Lake already possess most of the laboratories and test facilities needed to accommodate a joint aerospace complex and that any costs from the addition of hangars and other support facilities would be quickly covered by the savings from consolidation.

``When we talk about transformation, there are advantages in such a complex,'' said Phil Arnold, leader of a support organization for China Lake and a member of the Southwest Defense Alliance. ``Anytime you can use the same facilities it saves money from overhead.''

The joint center would have the added benefits of supporting other technologies and mission areas such as space propulsion, electronic warfare testing and training, as well as providing ranges for use by the many training installations in the Southwest, the proponents say.

The skies over 20,000 square miles are available for test and training missions in airspace managed by Edwards, China Lake and the Army's Fort Irwin National Training Center, and over the 36,000-square-mile Point Mugu sea range.

Backers of the proposal believe it will likely draw opposition from within the military services. There will also be a great deal of political pressure in opposition from those representing East Coast bases.

There could be support, however, from higher-ranking Pentagon officials who share Rumsfeld's vision of joint service operations.

The proposal was praised by Donna Tuttle, co-chairwoman of the California Council on Base Support and Retention.

``You are clearly addressing the 'jointness' that the Defense Department is bringing up,'' Tuttle told the Edwards supporters at a Lancaster hearing last week.

Supporters of the region's military bases believe they will come out ahead in the base closure process if there is an honest look at capabilities and resources. There is concern, however, criteria could be altered to make bases look like they have capabilities comparable to the West when they do not.

For example, when considering range capabilities, the commission should make a distinction between restricted airspace and warning areas when reviewing airspace ranges. Such a distinction was not made in previous base closure rounds.

Restricted airspace, such as California's R-2508 range north of Edwards, require nonmilitary aircraft to seek permission before entering. Warning areas, which extend outward from the nation's coasts, do not prohibit nonmilitary flights.

``Those who know know there is a difference,'' Johnstone said.

Jim Skeen, [phone]

james.skeen(at)dailynews.com