Florida Times-Union (Jacksonville, FL) October 7, 2003
Hawaii, Guam unlikely for JFK
Navy looking at moving carriers
By Gregory Piatt
WASHINGTON -- Moving permanently a Navy aircraft carrier from the continental United States to Hawaii or Guam would take about a decade, and if it happened it probably wouldn't be the Jacksonville-based USS John F. Kennedy, a Navy spokesman and an analyst said last week.
Adm. Walter F. Doran, who is responsible for all Navy ships in the Pacific, said last week a carrier may be moved so the Navy could respond more quickly to a crisis in North Korea or elsewhere in the Asia-Pacific region. Doran also said it's unclear whether the carrier would move from an East Coast or a West Coast base, and that no decisions have been made.
The Navy has five carriers based on the West Coast, six on the East Coast and one in Japan.
The Kennedy, however, still might not spend the rest of its life based at Mayport Naval Station, said Patrick Garrett, an analyst with Global Security, a Washington-based defense think tank.
The JFK, one of two non-nuclear-powered aircraft carriers in the fleet, could replace the USS Kitty Hawk, the other non-nuclear-powered carrier, on permanent deployment to Japan in 2008, when the Kitty Hawk is expected to be decommissioned, Garrett said.
'It would make a lot of sense to move the JFK,' Garrett said.
Japan restricts the stationing of nuclear-powered ships in its ports, although U.S. nuclear-powered carriers have made ports of call to the country.
Currently undergoing refurbishment, with another overhaul planned for 2005, the Kennedy's life with the fleet is expected to be extended to 2018. That would make the carrier the Navy's only choice if Japan doesn't lift its ban on nuclear-powered ships.
'It would make sense to have more carrier assets in the region' than only base carriers in Hawaii, Guam or the West Coast, Garrett said.
But no decision has been made to move the JFK to Japan, said Navy Lt. Jason Salata, a spokesman for the Department of the Navy.
The Navy also has another carrier, the USS Ronald Reagan, which will make its first deployment in 2005. The Reagan is expected to land in San Diego, where two carriers are currently based.
If the Navy home-ports a ship in the Pacific, Hawaii would be the most likely choice. The Navy has embarked on a $ 1.8 million study looking at whether it can base a carrier and its air wing at Pearl Harbor, Garrett said. Also, a recent report in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin said the Navy has contacted Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle about basing a nuclear-powered carrier at Pearl Harbor.
Putting a carrier at Pearl Harbor would require the Navy to build a new pier and support facilities for the ship and the air wing.
'A potential basing issue could be 10 years,' Salata said. 'So it wouldn't be happening for a while.'
Meanwhile, the Pacific Stars and Stripes reported Friday that a nuclear-powered carrier is expected to be moved to the region when the Kitty Hawk is decommissioned.
But Pacific fleet spokesman Lt. j.g. Mike Morley told the military newspaper that no decision has been reached yet on a potential new base or on a replacement for the Kitty Hawk.
Staff writer Greg Piatt can be reached at (904) 359-4169 or via e-mail at greg.piatt@jacksonville.com.
© Copyright 2003, The Florida Times-Union
