Oral History Program Jeanette Bonnell Interviewed by Alyssa Kammerman 10 February 2021 Oral History Program Weber State University Stewart Library Ogden, Utah Jeanette Bonnell Interviewed by Alyssa Kammerman 10 February 2021 Copyright © 2025 by Weber State University, Stewart Library Mission Statement The Oral History Program of the Stewart Library was created to preserve the institutional history of Weber State University and the Davis, Ogden and Weber County communities. By conducting carefully researched, recorded, and transcribed interviews, the Oral History Program creates archival oral histories intended for the widest possible use. Interviews are conducted with the goal of eliciting from each participant a full and accurate account of events. The interviews are transcribed, edited for accuracy and clarity, and reviewed by the interviewees (as available), who are encouraged to augment or correct their spoken words. The reviewed and corrected transcripts are indexed, printed, and bound with photographs and illustrative materials as available. The working files, original recording, and archival copies are housed in the University Archives. Project Description The Hill/DDO’95 oral history project documents the 1995 and 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process and its impact on Utah. In 1993, rumors started to circulate that Hill Air Force Base and Defense Depot Ogden (DDO) would be closed by the 1995 round of BRAC, causing state officials, local government, and local grassroots lobbying group, Hill/DDO’95, to spring into action to save Utah’s military installations from closure or realignment to other facilities. This project includes interviews from a wide range of players, from congressmen, state officials, members of Hill/DDO’95, and the civilian employees of Hill Air Force Base and (DDO). Their accounts describe the process of fighting for the base, the closure of DDO, the formation of the Utah Defense Alliance (UDA) and Military Installation Development Authority (MIDA) from the Hill/DDO’95 group, and their fight to save Hill Air Force Base all over again in 2005. Also discussed is the importance of the F-35 aircraft and the “Falcon Hill” Enhanced Use Lease project to the prosperity of Hill Air Force Base and military relations in Utah. ____________________________________ Oral history is a method of collecting historical information through recorded interviews between a narrator with firsthand knowledge of historically significant events and a well-informed interviewer, with the goal of preserving substantive additions to the historical record. Because it is primary material, oral history is not intended to present the final, verified, or complete narrative of events. It is a spoken account. It reflects personal opinion offered by the interviewee in response to questioning, and as such it is partisan, deeply involved, and irreplaceable. ____________________________________ Rights Management This work is the property of the Weber State University, Stewart Library Oral History Program. It may be used freely by individuals for research, teaching and personal use as long as this statement of availability is included in the text. It is recommended that this oral history be cited as follows: Bonnell, Jeanette, an oral history by Alyssa Kammerman, 10 February 2021, WSU Stewart Library Oral History Program, University Archives, Stewart Library, Weber State University, Ogden, UT. iii Abstract: This is an oral history interview with Jeanette Bonnell. It was conducted on February 10, 2021 at the Weber State University office in Farmington. Bonnell discusses her position in Human Resources at the conclusion of the 1995 Base Realignment and Closure. Her memories include preparations for the BRAC Commissioners’ visit and her involvement in “Operation Smooth Move” during the workload transition after the conclusion of BRAC 1995. Bonnell also recalls her involvement in the preparation and presentation of research about Hill Air Force Base during the 2005 BRAC. The interviewer is Alyssa Kammerman. AK: Today is February 10th, 2021. I am speaking with Jeanette Bonnell for the Base Realignment and Closure Commission project. My name is Alyssa Kammerman and I'll be conducting the interview. So, I know we kind of talked about it offcamera, but could we start out with talking about what year you started working at the base and what your position was? JB: I started working at the base in 1983, and throughout my career there I had a series of different jobs, but my first one was doing industrial engineering studies. Through that work, I started my involvement with the BRAC process. I became more involved with BRAC probably around 1992. In the beginning of my work with BRAC, I was mainly involved with the implementation of the results of BRAC 1995, and then I was the Program Manager and had a team of analysts during BRAC 2005 efforts. AK: When you said you were involved at the end result of 1995, what do you mean? JB: The data study has already been conducted. If the BRAC commissioners want to visit a particular military installation and gather more info, and if the community 1 becomes involved with the selling of the importance of a particular military installation, and in this case Hill AFB, I was on a team that work those efforts. I was working in the Human Resource area at the time and was on an implementation team for workloads and/or organizations that were going to be transferring to Hill AFB; specifically, I was looking at the transfers from the human resources eye. I also, as part of the effort, looked at the validity of the grades of the jobs coming and/or the impact the workload would have on organizations and jobs already at Hill. AK: Okay, the Human Resources side. You were saying that you had helped with different studies from management engineering. Did you help them with the—Oh, I guess you said that the study was already done in 1995? JB: I helped with the different BRAC studies both from the initial aspects to the implementation of BRAC commissioners’ decisions. AK: So, you wouldn't have helped with that. JB: I did get involved with the implementation of the 1995 results and the implementation of the decisions that were both on Hill or if workload was transferring to another military installation. Once the decisions are made by the BRAC commissioners, the military installation impacted has about 3 to 4 years to implement those decisions. This is when the workloads and so forth are reviewed and decisions are made for instance if buildings need to be refurbished etcetera. For BRAC ‘95 that was during the 1996 to 2000 timeframe. AK: Okay, so did you help with the workload transition from McClellan? JB: Yes. 2 AK: Okay, tell me a little about that. What did that entail? JB: Well, it was interesting because, of course, when a base is chosen by the BRAC commissioners to, we call it “realign” or “close”—Base Realignment and Closure. McClellan was closing and Hill was going to receive workload/organizations from McClellan—from McClellan, the Space and C3I programs and some maintenance workloads were coming. In addition, there was some workload going to Kelly AFB in Texas. A lot of the workloads at McClellan and Kelly were set to come to Hill Air Force Base. My responsibility was being on a team of base functional experts who worked the realignment efforts. It was called “Smooth Move.” It entailed going to the various bases, McClellan or Kelly, and talking to the people that were potentially transferring, or maybe they had made their decision to transfer to Hill Air Force Base, and this “Operation Smooth Move” program was to help those folks have what we call a “seamless transition” to Hill. So, I was on the task force team working the human resource side. Among some of my responsibilities was being involved with the “Town Halls”, talking to folks on human resource issues, etcetera. The people that were interested or not interested in transitioning to Hill, they would come to these Town Halls and we would walk them through the whole process, i.e. with finance, what things were going to be paid for, such as selling their house. But from my end, it was talking about their job position and how it would move to Hill Air Force Base and anything personnel-related. For instance, say that they were a GS-12 program manager at McClellan, 3 was that going to still stay a GS-12 when they transition to Hill Air Force Base? Because even though the ALCs—the Air Logistics Centers—should be functioning basically the same, there are some peculiarities, i.e. if not all the responsibilities currently being worked say at McClellan how would that impact their job grade. AK: Did they typically keep their pay grade when they transitioned? JB: It was pretty much a seamless transition in terms of their pay grade and everything. In the case of McClellan, I seem to remember that, you know, California at the time, it's more expensive to live, and probably still is. So, the government would buy back their house, and then they were paid X, Y, Z, and then they would come to Utah, to Ogden, and they could get more of a house for the money that they got for the house in California. So, when we presented things that way—and it wasn't like we were trying to dangle carrots or anything— but it helped them feel more at ease about moving. Because if you're living someplace for 20 or 30 years, it's hard sometimes. Actually, people perceived it as being a kind of a forced move. AK: That’s interesting. I’d wondered if it was kind of a discouraging thing, because I imagine if Hill Air Force Base had closed, people would feel devastated. JB: Oh, yes, definitely. I mean, it's kind of a, "Well, why me?" You know, you start thinking, "Well, did the data that was submitted to the BRAC commissioners, was it the right data? If it was, then why would they choose us?" But yeah, it's an interesting process. AK: To say the least. 4 JB: Yeah. AK: We talked to a few other people who said that during the 1990s they felt like Utah was kind of isolated from a lot of other areas. Was there concern from Californians coming to Utah? Like that seems like two pretty different cultures. JB: Oh, yes. Well, I mean there was difference. For instance, Utah at the time was perceived to have a very different culture than California, and I think for anyone that move—like even for me: When I moved here to Utah, you’re just kind of going like, “Hmm. How is this going to work?” But actually, when I talked to people later on, because my job allowed me to stay in contact with a lot of the people that transitioned here, they liked it because it is a smaller, beautiful countryside versus Sacramento. Have you been there before? AK: Not to Sacramento. JB: Okay, well, in the Sacramento area, I think the main agriculture there is either soy beans or rice fields and stuff, so it's flat. When folks transferred here, you can't help but like the landscape. But there was a concern about the culture. AK: That makes sense. Were you living near McClellan at that time as you were helping with the transition? JB: No, I was here. I lived here working at Hill. I was part of the group that would go, we call it TDY, but we’d go to McClellan, and we went there and conducted our meetings. Sometimes people from McClellan would come here and we would go there. So, we would try to alternate the location of the meetings just to make it a little easier, and then it also allowed people to see Hill. AK: Kind of like a little tour of sorts. 5 JB: Yeah. AK: Okay. So, what did the transition look like from the Hill Air Force Base side, receiving all those new workers and everything? JB: Well, certainly when you are going to receive workloads, you have to be able to house it both from the personnel side and the actual work which could be specific type building, equipment, etcetera. So, if I remember correctly, we had to look at the facilities that were available at Hill, and most of the workloads that came from McClellan were white-collar jobs. In fact, I can tell you there were twenty-eight programs and workloads, and they were involved with weapons system-type programs. Then there were 700 people associated with those workloads. That's a lot to bring in. I can remember being in meetings where we're looking at some of the buildings and how we had to reconfigure the building in order to be able to accommodate the number of people that worked with that program. Now certainly, everybody doesn't have to be housed in the same building, but it just makes for a little bit more consistency. The impact isn’t just on Hill but also the community as a whole. We had to look at housing the people, the new work, and also look at the community, too, and how all of a sudden you're going to have all these people, making sure that there's housing and other infrastructure off base for civilians and on-base housing for the military. It's kind of a selling or reassuring job once the transition starts taking place. You have to make whatever place—it could have been here going to McClellan or McClellan coming here or Kelly going, vice versa—you 6 have to sell the fact that it's all going to be okay. You're going to have a place to sit, it might not be the same as at McClellan or Kelly, but you're going to have a place to do your workload. AK: So, you did get transitioned workloads from both McClellan and Kelly then? JB: Yeah, but the majority was from McClellan. AK: What were some of the solutions you came up with for the buildings and housing that you were needing? Did you have enough room or did you have to build some new buildings? JB: Well, there was some building going on when the effort took place and I don’t remember if it was specifically tied to McClellan. In addition to Program Management type workload, there was some depot; the maintenance side of the house that transferred. There was a building that was built across the flight line to help stage that workload, but I would have to look at my notes. AK: Depot workload from Defense Depot Ogden? Is that what you're referring to? JB: No, it was from McClellan and Warner Robins AFB. AK: Okay. JB: I don't know that much about when the Defense Depot was closed and what came. It was a pretty big-ticket item for the community given it was I believe the first BRAC impact Utah felt. AK: Yeah. JB: I do remember the fact that everyone was going like, "What?!" AK: Oh yeah. Do you remember outrage in the community? JB: Oh yeah. I just remember like, "What? What's going on?". 7 AK: I was talking with Debbie Dujanovic yesterday who was a reporter at that time, and she said, "We all felt like if Hill closed everybody would be outraged, but nobody cared if DDO closed,” and just that frustration I thought was interesting. JB: Yeah. Well, it's the same way when Tooele Army Depot closed. They had just built some new buildings and they had moved some different workloads there and everything. Everyone's going like, "Wow," because BRAC was new. Kind of what was talked about at the initial meeting on your effort; that nobody really realized how important BRAC was. It wasn't really that they didn't know how important it was, but they didn't understand the process and how everything kind of melded together and there were some rude awakenings like, "Oh, well, we better pay attention here." AK: I'll bet. JB: The facilities in the BRAC process is a huge thing because part of the work, at least for 2005, we had to display through the data on Hill’s facilities and how we could manage workloads coming in and potential costs. The costs are built into the bid or the base data gathering. I think I'm going to look for some information on that to add to the transcript later because that's a big one. AK: Okay, thank you. That would be great. I also want to know a little more about the community efforts to welcome the new workers. I don't know if you know anything about whether or not the community had different welcome events or if UDA did anything to help welcome them? JB: I think they did. They did welcome the BRAC commissioners, but I’m not sure about the people per se. The UDA task was to lobby to keep Utah's military 8 installations off the Pentagon's chopping block, and they had some play in the efforts when McClellan realigning here. When the decisions were made by the BRAC commissioners UDA would attend many of Hill’s strategy meetings. But whether Ogden had this big fanfare stuff, I don't know. AK: I know this is kind of going back a little bit, but do you have any memories of that day when the BRAC Commission visited? You said that you kind of helped a little with some of the preparations. JB: Well, it was early in my career and I just kind of went like, "Wow." The base was extra spruced up; for instance, as simple as this, there was an area where the grass wasn’t quite up and new grass was laid. There was definitely “Let’s make this base look great, work with the community and not have people picketing,” etcetera. We wanted to put on our best show for the Commissioners. The base was on high alert sort of speak to make sure we knew our roles, what our script was, and make the best impression we could. There were specific routes that we would take, or the base would take the commissioners on, and you want to highlight and you want to make it look shiny new. So, I remember that and I'm just kind of like, "Wow. Okay, whatever." Then on one of the visits—are you familiar with Hill? AK: Somewhat. JB: Okay, so when you come in from what was the West Gate at the time, and it's changed now, but there's a road and I can't remember what it is, but it goes up to the east side and it's a major road, and the employees at Hill were lined up along there, kind of like a parade route. You'd have your flags and stuff like that. When 9 the commissioners came through, they'd be waving, etcetera, but that parade route went outside the base, too. So, they got the community people involved that maybe didn't necessarily work at Hill but just to show the effort that we wanted Hill to stay open. AK: I was reading that some of the workers wore green ribbons. Did you hear anything about that? JB: No. What were the green ribbons for? Maybe if you tell me, then I can remember. AK: I don't know. I was reading in a Hilltop Times article and someone was saying, "We're getting all ready for BRAC and we're going to wear green ribbons," and I was wondering why green instead of blue? JB: Well, maybe green for go. AK: Oh, maybe. Yeah, that's true. Because I was like, "Air Force blue." But okay. Green for go. JB: Well yeah, that would be my thought, like "Go with this," or something like that. But yeah, I don't remember green ribbons. AK: Yeah, and I haven't seen any pictures or anything of the green ribbons so I don't know. JB: Have you seen any pictures of the parade route and stuff? AK: Yeah. Just from outside of the base, along the streets from the airport to Hill. I haven't seen any from on-base. JB: They've got them somewhere—the History office or maybe in the Public Affairs office, because the Public Affairs Office did the Hilltop Times and I think they were digitalizing old papers and paperwork, but they have old papers from back 10 then, so you might want to check that out. AK: Okay. Thank you for that. Were you also a part of the Core Plus Program or did you know anything about that? JB: You know, I saw that question and I'm going like, "Core Plus?" Do you know what it was? AK: Yeah, I'm guessing it was probably something more like the officials of Hill— JB: The big cheeses, I call them. AK: —They would've been a part of that because I think it was more the way that the work was categorized and so it was supposed to help with more of a smoother transition. JB: Oh, so was it talking about the manpower authorizations and stuff? AK: Possibly. I don't remember. All I know is there's the Core work and there's the Plus work and then there's the Core Plus. JB: Oh, okay. All right, let me think here. Now it makes sense. So, to me, the core work would be—at least from McClellan—it would be the program management side of the house, which were the space programs, so this is all talking weapons systems. Do you know what a weapons system is? AK: I'm familiar. JB: Okay. Because with space, it's C3I programs, so space Command, Control, Intelligence. Anyway, the military has workloads impacted by those three avenues which has to be managed. On the west side of the base, there's this big, huge, white tracking device, and that was part of the workload that came. So, that white ball is kind of like a satellite-tracking thing that moved from McClellan 11 to here—or one was built. That to me was the Core workload. The Core Plus was something that was outside of the specific weapons system. AK: Interesting. Okay, I didn't realize that. JB: Are you going to talk to Gene Hathenbruck? AK: Yes, we have him scheduled. JB: He would be someone to ask about Core Plus, as well as Don Cazel. Are you talking to him? AK: Yeah, we've been in contact with him as well. JB: Do you know his role? Don Cazel transferred from McClellan. Along with Ernie Parada, they be able to give you a better definition. So, you’ll want to definitely talk to them on Core Plus and Core. AK: Okay, I think Ernie Parada's interview is on like March 10th or something like that, so I'll ask him about that. Okay, perfect. Then Gene Hathenbruck as well. JB: Yeah. Gene Hathenbruck, he kind of spearheaded the efforts from Hill, so he was kind of over it and then people like myself, the functional experts, is what they called us, we were on his team for the BRAC 1995 transition. AK: Okay. You said he called you functional experts. What does that entail? JB: The functional expert is someone that is a representative for a specific area, so mine was human resources. We had somebody from Finance and Housing, which was under the Air Base Wing at the time; they’ve reorganized the base now. But you have people like that. So, when we went to the base, to McClellan or Kelly, and we were sitting at a booth or at the Town Halls and the people transferring were in attendance the functional experts were there to answer 12 questions, give a perspective of the transfer, etcetera. So, if you had a question on housing or what the housing market is like, then you would talk to the housing representative, as the functional person, or the person that was supposed to know it all for that particular subject. AK: Okay. JB: I was just thinking, so in these BRAC moves, it's not only civilians that move, it's the military too. AK: Okay. Were you a part of that transition too? JB: Well, no. Ours was more on the civilian side of the house, but the military handled a little bit different because the military can be moved just like that, you know. But with the civilians, if I was at McClellan and I was making hand sanitizer and that workload came to Hill and that was my job, then I have the right of first refusal. So, I get that job, I get to go with that job, and if I choose not to then I can stay or do whatever I'm going to do. But you always have the right to follow your particular job to the base that it's going to. Whereas with the military, you wouldn't necessarily come to Hill. But that position, if it's making hand sanitizer, that position would come and they may PCS you to Hill (Permanent Change of Station) or they might just use a military member that's already stationed at Hill to reduce the costs. AK: Okay. JB: Gosh, I'm trying to remember if there was an average cost per individual to move. It was substantial because, especially if you had a house and say the government paid $200,000 at a time, plus moving you to Hill, that's expensive, 13 and that’s just on the personnel side. Then if you had a house, the government would pay for your closing costs here for your house. I mean, it was a sweet deal. But you have to make it sweet, I think, to be fair to the people that were moving. In addition the cost of moving items associated with the workload being moved. AK: Absolutely. Were there a lot of people who decided to stay in California even though McClellan, as far as I know, was closing, right? There were no “making hand sanitizer” jobs or whatever? JB: No. The land that McClellan was located on was prime land, and this is my personal opinion: The government owns sweet land. The same way with the Defense Depot Ogden, that was highly sought-after land. Part of the process of collecting the data and analyzing it, is looking on impact to the infrastructure outside part of the base. Part of the analysis is the impacts to the outlining communities and the pressure cities put on the Defense Department to release some of the prime real estate. So, when it closes, then the state takes over. Where was I going with this, what was your question? AK: I just was curious, since they had the right to refuse to move to Hill Air Force Base, I was curious if you knew what they chose to do instead? JB: There were 2,020 people associated with that workload and 700 people moved, so less than half moved. But then some people were at retirement age and chose to retire because when there is a base closure, there are incentives to retire. They're called VERA and VSIP. So, it's just kind of an enticement to retire. I guess they pay you to retire, that's basically it. You still get your normal 14 retirement, but then you get that added little bonus. AK: Which is very nice. JB: Yes it is. AK: Speaking of our conversation about the cost per person: Do you feel like the BRAC process did save the Air Force the money they were hoping for? Or did it end up a lot more expensive than they had foreseen? JB: If I remember the facts right, in some respects it was a little bit more. As the BRAC process progressed and developed over the course of almost thirteen or fifteen years, we got smarter. The government got smarter on what we really need to look at in terms of costs and things. Because it was a new program, there was a learning curve. So, in the beginning, I think there were some hiccups and some of the costs, while I think they were recouped, they weren't expected. AK: Yeah, that makes sense. Since you were in Human Resources during 1993, 1995, 2005 BRACs, were you ever involved in helping to deal with any of the concerns that the workers had during the process? JB: Well, during the Smooth Move program, you would sit there and you would listen to people when they would come and talk to you. If there were concerns then we had a meeting when we came back and we all kind of talked and said, "Well, you know, this is what we heard." Then if there were specific questions that people had, then we would take those, formulate the answer, and send it back to McClellan, or to the base, so that everybody had the answer. Because if one person asks a question, there probably are other people that have the same question but they just haven't thought about it. 15 So, it was kind of like a point paper that we would send back to McClellan and address those concerns or questions or whatever. From my end, I would be the one that would answer or get the answers for anything dealing with Human Resources, like the classification of a job or how they're going to move. Are they going to move with the specific workload or are they going to be moved somewhere else? Or something like that. Any Human Resource aspects, I would find the answer. AK: Okay. This next question isn't exactly Human Resources-related, but before Hill Air Force Base found out that they were safe, do you feel like the common worker was as concerned about BRAC? Was it a stressful couple of years for, you know, maybe the “hand sanitizer maker” or whatever? Or was it mainly the people who were in charge who were stressed about BRAC? JB: Well, in the beginning, in the early days of BRAC—again, it was an unknown elephant in the room, "BRAC? What? Base realignment?" I mean, you keyed in on the ‘realignment,’ and ‘closure,' those were the big words. But I don't know that we knew the impact or how it could impact Hill. We knew that there was a potential for closure. But when I was over the BRAC 2005 effort, oh, believe me, people were honed in on how we were answering questions, what data was being submitted, etcetera. Not saying that they didn't do it back in the 1990s, but we just learned over the course of years, "Hey, we better pay attention to this. This is what they're basing their decision on." AK: Yeah, absolutely. How did the BRAC 2005 differ for you from 1995? Was your involvement different? 16 JB: So, in 2005, I managed the BRAC program. I had a big team of four people. When it was announced that we were going to have a BRAC 2005, and because of my experience with 1995, I was fortunate that I got to go back to DC and work with the BRAC Commission to set up the process of collecting data and stuff. I went back several times to work the development effort. How it works is, the BRAC Commission has about 400 or 500 different questions that are developed to do the best at analyzing how the military installations work, the positive and challenges, etcetera. Every installation answers the same questions. Some of them, of course, are applicable and some may not be as applicable for the smaller bases. So, my team’s responsibility was to review and assimilate data submitted by the organizations whose workload was assigned to Hill AFB. We had the oversight of the collection and analysis process. We reviewed the questions, determine what organization(s) would work the data effort, collect the data, and then have a reviewing group called the "murder board" made up of representative from each directorate and functional experts and we would go over each question and answer to ensure we were giving the correct answer and not leaving anything out. I want to say it was almost a nine-month process. I mean, it's a long process because sometimes you don't have the specific data readily available so you have to go and collect it and everything. There's a lot of things going on, but I'm just kind of giving you the overall surface stuff. So, you had the murder boards and then the organizations would go back and they would either fine-tune it or we went ahead. I would brief senior staff, 17 often times congressional staff would be in attendance too. If they thought that we needed to put more emphasis on the hand sanitizer then we would change things, but it was all about selling that product and the product is Hill Air Force Base. Then you submit the data to the BRAC Commission, it reviewed at the DOD level and then the BRAC Commission could come and visit the installation. So, they would come and then senior staff (and I would also be there) would meet with them, and if they had any specific questions over the answers then we would let them know and tell them. If I'm not mistaken, if they did have specific questions they would send them to me, so we were prepared and not being asked just off-the-cuff. So, once the BRAC commissioners came, they toured the base, got the information, the clarifications, they would then go back to DC. Then the wait would begin waiting for them to process and determine what military installations were going to stay open and what bases were going to closure or realign. Oftentimes in the BRAC process, it's only certain workloads from the base. It doesn't necessarily have to be the closure, so that's the “realignment” part. For instance, one of our big selling points for Hill is that training range. So, some workload that is being performed at another base might realign to that training range. There is a base in Pennsylvania and we received some of their workload. It was just a small maintenance workload, probably a handful of people, maybe 10 people, and that workload came to Hill. I'll have to go through my notes and see if I can find out, but it can be as small as two people or it can be as big as McClellan’s 2,020. 18 Once the decision is made and it's announced—and of course we kept hearing, "Well, it's going to be announced here," and I think it took several, "Oh, we think it's going to be today" and then it finally was announced. Certainly, it's a good thing if you're not going to close, but in 2005, I think we had to realign some of our workloads to ALCs—Oklahoma and Warner Robins, which is in Georgia. But if the BRAC Commission decided that, "Well, really, the environmental aspect at Georgia really aligns to Hill," then they would realign that stuff. But we knew going into BRAC that there were going to be probably some closures with the ALCs because the ALCs are huge. They're the biggest bases in the Air Force or in the military and the Defense Department, and so it is very costly. We knew that somebody was going to close, we just didn't realize that it would be McClellan and Kelly Air Force Base, which is in Texas. They didn't close, necessarily, but most of their workload was realigned to the other ALCs. It ended up that it was Hill, Warner Robins from Georgia, and Oklahoma City stayed open. AK: So, was it just the ALC part of the base that closed for Kelly, but the rest of it stayed open? JB: Bergstrom Air Force Base, which was aligned with Kelly Air Force Base, and Bergstrom got a lot of the—gosh darn it, what was it called? It was something to do with behavioral science and stuff because they had the equipment and the buildings. It would have been cost-prohibitive to transfer that workload because they had these brand new, fine-tuned things that they needed to do this specific workload. So, to answer your question, that was considered part of an ALC, and I 19 can't remember what it was aligned to, so they stayed open. There were some other workloads that were located on Bergstrom that moved to Hill, because I remember that there was a lot of travel going back and forth, trying to determine what part and what could move to Hill and what should stay at Bergstrom Air Force Base. A lot of times on an ALC, there are "satellite functions" that might be associated with a different command. So rather than just the ALC, the Air Logistics Center, there might be something that's tied to a different command. In looking at the BRAC, when the BRAC Commission looks at the base, they will say, "Well, we're going to keep the X, Y, Z there, or we may move it." So, they look at how it fits with the big picture. I wish I could give you some examples because then it would make more sense. AK: No, that helps. I was really curious because I've read a lot about how people made a big deal out of the fact that there were five Air Logistics Centers originally and now there are only three, right? JB: Three, yeah. AK: But I was curious, since Kelly was only realigned instead of closed, is it really true that we only have three ALCs now? JB: Well, I think Kelly is still open, but it's not the Air Logistics Center part. I think they still do training there, too. AK: Okay, but not Materiel Command kind of stuff. JB: Well, and even Bergstrom really wasn't a Materiel Command-type base, but this behavioral stuff that they did, they seemed to think that some of it could come to be realigned to an ALC. 20 AK: OK. Next question: After 1995, Hill Air Force Base had to compete for the McClellan ALC workload against private companies like Boeing, North American Incorporated, and the AAI Corporation. Were you involved in any of that workload competition? JB: No. AK: Mostly transition then? JB: Yeah. AK: Okay. JB: Well, and I'm wondering if that was kind of like what I was talking about when I first started this talk today, about how we made bids against the private sector for certain service-type jobs here on Hill, and I'm wondering if that's what they were doing at the time; Boeing versus the in-house government. Because Boeing and Northrop Grumman and Lockheed, the government does have a lot of contracts with them. In fact, a lot of times at Hill, if a person was working on a specific weapons system program and they retired, they would go and work for, say, Boeing or Lockheed Martin doing the same job as they were doing at Hill. AK: You mentioned for 2005, you helped to write up the argument for why Hill Air Force Base should stay open. JB: Yeah, my team worked the 2005 BRAC data collection effort and after many reviews and briefing to the senior staff the package is forwarded to DoD. They have their murder boards and all this information. I always thought that would have been a great job to have. But each one of these packages at the different bases or depots or whatever got turned in, they had to sit there and go through 21 them. But they did have a program, if I'm not mistaken, that could kind of do like an algorithm and spit out some information so you wouldn't have to go through each piece of paper. In 2005, did we have computers? AK: Yes. JB: But I don't think they were as sophisticated as we have now. AK: No, for sure not. I remember in jr. high when they had the massive box computers and then one day they had the skinnier ones and we were like, "What?!" JB: Well, I mean, yeah. I started out with—Do you know what a Wang computer was? Have you ever heard of that? AK: I don't know. JB: It was kind of like a big box and the screen was black. What's that game that people play? Is it Pokémon or—? The one that the little guy would go do, do, do, do. AK: Oh, Pacman? JB: Pacman. AK: Yeah, okay. JB: Well, the Wang was almost like that. You'd sit there and you'd be typing in there and they had like a line and then when you typed like an 'a', the 'a' would go on top of that line so you had like these lines and then the little letters would go over that, and it would make like a noise like boing, boing, boing, boing. But so, when we went from that in the early 1980s, and then by the end of the 1980s into the 1990s, like you said, you've got a more narrow and you're just kind of going like, 22 "Whoa." AK: "How does it all fit in that little box?!" JB: You know, I can remember people talking about artificial intelligence at the base and I'd go, "That'll never happen," you know, and here we are. We have a phone and we can Google. AK: Right? I remember when Skype came out, I remember I saw that on The Apprentice or something and you can see someone while you're talking to them! Or like touchscreens? I remember the first time I saw a touchscreen, that blew my mind. JB: Oh, yeah, I know. It's just amazing how far we've come and how we rely on it so much. I mean, we entered the data and stuff into computers because we had computers when we were doing the BRAC 2005, but man, if we had the programs that we have today, it would have made it a lot easier just to enter stuff. AK: Well, speaking of algorithms, I think it was General Condon who was telling us that there was a man, Alan Goldstayn, who came up with a point system for BRAC to kind of see how the bases measure up. So, for example, the algorithm would say, “This aspect is worth 500 points and this aspect is worth 300,” and whatnot. Is that what you were kind of talking about? The algorithm? JB: Yeah. Well, and just the mere fact that when you plug in a bunch, I always call it plug-n-chug, when you're plugging in the data and then it chugs it out, I mean there has to be something in there that makes this correlation thing that if A and B equals D, what happens? AK: Right, that makes sense. So that bid was at the beginning of BRAC 2005. Is that 23 correct? Or was it when you were bidding for work after BRAC 2005? JB: Well, it was part of the BRAC 2005 process. They announced that we were going to have another BRAC and that's when I went back to D.C., helped give them some information on how it would be easier to collect data and this stuff. Then they sent out the questions, we collected the data, put it into the computer, determined if we were right or wrong, and then the whole process, the announcement, and then the transition. AK: Gotcha. When did that announcement come out that Hill wasn't on the list? JB: So, I'm just looking at this report, and this was 2005. Important for many reasons. Okay, so the dates were: The Secretary of Defense forwards recommendations for realignments and closures to the BRAC Commission in May of 2005. The Commission forwards the report to the President in September 2005. So, it all happened in 2005. Then the Congress has 45 days to say "yea" or "nay." Yeah, so it was the middle of 2005. Were you guys able to go up into building 1102, the headquarters building there, and look at the old BRAC stuff? I'm hoping they didn't throw it away. AK: No, we talked to the Aerospace Museum up there because I think that they thought they might have that information. JB: Yeah, because on the very top floor was where our office was located, and there had to have been eight tall cabinets full of all the data. Jim Sutton was my boss at the time, and I said, "You know what? The law says we only have to keep the stuff for eight years. But I'm going to put on the outside of the cabinets to keep it for X amount of years." I'm just hoping they didn't throw that stuff away, because 24 I had information from all of the BRACs that would be very good for you guys to have. So yeah, check that out. There's a command section in building 1102, which is the headquarters building. I think Doug James is still working there and whenever there was a visit to Hill with the high muckety mucks, his office would stage the whole thing and make sure that everything was just so. They were kind of like hosts or something but that's not their title. But he may know who to contact in 1102 so that they could see what's up there. AK: Is this the Materiel Command Headquarters building that you're talking about? JB: Yeah. AK: Okay. JB: Well, it's the one that when you're driving on I-15 and you see this old kind of building that has several stories to it, that used to be the ALC commanders. But then when they restructured the ALC—we used to have a two-star. Now, I think there's just a one-star General. That might be—Are they still called Air Logistics Centers? I mean, they changed it completely. AK: Yes, as far as I know, they're still Air Logistics Centers. JB: Whoever is over the Air Logistics Center or the Air Base Wing, I think they're housed there. AK: Okay. JB: Yeah. Let me just look real quick here. [Searches on phone] It’s hard to find the information, but it's the way the government works, it's kind of like, "What? Where? Why does this align here?" Let me just look up one other thing. 25 AK: You would think they'd be more organized. JB: The government? Well, you know, the joke was that because the government, at least the Defense Department, changes all the time, "Keep that stationary because you know it's going to come back," and by jango, it comes back. That's one of the reasons why I retired, I thought, "I am like over this." AK: Yeah, I don't blame you. How long did you work for the government? JB: Thirty-two years. AK: That's a long time. JB: Yeah. But I mean, I had a very good career. I had wonderful jobs and a lot of good responsibilities. AK: So, what did you do once BRAC 2005 was announced? JB: Well, because we weren't going to close, but we did have workloads that were going to realign to both Tinker Air Force Base, which is in Oklahoma, and Warner Robins that's in Georgia. My responsibilities were to ensure, or help ensure, that what we said in the BRAC package that we submitted is what we were transferring—not that we would not do it. Let's see, what was the rest of the question? AK: That was mainly my question. Because I know that in 1995 there was a small amount of workload that Hill had to give up to a different ALC, and I can't remember what it was. JB: Well, I know that we gained a railroad from Tooele. That might have been 1993 or 1995. In 1995, I can't remember what we lost. It could have been that we had a helicopter organization that was at Hill and that left, so I'm wondering if that 26 might have been it. I'll do a little research and see if I can determine what it was. AK: Ok, that's totally fine. I was just curious about any similarities and differences between post-1995 and post-2005, and if you were as involved with helping with the workload during both BRACs. JB: Well, we didn't have the numbers because 1995 was huge, and in 2005 it was very small workloads. Well, we had people leaving, transitioning or realigning to Tinker and Warner Robins, but it wasn't a massive amount. I don't think that Tinker or Warner Robins—they had something similar but not to the grandiose effort that Smooth Move was for McClellan. AK: Well, just to finish up, I have two questions that I've been asking everybody that I've been interviewing. First, how do you feel that the Base Realignment and Closure, specifically the 1995 and 2005 ones, helped impact Utah's way of supporting defense efforts or Hill Air Force Base, specifically? JB: Could you say that again? AK: I'm curious about the impact of the BRAC on Utah. Do you think it helped people become a little more involved with their local base and more interested in military affairs? JB: You know, that's a good question because I think sometimes, in anything, we all become complacent. In 1995, it was a big wake-up call when we saw the impact that BRAC could have: that they could actually close a whole ALC and move the workload to various other places. As a result of that, in 2005, I wouldn't say that the community necessarily had a wake-up call, but the base did, and I guess so did the community, through Senator Hatch and Rep Jim Hansen. I think Hansen 27 was more involved with 1995 and Hatch more involved with 2005. But just as the nature of the beast with them, I think they would go out and talk to community members, the mayors, the average “Joe” citizen. If a parade was going to happen, like in 1995 or 1993, they might alert them. But the mere fact that in these surrounding communities around Hill, probably eighty-five to ninety percent of the people worked at Hill. In that respect, yeah, the community is going to get there and will be a little bit more involved than if somebody lives in Salt Lake and they commute up to Hill. It's hard telling anything because the way the government operates, unless you are involved at Hill Air Force Base, it's hard to understand its importance—other than if there's an environmental issue, then they're going to alert themselves. But otherwise, they know that it's a huge employer for this area of Utah, and whether they are alerted to that and the impact that they have, it's kind of a plus or minus. AK: Do you feel like that's a result of people not taking as much of an interest, just because the world's gotten so much bigger since the last BRAC round? I mean, people are coming from so many different places and maybe there's a lack of a sense of community. Because it sounds like in the 1990s at least, Ogden was a little smaller and a little more isolated, so there was more of a sense of community. JB: Well, and in the 1990s, it was like this big elephant that came into the picture and you knew that there was this big elephant coming at you, but what it was going to do, you didn't know. Then in 1995, the announcement was made and it was like, 28 "Wow, that big elephant could have crushed us,” because we saw the impact of what happened at McClellan and Kelly. But in 2005, the community was wondering, "Is Hill going to close?" The community, like I said, is a high percentage of base people so they're going like, "Well, am I going to have a job or am I going to have to move?" So in that respect, yeah, there was a bit of concern. But once it's announced, we go back to normal, like, "Eh, we were saved." That's my reading on it. I mean, I don't remember anyone going and saying, "Oh man, am I glad Hill didn't close!" They probably thought it because their job could have been impacted, but it just goes back to the normal way of operation. I do know that there was a time that we kept thinking that BRAC would be announced again, but it never happened. I keep thinking that they might do it down the road, and if they do, I do hope they realize that one really has to sell the base. It's all about selling and showing that you really do need that workload, and you're doing a good job, and it really fits with the mission of Hill, or the mission of Tinker, or wherever. So yes, it impacts people, but you couldn't tell that because it just seems like it's like The Truman Show. Have you ever seen that show? Here you are in this little community and then one day you bump up against the wall, and you realize you're in this bubble-like thing. That's kind of like here: you're in this bubble of the surrounding community that all functions on Hill Air Force Base. I know it's a bit of a weird comparison, but— AK: No, but it makes sense and I think that's a good analogy because I think we do kind of take Hill Air Force Base and its impact for granted. I know I did until I 29 started this project. JB: Well, you just think that it's always going to be there but there's that monkey on your back. Especially in today's age, it's all about saving money. I think the government sometimes is sort of like, "Oh, we have all this money. We can spend it however we want to." But I think over the course of the years, we're learning that that's not true. We don't have a lot of money. Look what has happened with COVID and stuff and how much money is going out. It isn't just an endless bank account where you can just keep pulling things out. So, yeah, it would be interesting to see if BRAC was ever announced again, what people would think. Because 2005 is, what? Fifteen years ago? AK: Sixteen now, yeah. JB: Sixteen years. You forget a lot, and we're all getting older. The people that have been part of these BRACs, the 1995 and the 2005, are not going to be around forever. You've got to look at this and pay attention. You're not going to have Jim Sutton, for example. He's the type of guy that, man, he's a very visionary-type person and he knows when to foot stomp, and I think he was really one of the instrumental people with BRAC 2005. AK: How do you feel that Hill Air Force Base has positioned itself for the future and for any possible BRAC rounds? JB: You know, I hate to admit it, but on February 3, 2010, I left the base and I don't even stay involved. AK: Oh that's okay. JB: Yes, you know, I would hope that they're positioning themselves. I think with this 30 realignment that they recently implemented, where they changed it from—I know it's an Air Logistics Base, but they reconfigured it and everything—it was probably a good thing. But that's just my thought. I don't know how it works necessarily. Just offhand, I would say it was probably smart. AK: I think that the F-35 came to Hill in 2016, but do you think that was a part of the “BRAC-proofing" of Hill Air Force Base? JB: Oh, yeah. I mean, you have these major defense programs, along with the Utah Test and Training Range. It's a big thing because that test and training range, its one of three or four others. There's one up in Idaho, just outside of Boise, and there's one in California, and I think there's one back in the Midwest. That's almost a million acres out there, and to be able to strategic and tactical training out there, it's a feather in our cap. The F-35, and isn't there another plane that's out there? AK: Yeah, I thought I'd heard of another one as well. JB: Maybe it is just the F-35. They built facilities for that workload, and they had to transfer and train people specifically to be able to work on that aircraft because it is so advanced. So, yeah, that's a good thing. Anything that stands out is always a good thing at a base. I think that workload houses quite a few people associated with it and everything. AK: Yeah. I’ve heard that there are people who know the secret formula for the paints and such. JB: Oh yeah. I mean it's high level. I actually remember when they were bringing the workload on, now that you bring up paint and everything. They were having to, in 31 one of the buildings in the maintenance complex, where they were going to do all the maintenance on these birds—I think it was the building that's across the flight line—and it was like super, super, super secret. All the things that it takes to maintain that, I mean, who knows what's going on there? AK: That's true. Well, thank you so much. This has honestly been very informative. 32