Lake Union may lose NOAA ships to base in Everett

By Rachel Tuinstra
Times Snohomish County Bureau

GREG GILBERT / THE SEATTLE TIMES Capt. John Clary, commanding officer for NOAA marine operations, says a new home port at Everett could make financial sense.

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive Most read articles Most e-mailed articles

Shortly after the Ballard Locks opened in 1916, ships sailing for what would become the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration steamed into Lake Union. Since then, the agency has maintained a presence on the lake.

But discussions are under way to move NOAA's marine-operations facility, including four ships and 180 personnel, from Lake Union to Naval Station Everett.

Moving the facility to the Navy base would save NOAA $1 million a year. It would also save the cost of remodeling the aging Lake Union facility, an amount expected to be "massive," NOAA officials said. But NOAA would have to pay for some improvements at the naval station.

Officials at the naval station say the plan could help them make more efficient use of the base's facilities and help offset some of their operating costs. And Everett city officials say a move could bode well for the naval station as Congress prepares for next year's re-evaluation of the nation's military installations.

"There's a lot of interest on both sides of the fence for this happening," said Capt. John Clary, the commanding officer for NOAA's marine-operations facilities. "The way I look at it, we are all stewards of the taxpayers' dollars. ... This would maximize the naval station's facilities and put more assets in one location, rather than scattered all over the place."

While a move of NOAA's marine operations would be years away, NOAA and Navy officials are beginning serious discussions. Both sides say they hope an agreement can be reached.

The discussions began last year when Clary received a phone call from Naval Station Everett's then-commanding officer, Capt. Dan Squires. Squires, who retired from the Navy in August, asked Clary if he thought NOAA would be interested in moving its operations to the Navy home port.

NOAA's Lake Union facilities include about 2,400 feet of dock space, about 16,900 square feet of offices, 12,000 square feet of warehouse space and 8,000 square feet of maintenance-shop facilities.

The agency has four ships based on Lake Union: the Miller Freeman, John Cobb, Rainier and McArthur II. The vessels range from 95 to 231 feet.

The Lake Union facility also manages NOAA's six other West Coast ships, which are based in Alaska, Hawaii and San Diego. The ships are used to chart nautical waters, take stock of fish species to set limits for commercial fisheries, and conduct research.

NOAA traces its history to the U.S. Survey of the Coast, which received its charter from President Thomas Jefferson in 1807. A permanent office of the U.S. Survey was established at Puget Sound in 1898, according to NOAA's historical records.

After the completion of the Hiram M. Chittenden Locks and the Lake Washington Ship Canal in 1916, the ships were moved to Lake Union. In 1947, the agency's fleet was home-ported in the southeast corner of the lake until NOAA's current facilities opened in 1963, Clary said.

NOAA also has a research and administrative-support center in Seattle's Sand Point area, which would not be part of the proposed move.

Seattle city officials aren't too concerned about the possible loss of the NOAA facility and its personnel from Lake Union. The move wouldn't have a significant economic impact on the city because other jobs are expected to be added in the Lake Union area, said Marianne Bichsel, spokeswoman for Mayor Greg Nickels.

"The mayor is hoping public and private efforts to promote South Lake Union as a biotech hub will create an additional 30,000 jobs in the area over the next 10 to 20 years," Bichsel said.

For its part, the naval station has been looking at ways to increase the number of ships that use its resources, said Cmdr. Steve McLaughlin, the executive officer for Naval Station Everett. The station employs shore-duty personnel who do everything from supporting ships at the dock to serving food in the cafeteria. But there is a lack of work for shore-duty staff when the ships are at sea, he said.

The base is home to several Navy ships, including two destroyers, three frigates and the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln. A Coast Guard cutter is also stationed at the base.

"We operate the station day-in and day-out, no matter how many ships are here," McLaughlin said. "The reason for this initiative is to give NOAA a low-rent base of operations and at the same time maximize the efficiencies of a naval station that already exists."

Combining government resources could also bolster support for the naval station during next year's base realignment and closure round, said Pat McClain, Everett's director of governmental affairs, who also co-chairs a community group lobbying to keep the base open. Congress plans to look at all of the nation's military installations in a cost-cutting effort expected to result in the closure of some bases.

The Department of Defense has been looking at ways in which military installations can be used by other branches of the military. While not a branch of the military, NOAA is part of the federal government's uniformed service, McClain said.

"I think the test everyone is under is, 'Is the [naval] station flexible and adaptable, and can we get more out of the facility that was built here?' " he said.

Moving to the naval station could also solve a few nagging issues with the NOAA facility on Lake Union.

The facility's piers and building need upgrading, Clary said. He said NOAA hadn't looked into how much that work would cost.

"The whole thing needs to be modernized," Clary said. "We'd have to look at some massive amounts of money if we stay here."

There's also the $1 million NOAA pays each year to lease its site from the owners, listed in property records as a limited-liability corporation called 1801 Fairview Avenue East.

NOAA would basically have rent-free facilities at Naval Station Everett, although it would have to pay for its utilities, and nominal fees for using some of the services, McLaughlin said.

The move also would provide heightened security for NOAA, which has been an increasing concern since the Sept. 11 attacks, Clary said.

But there are some financial drawbacks to moving.

There are no electricity, water, sewer, telephone or cable lines to the naval station's wharf area where NOAA is considering moving. All of those utilities would have to be installed, and that expense would likely be NOAA's, Clary said. He said he doesn't know how much it would cost.

And if the facility moves, some NOAA employees may be entitled to relocate closer to work, an expense the agency would be obligated to pick up, Clary said.

NOAA just renewed its lease on the Lake Union property for seven years, and it might take that long to finalize a decision to move, he said.

NOAA's budgeting is already planned out to 2007, so the earliest that it could budget for a move would be 2008, he said.

"We're probably looking at five to seven years for this thing to come to fruition," Clary said. "It's not a small proposition — we would have to pay for it, and ultimately the taxpayer would pay for it."

Rachel Tuinstra: 425-783-0674 or rtuinstra@seattletimes.com

Copyright © 2004 The Seattle Times Company

E-mail this article

Print this article

Search archive

More local news headlines...