FORT CHAFFEE : Guard gets plan to create new port
Posted on Tuesday, September 2, 2008
FORT SMITH — City leaders have submitted a proposal to the Arkansas National Guard for development of an intermodal port on the Arkansas River at Fort Chaffee that would not impede the military’s river crossing training in the area.
Two options for a port were listed. One is on military property near one of four river crossing sites that once served as a small slackwater harbor for Fort Chaffee on the south side of the river. The other would be just east of the military property on undeveloped private land.
The proposal was made in an Aug. 19 letter to the Arkansas National Guard’s adjutant general, Maj. Gen. William Wofford, from Fort Smith Port Authority Chairman Rick Parrish.
The proposal grew out of a visit this summer by 3 rd District U. S. Rep. John Boozman, R-Ark., who asked the city and the National Guard to work together toward the development of the port at Fort Chaffee.
“Such a port will stimulate commerce and economic development in Arkansas, provide a more cost-effective method for moving large quantities of goods and materials through our region and stimulate the creation of hundreds of jobs,” Parrish’s letter said.
The letter says development of the port won’t interfere with the river crossing training. That is a change from earlier discussions, Fort Chaffee Redevelopment Authority Director Ivy Owen said. In those discussions, the focus was on closing the river crossing training to accommodate the port.
The authority is responsible for reclaiming 7, 000 acres of Fort Chaffee land that was turned over for civilian use. Its main mission is to create jobs and develop the land for industrial, commercial and residential uses. The redevelopment authority would work with the port authority in creating the port, according to Parrish’s letter.
The port authority would support the river crossing training mission and “development of the port and its operation will be adjusted as needed so that the military can accomplish this vital training,” the letter states.
Fort Chaffee is one of two military installations in the country in which the Army controls both sides of a river to accommodate river crossing training. The other installation is Fort Drum, N. Y.
Owen said the military conducts a large river crossing training exercise at Fort Chaffee every other year.
The proposal calls for the metropolitan port authority to be responsible for development of the port, which would include docks for loading, un- loading and maneuvering of barges; rail, road and utility service to the site; storage for bulk materials such as coal; and sites for warehouses and manufacturing plants.
The project would not interfere with the use of the Army’s sewer lagoons in the area, which serve Fort Chaffee, and the port could be useful to the Army for movement of equipment and goods.
The idea of developing a slackwater port on the Arkansas River at Fort Chaffee has been discussed for several years. A terminal firm in Toledo, Ohio, proposed in 2001 to build a bulk terminal at Fort Chaffee to ship coal mined from the Hartford area of south Sebastian County. The project never developed.
Parrish said there is enough coal in the Hartford area that in two or three years, a port could be shipping out 600 barges a year. He also said several companies in Fort Smith have expressed support for a port.
Parrish said the port would require hundreds of acres for its facilities, could cost up to $ 150 million to fully develop and could take up to 25 years to complete.
“This is an ambitious undertaking, but the economic rewards are so great,” Gosack said. “The development of an intermodal port is something people need to get behind, whether it’s at Fort Chaffee or some other location, because it’s a project that will benefit the region for decades to come.”
Fort Smith owns the Port of Fort Smith, which is on the Poteau River south of downtown Fort Smith. It is landlocked with no room for expansion, which a port at Fort Chaffee would provide.
Owen said it was important that the port be on the south side of the Arkansas River where most of the area’s manufacturing is located, that it not compete with the port at Van Buren on the north side of the river and that it not impede the Army’s river crossing training.
“I think we can do all that,” he said.
FEEDBACK:
Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online
