Connecticut officials question savings for base closure

BOSTON -- Several busloads of Connecticut naval workers stormed rainy Boston Wednesday, presenting a unified front against Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's recommendation to shutter the massive New London Submarine Base.

They were joined by state lawmakers and the Connecticut congressional delegation, which defended New London this morning before five members of the independent Base Closure and Realignment Commission.

During a two-hour presentation, they revealed what they considered to be flaws in the Pentagon's BRAC process. One by one, a small army of Connecticut officials questioned the Pentagon's evaluation and alleged "substantial deviations" in the department's two-year BRAC process.

After reviewing mounds of statistics during the last several weeks, Connecticut lawmakers said they believe the Pentagon low-balled the cost of closing the expansive base, as well as the total price tag for relocating personnel and rebuilding New London's submarine school at Kings Bay Submarine Base in Georgia. They said Defense officials underestimated closure costs by $41 million, economic cleanup costs by $125 million and military construction costs at Kings Bay and Norfolk Naval Yard in Virginia by another $190 million. Ultimately, it could take the Navy until 2057 to recoup all costs associated with shutting New London, the officials argued.

Connecticut officials, who have assembled a team to analyze the Pentagon's recommendations, likewise said they have concluded that the Defense Department did not correctly assess the role of New London in future naval missions. In assessing the base's "military value" score -- the most important factor in the Pentagon's evaluation -- Defense officials assigned no value to the base's submarine school, considering it merely a "tenant" command.

Pentagon officials also did not give military-value credit for all of the base's ports and put too great an emphasis on "irrelevant" criteria, such as proximity to naval gunnery ranges, said John Markowicz, chairman of the Subase Realignment Coalition. "The process was far from being statistically robust," he added.

Other officials argued that shutting New London would prevent the Navy from growing its 54-submarine fleet by limiting dock space for subs on the East Coast to Kings Bay and Norfolk. "Closing the base would put the Navy in a virtual straightjacket," said Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn. The Navy plans to reduce its sub fleet to about 41 vessels, but a series of massive defense reviews under way could recommend otherwise. Lawmakers in eastern Georgia and southern Virginia have argued that they have more than enough room to dock the 18 submarines at New London.

New England is by far the hardest hit region in this base-closure round. Shutting New London will result in more than 8,500 direct job losses, with thousands of other jobs connected to the base also expected to be affected. Officials from Maine will testify later today, along with lawmakers from other neighboring states. The "net effect" of the Pentagon's BRAC recommendations is to move military posts south and west, said Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn. "That's not good for the country; it's not good for recruiting."

The regional hearings allow local, state and federal lawmakers to present their arguments to the commission, which will submit its recommendations to the White House Sept. 8.