Boston Sunday Globe
January 30, 2005

New England bases vulnerable in round of closings, analysts say
By Ryan Lenz, Associated Press Writer

They were shuttered one by one after the Iron Curtain fell: military
installations throughout New England once important to the nation's defense
against a Soviet threat but deemed obsolete when the Cold War ended.

It's a legacy that hangs over the region still as the Pentagon prepares for
another round of base cuts, which some military analysts expect to hit New
England hard despite efforts to adapt installations to the war on terror and
homeland defense.

"The end of the Cold War -- and the shift of concern to terrorism -- is
drawing the military away from New England," said Loren Thompson, a military
analyst at the Lexington Institute, a Washington think tank. "There are just
so many forces that are converging to hurt the region."

New England already has lost several major installations, including Maine's
Loring Air Force Base and Massachusetts' Fort Devens. And more than 100
lesser-known bases have been closed since the first round of base closures
more than a decade ago, according to the Massachusetts Defense Technology
Initiative, which raises money to lobby on behalf of the region's bases and
save them from the latest round of closures.

Officials won't specify how many of about 400 domestic bases are targeted
this year -- nor if any in New England are singled out -- but they say the
military has 24 percent more capacity than needed, and there are plenty of
places to trim.

Under review in New England are two Army facilities: the Soldier Systems
Center in Natick, Mass., and the Cold Regions Research Lab in Hanover, N.H.;
and three Air Force facilities in Massachusetts: Hanscom Air Force Base,
Westover Air Reserve Base and Cape Cod's Otis Air National Guard Base.

There also are Navy facilities: the Brunswick Naval Air Station and
Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Maine; the New London Submarine Base in Groton,
Conn.; and the Navy War College and Undersea Warfare Center in Newport, R.I.
There also are dozens of other smaller facilities.

Recommendations for closings are due May 16 to a nine-member Base
Realignment and Closure -- or BRAC -- commission. Defense leaders say the
closures, the first since 1995, could save billions of dollars from an
already-bulging defense budget.

"Do we realize that we're in the fight of our life? Absolutely. We know
there will be a substantial reduction," said Jim Brett, president of the New
England Council in Boston, a group that has lobbied on behalf of the
region's bases.

Some analysts say a dense population and a harsh climate that restrict how
and where military units can train hurt bases in New England. They also
point to aging bases with outdated missions as being vulnerable.

Michael O'Hanlon, a foreign policy scholar at the Brookings Institution in
Washington, stressed these same factors also apply to other parts of the
country and don't paint New England as particularly doomed.

Yet even beyond terrorism, military concerns such as threats from China and
Iran offer little security for New England bases, he said. "The Iran
scenario works more to the advantage of the Pacific-based submarine yards.
And that could leave New England more vulnerable," O'Hanlon said.

Bases around the country have spent the last year touting their abilities in
hopes of being considered essential to homeland defense. Many have redefined
their core missions and proposed expansions to include more than one
military branch.

In Massachusetts, Hanscom is considering adding 1.2 million square feet of
high-tech research space, and officials in Brunswick, Maine, have compiled
documents stressing the base's capabilities, which could include the
construction of a proposed $42 million regional center to train National
Guard and reserve soldiers.

Pentagon leaders say the process is removed from politics, but community
commissions and congressional delegations have spent months lobbying. In
Connecticut, lawmakers set aside $350,000 to argue the merits of the Groton
submarine base amid worries the Navy could slash its submarine fleet from
about 55 to 37.

"We really have to be certain that all of the arguments in favor of the
installations are not overlooked. You don't want to assume the Defense
Department will be aware of all factors," said Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, thinks BRAC should be delayed until the
Pentagon fully assesses its needs in the war on terrorism.

"Until we know what our needs are, it seems to me to be foolhardy," she
said.

Jay Korman with DFI International, a Washington-based defense consulting
firm, said New England has been hurt by past base closings but there's no
reason to think that makes the region any less vulnerable in the next round
of closings.

"If you're a community that is hosting a base with a question mark on it,
you have to be concerned," he said. "You won't get much sympathy for being
hit hard before."

------

On the Net:
Base Realignment and Closure: www.defenselink.mil/brac

© Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company
==========
**NOTICE: In accordance with 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.**
==========