Aspin Urges Bases Panel to Not Alter Closure List : Pentagon: Defense secretary tells commission that too many revisions would affect preparedness. Outside testimony ends and board must make recommendations by July 1.

WASHINGTON —  Defense Secretary Les Aspin warned a presidential panel Thursday not to make too many changes to his base closing list because shutting down the wrong military installations could affect operational readiness.

Responding to criticism that the Pentagon list is flawed by errors and service subjectivity, Aspin, flanked by Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Colin L. Powell and service branch commanders, assured the commission that the Defense Department’s closure selections are the right ones.

“I believe that my original recommendations are still correct; they represent the right mix of bases, both to close and to keep open,” Aspin said.

Thursday’s hearing was the last outside testimony the base closing commission will hear before holding four days of meetings next week to decide on what it will recommend to President Clinton. The commission must send their choices to the White House by July 1.

The commission has 15 major California bases on its review list, eight of them selected by Aspin when he released his original list March 12. Since then, the commission has added seven California bases for consideration.

Nationwide, the commission added 73 large and small bases to its working list, and Aspin politely but firmly told the panel that diverging too far from the Pentagon’s list could affect military preparedness.

Aspin also admitted that the Pentagon had a poor record of helping communities reuse closed military installations and urged the commission not to further burden the system.

“We don’t have the resources to do much more and be fair to communities,” Aspin said.

But in an apparent bow to the commission’s role as an independent review body, Aspin said he “wouldn’t mind the commission adding a base or two at the margin.”

Commission Chairman James Courter carefully avoided tangling with Aspin or his top military commanders over the sanctity of the military’s recommendations and agreed that “there is a presumption that the Pentagon list is correct. But we very well might make some changes.”

Commissioner Harry C. McPherson Jr. said the selection of the right bases for closure “was not brain surgery.”

“There is not just one way to do it, and it would not cripple the U.S. at all to (make some changes).” Two years ago during the same process, the commission, after adding 35 bases, adopted the Pentagon’s list with only a few modifications.

After Aspin left, the commission sharply questioned a series of Pentagon representatives about apparent factual discrepancies between Defense Department statistics and those developed by communities threatened with base closings.

Supporters of the Alameda Naval Air Station say that it would cost $3.25 billion to close the base, while the Pentagon estimate is $850 million. But Charles Nemfakos, acting chairman of the Navy Base Structure Evaluation Committee, stuck by his lower figure, explaining that the larger amount was a collection of estimates that fails to take into account other anticipated savings.

Likewise, Marine Lt. Gen R.A. Tiebout dutifully supported the $340-million Pentagon cost estimate of closing the El Toro Marine Corps Air Station. When asked if he was absolutely certain of the accuracy of the estimate, Tiebout inspired a small wave of laughter when he immediately responded: “Yes, sir, I am.”

Supporters of the El Toro base say the cost of moving troops and planes to Miramar Naval Air Station in San Diego County is closer to $1.2 billion.

An Army representative, Brig. Gen. Joe Ballard, was put in the ticklish position of supporting Aspin’s decision to spare the Defense Language Institute at the Presidio of Monterey--even though the Army had originally urged it be closed.