Among the many arguments Maine’s congressional delegation made to the federal base-closure commission in 2005 was that the Defense Department had badly underestimated the cost of closing bases, meaning the expected savings wouldn’t be nearly as great. That seems to be exactly what has happened, and it demands a further look by Congress.

A series by the Asbury Park Press in New Jersey revealed that the 2005 estimates in the base realignment and closure process were as much as $10 billion too low, with costs increasing by $500 million just this summer. According to the newspaper, for instance, BRAC costs for the Brunswick Naval Air Station were listed in 2005 by the Defense Department at $93 million, but currently are set at $246 million.

These estimates are supported by Government Accountability Office studies, which in June concluded the Navy had “increased one-time costs, decreased onetime savings and increased annual recurring savings expected” from its fleet readiness centers. One-time savings, for instance, dropped $594 million, or 92 percent. The Army, according to the GAO, has similar savings problems.

These discrepancies between savings estimated in 2005 and current levels properly prompted Sen. Susan Collins to ask colleagues on the Armed Service Committee to review the Defense Department’s costs analyses as they related to BRAC. The review likely won’t stop closures that have already begun, but unless changes are made to improve the closure and avoided-cost estimates under BRAC, states would have strong arguments to protest any future closure rounds.

Maine knows firsthand how dramatic base closures can be; their impact on local economies, town populations and on individual family life are severe, to say nothing of the national-security effects. For the Defense Department to so badly miss its savings estimate should be unacceptable to Congress. (The BRAC projected one-time savings from Navy readiness centers of $648 million; the Navy business plan now says the savings will be $54 million. And the GAO doubts the Navy’s reported increase in annual recurring savings, saying it is more likely closer to the original lower estimate.)

According to Sen. Collins, “the cost overruns … were in many instances foreseeable and should have been disclosed at the outset of the process to ensure that the BRAC Commission’s recommendations were not based on faulty information.”

The Armed Services Committee should hold the Defense Department accountable for these inaccurate numbers and find new, more trustworthy models for determining likely savings and costs of closures. The BRAC process cannot go forward without it.