Hearing to Address Ft. Monmouth

Press Release

Smith, Saxton request for hearing to be honored in early Nov.

The Base Realignment and Closure Commission's (BRAC) decision to close Fort Monmouth will be front and center at an upcoming Congressional hearing next month, U.S. Reps. Jim Saxton (NJ-03) and Chris Smith (NJ-04) announced today after receiving a commitment from a powerful House committee chairman that their request for a hearing will be honored.

"I'm pleased that Chairman Skelton shares the concerns we raised, and that he has agreed to hold another hearing on the implementation of BRAC 2005," said Saxton, who has consistently criticized the independent BRAC Commission for closing Fort Monmouth. "As I said in the last Armed Services Committee hearing on this topic back in March, I have felt all along that the decision to close Fort Monmouth is flawed."

"I am extremely grateful that Chairman Skelton is honoring our request for additional oversight into the implementation of the misguided decision to close Fort Monmouth," said Smith. "Fort Monmouth is a microcosm of all that is wrong with the BRAC process and we have an extraordinary opportunity to advocate for Fort Monmouth in front of key decision makers who can affect a change of course."

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton (D-MO) sent a letter in response to Smith and Saxton granting the hearing that will look at the challenges facing the BRAC process and the escalations in the costs of closing Fort Monmouth and the impact such a move would have on the warfighter will play a critical role in the hearing.

In a letter to Smith and Saxton, Skelton states that he shares the two Congressmen's concerns about the "apparent cost escalations and reduction in savings being reported by the Department of Defense (DOD)" as well as the "apparent disruption in the civilian workforce and mission degradation" that are occurring as a result of the implementation of BRAC recommendations and said an Armed Services Subcommittee will investigate this issue, and in particular the decision to move Fort Monmouth.

"Fort Monmouth is a clear example of this trend. I have asked the Readiness Subcommittee of the Armed Services Committee to address Fort Monmouth and the overall implementation of the BRAC 2005 process and expect them to have a hearing in early November 2007," Skelton wrote in the letter.

Smith and Saxton, who are sponsoring legislation to block the transfer or personnel and functions from Fort Monmouth until at least 30 days after the General Accounting Office (GAO) has submitted their report on whether the move can be completed without disrupting the Global War on Terror, expect to raise that legislation during the hearing.

"Chairman Skelton clearly sees there are problems with the implementation of BRAC's recommendations and his letter specifically states concerns I have raised about the ‘brain drain' such a move would cause on the Army's ability to carry out their mission in Global War on Terror. That is why he has asked the Readiness Subcommittee which has jurisdiction over such matters to hold this hearing," said Smith. "The negative impact this move will have on the warfighter—more than anything else—is why Congress has to condition the move of personnel, equipment and functions from Fort Monmouth to Aberdeen. The very fact that Chairman Skelton used the term ‘mission degradation' is indicative of his understanding of the significant concerns at Fort Monmouth."

Smith, Saxton and other members of New Jersey's Congressional delegation have already secured a commitment from the GAO to investigate the effects the decision to close Fort Monmouth and relocate the bulk of its missions and personnel to Aberdeen Proving Ground will have on the Army's ability to carry out its missions in the War on Terror.

The Army confirms that the costs for closing Fort Monmouth have more than doubled in just a two-year period—from a projected $780 million to $1.5 billion—and that DOD officials may have purposely ignored data that showed the cost to close the base was much higher than the estimate the BRAC Commission was given.

Source