May 20, 1976
Page 14797
Mr. SYMINGTON. May I say to my able friend from New York, there has been a little juggling around today between three different bills. I am trying to cooperate with the leadership on the least controversial of these bills.
I am glad to see the able Senator from South Carolina in the Chamber. To the best of our knowledge, there is no problem incident to the bill and, therefore, we took it up at this time because the leadership wanted to expedite the various matters of the Senate.
Mr. JAVITS. I thank my colleague. I have a question I would like to put to him.
Mr. SYMINGTON. I would be very glad to attempt to answer it.
Mr. JAVITS. We have a big problem in New York with Fort Drum, where some 80,000 Army active and Reserves train each year. I have been there and the facilities are terribly run down. The House has provided an estimated $8.4 million to deal primarily with new medical and barracks facilities. The Senate has omitted it from the bill. I wrote to Senator STENNIS under date of May 10 and asked if he would be kind enough to look into the matter, but it has been omitted.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD at this point the letter to which I referred, dated May 10, 1976, addressed to the Honorable JOHN C. STENNIS, chairman, Senate Armed Services Committee, and included therein are the attachments which are referred to in the letter.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
U.S. SENATE,
Washington, D.C.,
May 10, 1976.
Hon. JOHN C. STENNIS, Chairman,
Armed Service Committee,
U.S. Senate,
Russell Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR JOHN: On March 11 I wrote to you concerning the proposed expenditure of sums, now estimated at $8.4 million, for new medical and barracks facilities at Fort Drum, New York where as many as 80,000 Army active and reserve soldiers train each year. As you may know, the House Armed Services Committee has included this amount in its version of the Military Construction Authorization bill.
The upgrading of the Army facilities at Fort Drum has attracted considerable attention throughout the Northeast as units from states throughout the area train there. To provide you with documentation of this widely felt concern, I enclose letters from five governors and seven adjutant generals, all expressing their support for the improvement of some of the facilities at Fort Drum.
I very much hope that in its consideration of the Military Construction Authorization, the Senate Armed Services Committee will look very closely at this matter and give the proposed new medical and barracks facilitiesat Fort Drum its favorable consideration.
Thank you for your consideration.
With best regards,
Sincerely,
JACOB K. JAVITS.
SEPTEMBER 9, 1975.
Hon. MARTIN R. HOFFMAN,
Secretary of the Army,
Department of the Army,
The Pentagon,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. SECRETARY: On August 7th, eighty-two members of the House of Representatives cosigned a letter to you, in which they recommended the following: That Fort Drum be properly funded and maintained for year-round training of Reserve Components; that concurrent with upgrading of facilities, at least an Active Army armored or mechanized brigade, and an engineer construction unit be permanently assigned at Fort Drum; and that Fort Dix continue to be used for the conduct of basic combat and advanced individual training.
I support this Congressional request and urge you to implement the proposals expressed in their letter.
The imbalance in the number of Department of Army installations located in the Northeast compared with other sections of the country continues to grow. The implementation of these proposals will not only reverse this trend but will enhance National Guard and Reserve training.
Sincerely,
HUGH L. CAREY.
STATE OF VERMONT,
Montpelier, Vt.,
September 19, 1975.
Hon. HUGH L. CAREY,
Governor of New York,
Executive Chamber,
Albany, N.Y.
DEAR GOVERNOR: On August 29, 1975, I wrote to the Honorable Martin R. Hoffman, Secretary of the Army, in Washington, D.C., personally endorsing the improvement of facilities in Fort Drum, New York.
I fully support your initiatives in this respect, since Fort Drum is the main training facility for the Vermont National Guard.
Yours very truly,
THOMAS P. SALMON
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE,
Concord, N.H.
Hon. HUGH L. CAREY,
The Governor of New York,
State Capitol,
Albany, N.Y.
DEAR GOVERNOR CAREY: You will recall that last month I wrote to the Department of the Army at your suggestion concerning their plans for Fort Drum and Fort Dix. I have received the enclosed reply from them which may be of interest to you or your staff.
If there is anything else you feel I should do in this matter, please let me know.
Warm personal regards,
Sincerely,
MELDRIM THOMSON.
Enclosure.
CONCORD, N.H.
September 29, 1975.
Hon. JAMES R. SCHLESINGER,
Secretary of Defense,
The Pentagon,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. SECRETARY: I would strongly urge you to take demonstrable action regarding the rehabilitation of Fort Drum, the stationing of significant combat units of the Active Army in the Northeast, and the retention of Fort Dix as a Combat and Advanced Individual Training Center.
Like other Governors, I am deeply concerned over the lack of major Active Army Combat Troop Units in the Northeast and the deteriorating conditions of training facilities for our Army National Guard and the United States Army Reserve Units at Fort Drum, and the contemplated deactivation of Fort Dix as the United States Army Basic Combat and Advanced Individual Training Center.
As Governor, I have visited our National Guard Units at Fort Drum on several occasions and am cognizant of the imbalance in the number of defense installations located in the Northeastern part of the United States compared with other sections of the country.
I hope you will reassess your position on this matter.
Sincerely,
MELDRIM THOMSON, Jr.
PROVIDENCE, R.I.,
September 18, 1975.
Hon. HUGH L. CAREY,
Governor of New York,
Executive Chamber,
Albany, N.Y.
DEAR GOVERNOR CAREY: This is in reply to your letter of September 12, 1975 in which you expressed your concern over the contemplated deactivation of Fort Dix and the deteriorating training facilities at Fort Drum.
Enclosed is a copy of a letter which I have forwarded to the Secretary of Defense expressing my concern with regard to the effect that these contemplated actions could have on our state.
I wish to thank you for bringing this to my attention and I trust that a favorable response will be received from the Secretary of Defense.
Sincerely,
PHILIP W. NOEL,
Governor.
THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS,
Boston, Mass.,
October 7, 1975.
Hon. HUGH L. CAREY,
Governor of the State of New York,
Executive Chamber,
Albany, N.Y.
DEAR GOVERNOR CAREY: I appreciate your letter requesting my support for the rehabilitation of Fort Drum, the location for training of significant units of the Active Army and National Guard in the Northeast, and the retention of Fort Dix as an active training center.
Recently, the Boston Globe carried a release indicating that the Secretary of the Army had ruled that Fort Dix will remain open at its present level of operation. This action is most welcome and significant. I strongly support the efforts to rehabilitate Fort Drum and to locate major active Army units in the Northeast.
As you may know, the Massachusetts Army National Guard annually sends the major portion of its unit to Fort Drum. Although we are increasing our utilization of Camp Edwards on Cape Cod, I have not as yet visited Fort Drum. However, I have been advised that considerable upgrading of its facilities must be made to increase its training, housing, and recreational facilities.
Additionally, I strongly support the location of major active Army units in the Northeast, particularly in Fort Devens. Such action would provide direct association with counterpart National Guard units and would provide significant impact on the economic situation of our region.
I have forwarded a copy of this letter to theSecretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Army.
Sincerely,
MICHAEL S. DUKAKIS
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY,
Washington, D.C.,
October 9, 1975.
Hon. HUGH L. CAREY,
Governor of New York,
Albany, N.Y.
DEAR GOVERNOR CAREY: This responds to your letters of 9 September 1975 to the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Army concerning stationing of Active Army units in the Northeastern United States, particularly at Fort Drum, New York; funding, rehabilitation and maintenance of facilities at Fort Drum; and the retention of Fort Dix, New Jersey as a major US Army Training Center.
The problem of upgrading facilities at Fort Drum is equally true of many other Army installations. The Army National Guard initiated a program in FY 1969 to rehabilitate facilities at Fort Drum. The program in past years has ranged from $1.0–$2.5 million annually for upgrading troop facilities and training areas there. The projected funding for FY 1976 is approximately $2.8 million. The expenditures for maintenance and repair work to the existing facilities at Fort Drum increased approximately 25 percent from FY 1974 to FY 1975 and we would expect further increases in FY 1976.
The Army recognizes that the field training facilities at Fort Drum could support increased utilization. There was a substantial increase at Fort Drum in both Active Array and Reserve Component training from the period 1974 to 1975. Active Army battalion level training there increased from one to five battalions. Reserve training at Fort Drum increased from 56,000 to 76,000 personnel from 1974 to 1975. The 1976 Army training program is yet to be published, but it is tentatively planned to program the same level of activity at Fort Drum as in 1975. The Army is also studying the possibility of stationing various types of Active Army units at Fort Drum on a permanent basis in terms of benefits to the Army and costs associated with construction of permanent facilities.
Fort Dix has been built up over the years to accommodate a training mission. The total investment there is approximately $200 million. However, as the Army completes its drawdown from the Vietnam era peak of 1.57 million to a strength of 785,000 military personnel with the necessary new programs to produce better soldiers faster through One Station Training, adjustments to the training base must be made.
The Army is currently conducting a study to determine the future mission of Fort Dix, with the goal of minimizing personnel turbulence and the economic impact on the surrounding area. The Army recognizes the value of keeping and continuing to make use of facilities already available at Fort Dix.
I can assure you that the Army is maintaining an open mind on Fort Dix and Fort Drum. The Army understands and fully appreciates your concern for the future of these installations and for the future of an Army presence in the Northeastern United States.
Sincerely,
HAROLD L. BROWNMAN,
Assistant Secretary of the Army, (Installations and Logistics).
DEPARTMENT OF MILITARY AFFAIRS,
Annville, Pa.,
March 26, 1976.
Hon. ROBERT C. McEWEN,
U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. McEWEN: Major General Greenlief has indicated to me that you have taken action to improve the facilities at Fort Drum, New York for use by National Guard and Reserve Troops. Since the Pennsylvania National Guard sends a large contingent of troops each year to Fort Drum, I commend you on the initiative you have taken to upgrade the facilities at that training site.
To be very frank with you, I must tell you that I am even more concerned with the deteriorating conditions of our facilities here at Fort Indiantown Gap, Pennsylvania. I solicit your support in our effort to move the Department of Defense to invest more of their budget in this very excellent National Guard and Reserve training site. Further, since Pennsylvania sends a large number of troops into New York each year to train, I suggest that New York reciprocate by sending troops to Fort Indiantown Gap in Pennsylvania. Your considerable influence in this area would be very helpful.
Again, thanks for the strong support you have given to the construction program at Fort Drum.
Sincerely,
HARRY J. MIER, Jr.,
Major General,
The Adjutant General.
CAMP KEYES,
Augusta, Maine,
March 26, 1976.
Hon. ROBERT C. McEWEN,
U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. McEWEN: I have recently learned of your very much appreciated stand for improvement of funding and utilization of Fort Drum, New York.
From what I have heard of the hearing on March 11 by the military construction Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, your presentation should be most helpful in a reevaluation of the rightful part Fort Drum should play in the Army training program.
The Maine Army National Guard has trained many years at Fort Drum and we have first hand knowledge of the potential offered by Fort Drum if given its appropriate share of the Army training site support dollar.
Thank you for your help.
Sincerely,
PAUL R. DAY,
Major General, MeNG,
The Adjutant General.
STATE OF NEW JERSEY,
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE,
Trenton, N.J.,
March 25, 1976.
Hon. ROBERT C. McEWEN,
U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. McEWEN: I have been advised of your recent representations to the Military Construction Subcommittee about construction programs at Fort Drum. My advice is that you strongly supported the improvement of facilities at Fort Drum for the use of the National Guard and Army Reserve. Our Armored Division in, New Jersey stands to gain a great deal to any improvement of facilities at Fort Drum and we are deeply indebted to you for your strong support of such a program.
Sincerely,
WILFRED C. MENARD, Jr.,
Major General, NJARNG,
The Chief of Staff.
STATE OF NEW YORK,
DIVISION OF MILITARY AFFAIRS,
Albany, N.Y.,
March 24, 1976.
Hon. ROBERT C. McEWEN, U.S.
House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. McEWEN: Thank you for your continued personal support for the construction program at Fort Drum. I was informed of your extensive participation during the military construction Subcommittee hearing of the House Appropriations Committee on March 11.
In my former role as Acting Commissioner of Commerce and now as the Chief of Staff to the Governor I concur that Fort Drum must continue as a viable training site for both active and reserve forces.
For your information, I have had numerous discussions with my counterparts in Washington to insure that Fort Drum does, in fact, get its proper share of Active Army, National Guard and Reserve appropriations.
I look forward to meeting with you at your convenience to discuss ways to accomplish our mutual objective; that is the enhancement of the entire Fort Drum facility.
Sincerely,
VITO J. CASTELLANO,
Major General, Chief of Staff to the Governor,
THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, MILITARY DIVISION,
Boston, Mass.,
March 22, 1976.
Hon. ROBERT C. McEWEN,
U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR REPRESENTATIVE McEWEN: I have been advised of your keen interest in the improvement of facilities at Fort Drum particularly during the recent hearings of the military construction subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee.
As you know, a majority of the Massachusetts Army National Guard conducts its annual training at Fort Drum and on its behalf I would like to extend my thanks for your interest and concern in this matter.
The improvement of Fort Drum facilities is of utmost importance to the National Guard and Army Reserve particularly if the Reserve Components are to continue improving their readiness.
Again, thank you for your support. Sincerely,
VAHAN VARTANIAN,
Major General, Mass ARNG,
The Adjutant General.
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE,
Concord, N.H.,
March 19, 1976.
Hon. ROBERT C. McEWEN,
U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR CONGRESSMAN McEWEN: I have recently been apprised of your efforts in support of Fort Drum and of your strong support for developing and improving this facility.
New Hampshire has been sending National Guard troops to Fort Drum since 1951 and we wholeheartedly support and appreciate your desire to upgrade this installation.
As the only sizeable training area in the northeast suitable for division level training, I feel it extremely important to our National Defense needs to maintain and develop Fort Drum for year round use.
Again, thank you for your support.
Sincerely,
JOHN BLATSOS,
Major General, AGC, NHNG,
The Adjutant General.
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS,
Providence, R.I.,
March 18, 1976.
Hon. ROBERT C. McEWEN,
U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. McEWEN: I have learned from Major General (Ret.) Francis S. Greenlief, Executive Vice President of the National Guard Association of the United States, that you voiced your strong support for the improvement of facilities at Fort Drum, New York, at a House Appropriations Committee hearing held on 11 March 1976.
As you probably know, Rhode Island Army National Guard units have used Fort Drum for many years, and it has been particularly vital for our Artillery units. We have in Rhode Island an Artillery Group and two artillery battalions comprising nearly 1000 officers and enlisted men.
Because of the severe restrictions imposed on our artillery units at Camp Edwards, Massachusetts, the nearest suitable facility available for artillery training is Fort Drum.
I wish to thank you for your support and should you desire any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
LEONARD HOLLAND,
Major General, Commanding.
TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE ROBERT C. McEWEN BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before this Committee on two items which I consider to be of extreme urgency. Both pertain to Fort Drum, New York, where upwards of 80,000 Reserve Component citizen soldiers (including four of the U.S. Army's total of eight National Guard Divisions) conduct Annual Training; where Reserve Component units from the Northeast conduct weekend drills throughout the fall, winter and spring months; and where active duty units of all services conduct winter training.
First, I will discuss the desperate need for a new medical dispensary. This project is essential to replace an outmoded, 35-year-old temporary medical facility and to restore the X-ray and surgery capability lost as a result of a fire in March, 1972. At present, there is no surgery capability and the only X-ray capability comes from a portable machine set up in an overcrowded physical examination room. Of the sprawling mass of 46 one-story old wooden buildings, only six are heated — including one area where a potbelly stove is the only source of heat. It is a fire hazard, as was demonstrated by the fire in 1972. It is a maintenance burden. The emergency room can accommodate only two persons at a time. I could go on and on, but these pictures, which I am leaving for your examination, show the problem better than I can describe it. After seeing these, I am certain that you will agree that this is a deplorable facility for providing medical care to any human being, and is totally inadequate to serve the medical and dental needs of a military community whose population often exceeds 10,000. I think you will also agree that it would be a waste of money to attempt to restore this facility to a barely acceptable standard.
This medical facility serves a fulltime patient population of over 5,000 active military, retired military and dependents. From May through September, there is an average of 10,000 Reserve Component and Active duty military personnel at Fort Drum. During peak periods there are as many as 15,000 present at one time. Active Army units come to Fort Drum from other posts for winter training. During February alone, there was an average of 1,164 Army, Marine Corps and Navy Construction (Seabee) units in training there. While the facility is inadequate to handle routine care for this large number of troops, it would be disastrous should a mass casualty situation ever occur — easily resulting in untold loss of life and limb. Ironically, some of the finest doctors — specialists and surgeons — in the Nation are assigned to Reserve Component units which train at Fort Drum. Their abilities would be restricted to First Aid and field expedients should such a situation occur. Two local civilian hospitals in Watertown, 10 miles away, are seriously overcrowded. The nearest military installation with modern medical facilities is Griffiss Air Force Base, 80 miles away.
Further, this facility is inadequate in meeting training requirements of Reserve Component medical units which come to train there. It would be completely unsatisfactory in meeting Fort Drum's mobilization responsibility for a 50-bed hospital.
I am not asking that this hospital be replaced by a new hospital. But, to meet minimum medical needs, I am asking that this Committee authorize the construction of a permanent health complex, to include a 10 chair dental clinic and a 20 bed (expandable to 50 beds) dispensary with emergency room, outpatient clinic, pharmacy, laboratory and other necessities. This would replace what is presently being used in this totally inadequate facility and would restore the surgery and full X-ray capability. The estimated cost is $3.3 million. Certainly, this is a modest sum when we consider that the health and welfare — and even the very lives — of so many Reserve Component, active military, retired military and dependents are at stake. The Army has recognized that the existing health clinic is in need of replacement and has programmed this for FY 79. I do not believe we can afford to wait that long when the need is so apparent and immediate.
Next, I would like to discuss the need for an improved barracks facility to accommodate active military and Reserve Component troops of all services which train at Fort Drum during the winter and for active Army troops which are on temporary duty there for long periods during the summer. The 10th Special Forces conducted winter training at Fort Drum for one month this winter. 1,200 Marines spent almost a month in winter training there. A battalion of the 82nd Airborne Division was flown up there for training. Two Naval Construction (Seabees) battalions trained there this winter. While admittedly these troops are there for winter training, their training periods are of such duration that they spend time in garrison and they deserve to live in suitable quarters. Additionally, from April through September each year, about 500-600 active Army troops are sent to Fort Drum to support Reserve Component training.
These men on TDY, who leave modern permanent facilities at other posts, deserve to live in decent accommodations while performing this important mission. In fact, the Secretary of the Army announced recently that an engineer company would be sent TDY to Fort Drum from March until November. These men, who will be there during this extended period, deserve decent living conditions, and the Reserve Component units which come to Fort Drum on weekends during cold winter months could use these better facilities. Certainly, then, an improved set of buildings would be well utilized and are fully justified.
The National Guard has been engaged in a cantonment renovation project at Fort Drum for several years and are still at it, but this should not be confused with what I am proposing. They are putting on steel siding and providing for automatic hot water, but not renovating the interior of the buildings. Here is a picture of the exterior before renovation. Here is a picture of the renovated exterior. After renovation, they are colorful and quite attractive from the outside. But here are pictures of the interior of these same buildings, which are unfinished, have holes in the walls, outmoded latrines and lighting, etc. While this preserves these structures and enhances their outside appearance, it in no way changes the deplorable and unlivable interiors which presently exist. Further, they are still heated by coal fired furnaces. Supply rooms have pot belly stoves. Firing these furnaces and stoves takes away valuable training time during winter exercises.
In recognition of this dire need, I had proposed that a set of wooden buildings be rehabilitated. Senators Javits and Buckley have supported me on this. However, the Army has indicated that it would prefer construction of a permanent type building which would be more economical. The permanent barracks would accommodate 300 personnel. The cost would include a 600 man mess hall which would be utilized by other support personnel as well as barracks occupants. More importantly, it would provide a more economical single mess hall (rather than the construction and operation of 2 mess halls) should another barracks be constructed at a later date. This will cost $5.1 million. They have programmed this for FY 78. While I defer to their judgment that a permanent facility be constructed rather than rehabilitating the World War II wooden buildings, I believe that the need is of such urgency that it should be included in the FY 77 budget. With this the Army now agrees.
Again, I thank you for the opportunity of appearing before this Committee. I would appreciate thoughtful consideration and approval of these worthwhile and necessary projects.
U.S. SENATE,
Washington, D.C.
Hon. JAMES R. SCHLESINGER,
Secretary of Defense.
DEAR MR. SECRETARY: We are writing to you in conjunction with the letters of August 7 sent to you and Secretary of the Army Designate Hoffman signed by 82 members of the House of Representatives regarding the under-use of Department of Defense facilities in the nine Northeastern states. We share fully the concerns expressed in those letters.
We have witnessed with increasing concern the ever growing list of Department of Defense facilities in the Northeast that have either been closed or substantially reduced in their activities with a commensurate economic loss to the area. While it is understandable that closings and reductions must be made in the interests of efficiency and consolidation to meet the needs of a cost effective national defense, we are quite disturbed by the apparent pattern of base reorganizations that brings closings and reductions in the Northeast and consolidations and expanded or new facilities in other areas of the country.
A most compelling example in this regard is that in the fiscal year 1976 Department of Defense Military Construction Authorization request, the Department sought $800 million for twelve Southern states and $448 million for three Pacific states but only $54 million for the nine Northeastern states. In view of the availability of defense facilities in the Northeast that are now not used to their full potential, this disproportionate allocation of Military Construction funds seems incomprehensible. As pointed out to you in the correspondence that you have received from the 82 members of the House of Representatives, Fort Drum, New York and Fort Dix, New Jersey are two excellent examples of facilities in the Northeast that are much underused and which, given the proper support from the Department of Defense, would help to provide the Northeast with its "fair share" of defense oriented facilities.
We look forward to working with you in a spirit of cooperation in an effort to redress this imbalance that deeply concerns us, and we would be most interested to hear what proposals the Department of Defense would be willing to make in this regard.
Sincerely,
Signed by Senators Javits, Buckley, Case, Williams, H. Scott, Schweiker, Ribicoff Kennedy, Brooke, Leahy, Stafford, McIntyre, Durkin, Muskie, Hathaway, Pell, and Pastore.