November 13, 1979
Page 32063
Mr. HUDDLESTON. Mr. President, I yield to the distinguished senior Senator from Maine such time as he may require.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maine is recognized.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished floor manager of the bill for yielding to me on a subject we have discussed informally, and which I would now like to discuss on the record.
Mr. President, on October 31, the Secretary of Defense announced that the decision to reduce Loring Air Force Base would not be implemented. The decision reflected a recognition of the strategic value of Loring as a strategic air command installation, the mission of which is to accommodate both bombers and tankers as part of our strategic deterrent forces and rapid deployment forces.
The Senate had earlier recognized the strategic value of Loring and included a provision in the fiscal year 1980 military construction authorization bill prohibiting reduction of the base. After Secretary Brown announced the decision to retain Loring, the conferees dropped the legislative provision from the military construction authorization bill, but included report language recognizing the unique strategic value of Loring.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of that language be printed in the RECORD at the conclusion of my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I am of course pleased that the proposal to reduce Loring Air Force Base has been abandoned. With my colleagues in the Maine delegation, I have argued for 3 years that Loring's unique location in the northeast corner of the United States offered valuable strategic and logistic advantages that should be preserved and enhanced. It is most encouraging to have had that position affirmed first by the Senate, and now by the Secretary of Defense.
But while I am pleased and encouraged, Mr. President, I am also concerned with the construction needs of this valuable installation in northern Maine.
The proposal to reduce Loring Air Force Base was publicly announced in March of 1976, and apparently was under consideration within the Air Force for some years before that. For the 3 years that the reduction proposal was publicly debated, and for a period of time before, many needed repairs and renovation projects were deferred so that the Air Force could utilize available funds at other installations not scheduled for reduction. As a result, many projects, such as repair of utility lines, electrical distribution lines, replacement of roofs, painting, and general facilities repair work, were not carried out. Now that Loring's status as an active SAC base is permanent, this work should be expedited to prevent further deterioration and added expense.
In his announcement, Secretary Brown recognized that there are priority needs in fiscal year 1980, particularly with respect to housing rehabilitation.
I recognize that we are late in the congressional cycle for military construction funds. The military construction authorization bill is through conference, and we are in the final stages of shaping the appropriations for military construction.
I am deeply concerned, however, with the need at Loring for housing and facilities rehabilitation and would like to ask the floor manager of this bill, the distinguished Senator from Kentucky (Mr. HUDDLESTON) to consider the circumstances at Loring and attempt to identify funds in this legislation which might be made available for Loring. I understand that there is at least $9 million worth of housing rehabilitation work which has been deferred at Loring over the last 5 to 6 years. This work could be accomplished this fiscal year if funds were identified and made available. I am also advised that $4 million for general repair of utility systems could be immediately utilized if funds for those purposes can be identified.
I understand that, under this bill, $3 million is provided for minor construction and $716 million is provided for maintenance and repair of family housing. These programs are flexible and I would hope will provide the funding we need at Loring. The level of funding for these programs is higher in the Senate bill than in the House version. I encourage the distinguished chairman of the Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee to retain sufficient funds in conference to accommodate these priority needs at Loring, and to seek support in the conference for identifying these priority needs at Loring as appropriate projects for funding under these provisions.
I am most appreciative of the sympathetic attitude that Senator HUDDLESTON has shown toward this problem and I am pleased to bring it to his attention on the RECORD at this time.
Mr. HUDDLESTON. I thank the distinguished Senator from Maine. I would point out that Senator MUSKIE contacted us last Friday about this problem and gave us an opportunity to talk directly with the Department of Defense. They have assured us that they intend to assist with this particular problem at Loring.
As I noted previously, the committee itself has included in this bill all of the money that was authorized for family housing, the full $1.69 billion. Included in that amount is $716 million for maintenance and repair and $3 million for minor construction.
It is our position that within these funds there is ample flexibility to assist Loring. And with the expression of intent made to us from the Department of Defense in response to the request of the Senator from Maine, it is our hope that these projects will go forward.
Mr. MUSKIE. I thank my good friend from Kentucky. I am most grateful for his positive attitude and cooperation.
May I also add that I am most appreciative to the Air Force for its positive attitude toward funding of these needs, now that the decision with respect to reduction of the base has been reversed.
I thank the distinguished floor manager, my good friend from Kentucky. I yield the floor.
EXHIBIT
Section 809 of the Senate's bill prohibited the base realignment of Loring Air Force Base, which had been announced by the Secretary of the Air Force in March 1979, due to the significant strategic value of the Base and the complex set of evolving decisions regarding U.S. strategic programs.
The House amendment did not include this provision.
On the basis of the Secretary of Defense's decision of October 31, 1979, wherein he announced that Loring Air Force Base would remain a fully operational Strategic Air Command (SAC) base, the conferees withdrew this provision. The conferees agree with the decision of the Secretary of Defense that the reduction of Loring to a forward operating base should not occur because of the need for maintaining maximum flexibility in strategic and tactical forces in the 1980's and due to the evolving strategic basing requirements such as decisions on the beddown of the air launched cruise missile, a follow-on penetrating bomber, and a new air defense interceptor. While a full discussion of the strategic considerations of Loring Air Force Base would get into classified information, the need for Loring can be justified by its significant contribution as a strategic asset. The conferees further agree that construction and O&M funds to upgrade and maintain this base should be planned and programmed for FY 1980 and future years in order that the base retain a high level of strategic and tactical capability.
Mr. HUDDLESTON. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The second assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. HUDDLESTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. HUDDLESTON. I yield to the Senator from Maine such time as he may require.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, given our concern with the budgetary implications of all appropriations bills at this point in the session, I would like to make this brief statement with respect to the pending bill.
The bill provides $3.9 billion in budget authority and $1.1 billion in fiscal year 1980 outlays.
These amounts are consistent with the President's budget request and the functional totals of the second budget resolution.
While I remain concerned about the Appropriations Committee's ability to live within its total allocation, this bill fits within the committee's military construction subcommittee's estimated allocation and the spending in the bill clearly was contemplated in the second budget resolution.
Mr. President, since this bill is consistent with the budget resolution, I support the bill as reported.
I ask unanimous consent that a table showing the budgetary status of this function be printed in the RECORD following my remarks.
There being no objection, the table was ordered to be printed in the REcORD, as follows:
[Table omitted]