AIR FORCE O&M HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES, READINESS SUBCOMMITTEE, Washington, DC, Wednesday, March 15, 1989. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:36 a.m., in room 2216, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Earl Hutto (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. STATEMENT OF HON. EARL HUTTO, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM FLORIDA, CHAIRMAN, READINESS SUBCOMMITTEE Mr. HUTTO. The Subcommittee on Readiness will come to order. This morning the subcommittee will continue its consideration of the fiscal year 1990-1991 Department of Defense Operation and Maintenance budget request with testimony from Air Force wit nesses. Before proceeding any further, I want to welcome Lt. Gen. Claudius E. Watts, Comptroller of the Air Force, who had the good sense and judgment to marry a young lady from Marianna, FL. It is good to have you General Watts. Also, Maj. Gen. George W. Larson, Deputy Comptroller of the Budget, and Brig. Gen. John L. Finan, Director of Budget Operations. I have looked over your statement and it is apparent that the Air Force has made some tough decisions in formulating its budget request. There is a substantial reduction in force structure that decreases O&M funding by about $400 million. To accomplish this, however, the active force loses three B-52 squadrons, two FB-111 squadrons, one KC-135 squadron equivalent and two C-130 squadron equivalents to the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve. In addition, the tactical force structure is reduced by three tactical fighter wing equivalents and the SR-71 program is restructured. I recognize that some of these planes are old and costly to operate, a number of squadrons are being transferred to the Guard and Reserve and will be available in times of need, and that new aircrafts, such as the B-2 and C-17, are being procured and will eventually replace some of these losses. Nevertheless, it results in a loss of 116 aircraft and a serious reduction in our strategic and tactical forces. I want to also point out that today's testimony is based on the budget prepared by the last administration and does not reflect the changes that have been proposed by President Bush. It should be evident, therefore, that shortfalls or problems surfaced today are not likely to be relieved during the ongoing budget process. If anything, they will become more serious. (1125) Finally, I am hopeful that during the course of today's hearing General Watts can provide the subcommittee with some insight with regard to President's Bush's budget that is due here shortly. Mr. Kasich, our ranking minority member, cannot be with us at this time. I believe, Mr. Hefley will give his statement. Mr. Hefley. Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I hope you think I am becoming quite good at doing my Kasich impression that I have done a number of times. [Laughter.]. Mr. HEFLEY. I will do that again. Mr. RAY. Hopefully, he might drop in every now and then. Mr. HEFLEY. Well, that is right. It would be nice for him to drop by. STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN R. KASICH, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM OHIO, RANKING MINORITY MEMBER, READINESS SUBCOMMITTEE, PRESENTED BY HON. JOEL HEFLEY, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM COLORADO Mr. HEFLEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to take this opportunity to welcome Lieutenant General Watts and Major General Larson and Brigadier General Finan, as we review the Air Force's Fiscal Year 1990 Operation and Maintenance budget. I agree with the Chairman's remarks about the decisions taken by the Air Force in the face of the tight budget situation. In fact, the Air Force can almost be said to be undertaking a kind of structural disarmament in order to modernize within a very constrained budget. It is our task to see whether the Air Force has struck the right balance between modernization and readiness. A decision to reduce current force structure and readiness in favor of modernization may be sensible, depending on the future security environment. But in no sense do we want to return to the hollow forces of the 1970's. I hope General Watts can provide this subcommittee with the information we need to make wise decisions. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. HUTTO. Thank you, Mr. Hefley. If you had been a little more animated there you would have sounded just like him. Mr. HEFLEY. Well, I am working on it. Mr. HUTTO. OK. It is good to have you gentlemen with us. General Watts, you may proceed as you see fit. STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. CLAUDIUS WATTS, III, COMPTROLLER, U.S. AIR FORCE, ACCOMPANIED BY MAJ. GEN. GEORGE W. LARSON, JR., DEPUTY COMPTROLLER, BUDGET, AND BRIG. GEN. JOHN L. FINAN, DIRECTOR OF BUDGET OPERATIONS General WATTS. Mr. Chairman, first I have a statement I would like to present for the record. Then if you would permit me to make just a few general comments before we proceed with questions. Mr. HUTTO. Without objection, your full statement will be admitted for the record. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: I am pleased to appear before this Committee to present and discuss the Operation and Maintenance (O&M), Air Force budget request for FY 1990/1991. My statement will discuss the O&M funding history from FY 1988 through FY 1991 and will highlight the forces, manpower, and programs supported by these O&M funds. The following is a summary of the Air Force FY 1988-1991 O&M For the remainder of my statement, I will focus my comments on the O&M, Air Force (active) request, since the Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard budgets are reviewed separately by this Committee. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE. AIR FORCE The Air Force Operation and Maintenance (O&M) appropriation finances the day-to-day operating costs of the Air Force at 130 major installations. This appropriation supports the key ingredients of combat readiness by providing the funds needed to operate and maintain aircraft and related weapon systems; train personnel; operate communications, command, and control systems; and purchase supplies, equipment, and fuel. O&M also supports essential combat related activities such as intelligence, logistics, weather, air traffic control, search and rescue, medical operations, maintenance of runways and base facilities, contract services, and the working and living environment of Air Force personnel. Financial requirements in the O&M appropriation are influenced by force structure levels and activity rates. Examples are the number and type of aircraft and squadrons, the number of aircraft sorties and flying hours, equipment inventories, modification acquisition schedules, civilian hiring, training and deployments, the number of installations, and the quantity and complexity of vehicles and other operational equipment. Economic assumptions used in developing this budget are: Traditionally we tend to look at O&M according to how our accounts are structured; that is, by Major Force Program or mission area. Our budget justification book is prepared in this manner. |