    [House Hearing, 115 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                             [H.A.S.C. No. 115-88]
                         ____________________________

                                    HEARING

                                       ON

                       NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT

                              FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019

                                      AND

                  OVERSIGHT OF PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED PROGRAMS

                                   BEFORE THE

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                         ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                    SUBCOMMITTEE ON STRATEGIC FORCES HEARING

                                       ON

      FISCAL YEAR 2019 BUDGET REQUEST FOR NATIONAL SECURITY SPACE PROGRAMS

                                   __________

                                  HEARING HELD
                                 MARCH 15, 2018

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                               _________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    29-492                    WASHINGTON : 2019

                        SUBCOMMITTEE ON STRATEGIC FORCES

                         MIKE ROGERS, Alabama, Chairman

    DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado               JIM COOPER, Tennessee
    DUNCAN HUNTER, California            SUSAN A. DAVIS, California
    MO BROOKS, Alabama                   RICK LARSEN, Washington
    JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma            JOHN GARAMENDI, California
    MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio              BETO O'ROURKE, Texas
    MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado               DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey
    BRADLEY BYRNE, Alabama               COLLEEN HANABUSA, Hawaii
    SAM GRAVES, Missouri                 RO KHANNA, California
    JODY B. HICE, Georgia
                    Sarah Mineiro, Professional Staff Member
                             Leonor Tomero, Counsel
                               Mike Gancio, Clerk
                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

                  STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

    Rogers, Hon. Mike, a Representative from Alabama, Chairman,
      Subcommittee on Strategic Forces...............................     1

                                   WITNESSES

    Rapuano, Hon. Kenneth P., Assistant Secretary of Defense for
      Homeland Defense and Global Security, Department of Defense....     4
    Raymond, Gen John W., USAF, Commander, Air Force Space Command...     2
    Sapp, Hon. Betty J., Director, National Reconnaissance Office....     3

                                    APPENDIX

    Prepared Statements:

        Rapuano, Hon. Kenneth P......................................    46
        Raymond, Gen John W..........................................    21
        Rogers, Hon. Mike............................................    19
        Sapp, Hon. Betty J...........................................    40

    Documents Submitted for the Record:

        [There were no Documents submitted.]

    Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:

        [The information was not available at the time of printing.]

    Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:

        Mr. Coffman..................................................    63
        Mr. Lamborn..................................................    61
        Mr. Rogers...................................................    61
        Mr. Turner...................................................    62

      FISCAL YEAR 2019 BUDGET REQUEST FOR NATIONAL SECURITY SPACE PROGRAMS

                                  ----------

                      House of Representatives,
                           Committee on Armed Services,
                              Subcommittee on Strategic Forces,
                              Washington, DC, Thursday, March 15, 2018.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 4:30 p.m., in
    room 2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Mike Rogers
    (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

     OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE ROGERS, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
          ALABAMA, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON STRATEGIC FORCES

        Mr. Rogers. Good afternoon. I want to welcome everybody to
    this hearing of the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces and our
    hearing on the 2019 budget request for national security space
    programs.
        Unfortunately, as everybody in the room now knows, we were
    interrupted by votes, and we are an hour behind starting off.
    So for the sake of not keeping you all here all night, I am
    going to submit my opening statement for the record, and the
    ranking member has told me that he is going to submit his
    opening statement for the record, too.
        So we will go straight to your opening statements. And I
    would ask that each of you have 5 minutes. Your entire
    statement will be accepted into the record, so if you would
    just summarize it, we will get to questions and answers and
    finish this session and go to the classified section
    immediately after that.
        So, with that, thank you all for being here. I know it
    takes a lot of time and energy to prepare for these things, but
    it really helps us. We really need to hear your thoughts at
    this time of year.
        So, with that, I will recognize General Raymond.
        Well, first let me recognize we have General Raymond with
    us today, Betty Sapp from NRO [National Reconnaissance Office],
    and the Honorable Kenneth Rapuano.
        We will start with General Raymond for your opening
    statement. You are recognized.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Rogers can be found in the
    Appendix on page 19.]

     STATEMENT OF GEN JOHN W. RAYMOND, USAF, COMMANDER, AIR FORCE
                             SPACE COMMAND

        General Raymond. Thank you.
        Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member Cooper, distinguished
    members of the subcommittee, I am honored to appear before this
    committee.
        And this time it is my first time being able to testify in
    front of you in my dual hat as the Air Force Space Command
    commander and as the Joint Forces Space Component commander, a
    component of U.S. Strategic Command. I have the absolute
    distinct privilege of leading and representing both the Air
    Force and joint space personnel, who underpin successful global
    operations for our joint force and our Nation.
        As I have stated previously, I am increasingly convinced
    that we are at a strategic inflection point and that we must
    accelerate our preparations to protect and defend against a
    conflict that begins in, or extends to, space, and that is
    exactly what we are doing.
        Today's space capabilities are the foundation of power
    projection and fuel our joint force lethality. A high-end
    conflict may begin in our domain, which will require us to
    fight for space superiority.
        As a component of United States Strategic Command, I would
    be remiss if I didn't echo the words of my boss, General Hyten,
    to say that our force is fully prepared to deter and, if
    necessary, to respond, and win, if deterrence were to fail.
        As our National Security Strategy states, the United States
    considers unfettered access to and freedom to operate in space
    to be a vital interest. Our National Defense Strategy clearly
    articulates that the central challenge to the United States
    prosperity and security is the reemergence of long-term
    strategic competition.
        Space is a warfighting domain, just like air, land, and
    sea. This budget is aligned with the National Defense Strategy
    to meet our warfighting imperatives necessary to compete,
    deter, and win. This budget marks a bold shift towards an
    increased focus on space superiority in a contested
    environment.
        Specifically, we are enhancing our space situational
    awareness and our ability to command and control. We are
    shifting towards more defendable architectures. We are
    investing in tests and training infrastructure to further
    enhance our readiness. And, finally, we are enhancing our
    partnerships with the intelligence community, our allied
    partners, and the commercial space industry.
        I thank you for your support, and I look forward to working
    with Congress as we continue to focus on our national security
    space posture.
        I am privileged, absolutely privileged, to be here with my
    distinguished colleagues on the panel this afternoon, and I
    look forward to your questions. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of General Raymond can be found in
    the Appendix on page 21.]
        Mr. Rogers. Thank you, General.
        The Chair now recognizes Betty Sapp, Director of the
    National Reconnaissance Office.

          STATEMENT OF HON. BETTY J. SAPP, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL
                         RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

        Ms. Sapp. Thank you, Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member
    Cooper, and distinguished members of the committee. It was a
    great pleasure to host you and your committee members out at
    the NRO, and it is a great honor for me to be here today.
        The NRO has a very clear and a very critical mission for
    the Nation: We provide the space-based ISR [intelligence,
    surveillance, and reconnaissance] capabilities necessary to
    assure the U.S. an information and operational advantage.
        The NRO is structured for success. We are small and
    streamlined with end-to-end mission responsibility. We have
    enjoyed success in all aspects of that end-to-end mission. Our
    research and development team has developed and matured the
    next-generation technology necessary to stay ahead of changing
    targets and threats, fill current mission gaps, and develop new
    partnerships. Our acquisition teams are delivering the
    capabilities our users need on time and within budget.
        In 2017, for the ninth consecutive year, we achieved a
    clean independent audit opinion, demonstrating our ability to
    properly manage and account for the resources entrusted to us.
    We had four successful launches last year, including our first
    on a SpaceX Falcon 9. Finally, and most importantly, we
    continued to deliver critical operational capabilities with a
    better than 99.7 percent reliability.
        Our fiscal year 2019 budget request will build on the
    successful history of delivering innovative overhead
    intelligence systems for national security with the resilience
    required for the threat environment we face. We are
    specifically focused on investments that will deliver and
    assure the space-based capabilities we will need in a future
    fight: more resilience, more capability and capacity, and more
    speed.
        Greater resilience continues to be a top priority.
    Processes and CONOPS [concept of operations] to protect our
    current on-orbit systems are being refined and tested, and our
    people are being trained to use them to full advantage. New
    systems will have resiliency features built in as an inherent
    part of their design.
        In a future conflict, resilient space must backstop and
    work in concert with resilient air assets. Our investments
    focus on achieving the capacity and the capabilities required
    by the IC [intelligence community] and the DOD [Department of
    Defense]. We are increasing persistence in the ``look rate''
    from space, reducing the gaps currently exploited by our
    adversaries.
        Finally, we require more capacity and capabilities in
    space. They must be combined to deliver that critical
    information directly to warfighters at the tactical edge and in
    the fight, and it must be delivered when they need it. Enabled
    by advances in artificial intelligence, automatic target
    recognition, machine learning, and emerging technology, the NRO
    plans to do exactly that.
        Everyone at the NRO is focused on our mission: delivering
    innovative overhead intelligence systems for national security.
    The current and projected threat environment doesn't change our
    mission, it just makes it more challenging. The men and women
    of the NRO are more than up to that challenge.
        Thank you for your support, and I look forward to your
    questions.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Sapp can be found in the
    Appendix on page 40.]
        Mr. Rogers. Thank you very much.
        The Chair now recognizes Kenneth Rapuano, Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Global Security.
        You are recognized for 5 minutes. Thank you.

     STATEMENT OF HON. KENNETH P. RAPUANO, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF
    DEFENSE FOR HOMELAND DEFENSE AND GLOBAL SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF
                                DEFENSE

        Secretary Rapuano. Thank you, Chairman Rogers, Ranking
    Member Cooper, and distinguished members of the subcommittee.
    It is an honor to appear before you today along with General
    Jay Raymond, Commander of Air Force Space Command and the U.S.
    Strategic Command Joint Force Space Component commander, and
    Ms. Betty Sapp, Director of the National Reconnaissance Office.
        Space is a warfighting domain, and just as in air, land,
    sea, and cyberspace, the Department of Defense must be prepared
    to address any and all threats to our national security. Space
    systems provide our joint force an unmatched ability to project
    power globally, respond to crises rapidly, strike swiftly and
    precisely, and command forces in multiple theaters of operation
    simultaneously.
        Our National Security Strategy and the National Defense
    Strategy prominently recognize the criticality of space and
    acknowledge the potential for conflict to extend into space.
        Our new National Defense Strategy [NDS] charts the course
    for how DOD will contribute to each of the National Security
    Strategy's four national interests. Under the new NDS, long-
    term strategic competition with China and Russia are the
    principal priorities for the Department. Addressing the
    challenges posed to our preeminence as a space power is
    fundamental to that effort.
        Today's potential adversaries and competitors have studied
    how the U.S. joint force operates, and they are rapidly
    developing capabilities designed to challenge our freedom of
    action across all domains. Those potential adversaries view
    space as an area where they could weaken our advantage and
    cause cascading impacts on our sea, air, land, and cyber
    systems that rely on our space-based capabilities. Denial of
    U.S. space advantage is a key component of their strategy.
        With this budget, the Department is making critical
    investments in capabilities necessary to protect and defend the
    space domain to ensure the mission to compete, deter, and win
    in the face of growing challenges.
        The fiscal year 2019 budget request prioritizes activities
    to address the space threat and improves on the performance of
    our space systems. Our aim remains to deliver the space effects
    to enable the combat edge our Nation and our warfighters must
    have.
        We also recognize the important need for the Department to
    be organized and structured most effectively to deliver on our
    duty to protect the Nation and its vital interests. The
    Department must accelerate, and is accelerating, its response
    to the changing dynamics of space.
        The Deputy Secretary of Defense has heard Congress'
    concerns, and consistent with the NDAA [National Defense
    Authorization Act] for Fiscal Year 2018 has already taken
    action through interim implementation guidance and looks
    forward to completing the directed studies and changes that may
    be required.
        The Department's partnership with Congress is and will
    remain absolutely critical to our success. To that end, I
    remain grateful for this subcommittee's strong support and
    interest in this vital area and its advocacy to dissuade
    aggression and establish a lethal force with the unmatched
    ability to prevail in, from, and through the ultimate high
    ground of space.
        I look forward to your questions. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Secretary Rapuano can be found
    in the Appendix on page 46.]
        Mr. Rogers. Thank you. I now recognize myself for
    questions.
        General Raymond, the space launch industry is innovating in
    some pretty incredible ways that could increase capability and
    reduce costs, like moving toward reusable launch vehicles.
    Given all of this, how does the Air Force plan to integrate
    reusability into its launch program, and does the LSA [Launch
    Service Agreement] contemplate reusability?
        General Raymond. Thank you, Congressman Rogers.
        I have gone on the record in the past saying I fully
    support reusability. In my opinion, we would be stupid not to
    go down that path. It saves us money, and it will make sure
    that we do it smartly and that we will be able to launch
    effectively, but we fully intend to capitalize on the
    advantages that the U.S. industry has with reusability.
        Mr. Rogers. Great.
        Mr. Rapuano, given President Trump's recent endorsement of
    the establishment of an independent space force, do you think
    the Department should implement that direction? Because it is
    consistent with what this committee and the House of
    Representatives has called for in the buildup to this last
    NDAA.
        Secretary Rapuano. Congressman, the President is very
    focused on outcomes. He has prioritized space, he has
    recognized the threats that have evolved and the pace at which
    they have evolved, and he recognizes it as a warfighting
    domain.
        He also is very interested in ensuring that the Department
    is best organized and equipped to achieve our vital missions in
    space, and he is very interested in exploring any options that
    can provide that enhanced capabilities.
        The Deputy Secretary, as you know, is leading the
    organizational and management review for the Department,
    consistent with the NDAA. Assessment of the space corps is one
    of those options that is getting close attention, among others.
    And he is going to be recommending that set of options that
    best ensures lasting U.S. leadership and success in space by 1
    August, per the requirement.
        Mr. Rogers. Well, I agree, the President cares about
    outcomes. But I would ask you to go back and look at his exact
    words, and they were: We should have a space force; we will
    have a space force.
        You are right, though, Deputy Secretary Shanahan is charged
    with trying to design that. I just was hoping you could show us
    a little bit of what it might look like before he does it, but
    apparently that is not going to happen.
        With that, General Raymond, yesterday in the full committee
    we had some testimony about how, if the Air Force really wanted
    to, while we are between where we are now and the establishment
    of this new space force, or space corps, whatever it is going
    to be, which will not be in the immediate future, the Air Force
    has a lot of challenges in dealing with the national security
    space and some of the threats that we face.
        It was proposed yesterday in the hearing that if the Air
    Force really wanted to demonstrate that they get it and they
    are going to get after this, they would raise the profile of
    space in the Department and put a significantly larger amount
    of money against that challenge.
        And I don't expect you to have the number today, but I
    would ask you to, at your earliest convenience, after you think
    about this a while, kind of get back to me and let me know what
    you think that number might be to enable you to have all the
    resources you need to get after the challenge fast.
        General Raymond. I will be happy to do that.
        I will tell you, I think the profile of space is pretty
    high in the Air Force. It is very high in the Air Force. This
    budget this year represents across the FYDP [Future Years
    Defense Program] an 18 percent increase, about a $7 billion
    increase across the FYDP.
        But I will be happy to put some thought on that. I have
    been focused on this budget. I will be happy to put some
    thought on that and come back to you.
        Mr. Rogers. Thank you very much, General.
        And the Chair will now recognize my friend and colleague
    from Tennessee, Jim Cooper, for any questions he may have.
        Mr. Cooper. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I welcome the stronger Air Force budget. But I will defer
    questions for the closed session, in view of the lateness of
    the hour and the excellent attendance by my Democratic
    colleagues. Thanks.
        Mr. Rogers. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
    Colorado, Mr. Lamborn, for any questions he may have.
        Mr. Lamborn. Thank you. And I will have some questions for
    the closed hearing, but I have got a couple for right now. And
    I appreciate the conversations we have had recently.
        The $350 million in unfunded priorities. Now, as you told
    me earlier, there is a $7 billion increase. However, we have to
    draw the line somewhere when we are doing budgets. But if you
    could have that extra $350 million, what would we be able to
    get for that? And what are we losing by not having that?
        General Raymond. Congressman, thanks for the question.
        The way the Air Force did the unfunded priority list was,
    obviously, it is in its name, priority. So we have prioritized
    those activities that we couldn't fit into the budget, although
    $7 billion is a significant increase for space and is really,
    as I mentioned in my opening comments, a bold shift towards
    warfighting and being able to protect and defend those assets
    in a contested domain.
        But I will be happy to come back to you and talk
    specifically about the items that are in the unfunded priority
    list, but they give Congress options in a priority order to
    help accelerate some of the things that we already have in the
    program.
        Mr. Lamborn. Okay. Well, we can continue that discussion.
        I would also like to ask you about the increased need for
    space warfighting training. Now that everyone has recognized
    that space is contested and it is a warfighting domain, we need
    to have the personnel who have the training necessary to excel
    in that domain.
        What are your thoughts on that?
        General Raymond. It is a key focus area for us. I have been
    focused on that since the day I took command, the professional
    development and training.
        We have made some pretty significant strides towards that
    end. We have implemented the Space Mission Force, which has
    allowed us to enhance the advanced training of our crews. We
    have implemented what we call Space Flags [exercises],
    analogous to Red Flags, to increase the focus of that as well.
        And what I would suggest to you, it is not just about space
    training. It is about multi-domain training. And really what I
    am focusing on is making sure that we have space operators that
    are very smart in joint warfighting, and that we have joint
    warfighters that are also very smart in space, because it is
    that multi-domain collaboration and strength that is going to
    carry us to where we need to be in the future.
        We also in this budget spent about approximately $175
    million to get after additional trainers, exercises, and war
    games.
        Thank you.
        Mr. Lamborn. That is really good to see.
        And, lastly, for any one of you, can we do a better job of
    partnering with the commercial sector, with private industry,
    to accomplish our goals? And, if so, how?
        General Raymond. I don't want to monopolize this hearing, I
    will deflect, but I am passionate about this as well. We are
    working very closely with our commercial customers, and I think
    this will provide us significant advantage going forward.
        One of the things that we have done on this budget, the
    Enterprise Space Battle Management Command and Control program
    is focused on building open standards in a consortium approach
    to energize and harness all of industry focusing on these
    issues. It is a key priority for us going forward, and you will
    see that reflected in our budget.
        Mr. Lamborn. That is great.
        And either one of you.
        Ms. Sapp. The NRO has always been about 95 percent of its
    budget in industry, on contract. So we have always been a close
    partner with industry today. And as new commercial providers
    are coming in, certainly we are looking at every way to team
    with them and leverage our capabilities.
        Secretary Rapuano. I would just add that this is a real
    intense focus of the Deputy Secretary of Defense, who is
    leading the reform efforts in the Department, obviously a big
    component focused on acquisition. And he is all about
    leveraging the commercial sector more effectively, and I think
    that we are going to be seeing a number of reforms in that
    area.
        Mr. Lamborn. Okay. These are excellent things. Thank you
    for the great work that you are doing.
        Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Rogers. The gentleman yields back.
        The Chair will pause for a little housekeeping that I
    overlooked at the beginning of the hearing.
        We have two members of our full committee that are with us
    today that are not members of the subcommittee. I would like to
    ask unanimous consent that Mr. Moulton of Massachusetts and Ms.
    Bordallo of Guam sit in on this hearing and be able to
    participate.
        Without objection, so ordered.
        The Chair now recognizes Mr. Norcross from New Jersey.
        Mr. Norcross. Thank you, Chairman.
        General Raymond, you have had comments, as it started from
    this, how we are trying to get caught up and take advantage,
    whether it is private industry and others. The Air Force
    publicly says they want to move fast and get effective
    capabilities deployed, which is why section 1610 of the final
    NDAA for 2018 conference agrees, requires that the United
    States Air Force operationalize existing best-of-breed
    commercial space situational capabilities, but not later than
    May 30, 2018.
        What is the plan to operationalize the best-of-breed
    commercial SSA [space situational awareness] capabilities by
    this required deadline? And this has been ongoing.
        General Raymond. Yes, it has been. In fact, we leverage
    them pretty heavily today. If you look at the C2 [command and
    control] system that we have today, called the JSpOC [Joint
    Space Operations Center] Mission System, commercial
    capabilities are leveraged pretty significantly in that.
        We also have stood up a capability in Colorado Springs,
    called Catalyst Campus, where we are bringing commercial
    applications in. The commercial companies can test them out
    there, and then we will roll them into our ops center to
    facilitate their integration into our operations.
        And then, finally, as I mentioned earlier, in the
    Enterprise Space Battle Management Command and Control, what we
    are trying to do is not to have just one company be a winner
    and then to have a whole bunch of losers. We are trying to
    energize the entire industry by developing open standards and
    having a consortium-based approach where everybody can play.
        And that is what we are doing. We will have a prototype
    done by 2021, and I am eager to get all of commercial industry
    wrapped around those standards.
        Thank you.
        Mr. Norcross. But let me follow up with that.
        Then General Buck, commander of the Joint Forces Command,
    talked about this and said our capabilities were at a 3. Why
    are we not doing this quicker, not waiting for everybody to
    come onboard, but take advantage of what we have now, and then
    build up to that?
        General Raymond. I must not have been clear. We are taking
    advantage now. We will continue to take advantage now. This is
    a future C2 system going forward that we are building the
    entire system off of the commercial open standards. But we are
    leveraging those today, and will continue to leverage
    commercial industry hard as we look to fill some of the gaps
    that we have.
        Mr. Norcross. I will wait for the closed session when we
    can get into it in a little bit more detail.
        I yield back.
        Mr. Rogers. The gentleman yields back.
        The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Georgia, Mr.
    Hice.
        Mr. Hice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I am not sure exactly who this question goes to, and I do
    have some others for our closed session, but just a couple
    right now.
        Does the DOD need to be more assertive about blocking
    potential acquisitions of U.S. companies by China in the space
    industry in ensuring security here?
        Secretary Rapuano. Congressman, that is a key issue. Thank
    you for raising it.
        This is an issue that both the Secretary and the Deputy
    Secretary have raised, looking at supply chain, looking at the
    implications of foreign ownership or investment in capabilities
    that are critical or essential to national security.
        I believe you are familiar with the CFIUS [Committee on
    Foreign Investment in the United States] process in which these
    types of transactions are assessed by an interagency committee,
    accessing intelligence and other sources of information to make
    assessments on the relative risk associated with these
    transactions.
        So I think that we are definitely focused within the
    Department on the ways in which adversaries can all too easily
    acquire capabilities or knowledge that they could use against
    us, and we are actively involved in that process.
        Mr. Hice. I am really glad to hear that.
        So are you saying then that the DOD is responsible or
    authorized to block these kinds of acquisitions?
        Secretary Rapuano. The DOD is involved in the interagency
    process that makes conclusions on transactions that are
    concerning and then rise to the CFIUS process.
        Mr. Hice. So they have significant influence in the
    decision?
        Secretary Rapuano. We are a pretty significant voter in the
    process.
        Mr. Hice. Great. One other quick question, then I will
    defer my other questions.
        During a Red Flag event, or some other kind of training
    event, are these services taking into account the possibility
    of a partial loss of our satellite communications?
        General Raymond. Absolutely. We embed our space operators
    into those exercises. The Space Flag exercise that we also
    stood up complements that. But we exercise that routinely.
        Mr. Hice. Okay. Great. So are any of your offices, or all
    of your offices, involved in crafting those type training
    exercises?
        General Raymond. Sir, that falls under my responsibility to
    organize, train, and equip at Air Force Space Command. We work
    that routinely.
        Mr. Hice. Okay. Very good.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will yield back.
        Mr. Rogers. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from
    Washington State, Mr. Larsen, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to yield
    my time to Mr. Moulton from Massachusetts.
        Mr. Rogers. The gentleman yields to Mr. Moulton from
    Massachusetts. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized
    for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Moulton. Thank you, Mr. Larsen.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        General Raymond, China has successfully conducted test
    launches of several effective anti-satellite missiles,
    ostensibly able to destroy U.S. satellites. This development
    fundamentally alters the strategic balance between great
    powers, and it has continued to evolve in favor of China, which
    has accelerated development of space weapons.
        Public reports indicate China would be able to destroy a
    staggering number of U.S. satellites in the opening days of a
    potential conflict, thereby disabling many of the capabilities
    we have come to rely on in the United States military--GPS
    [Global Positioning System], surveillance, targeting,
    communications, and more.
        I will be following up on this in the classified setting,
    but can you just give us an overview of what our strategy is to
    counter those capabilities? And echoing some of the other
    questions we have heard from the committee, are we really
    committing enough resources to this development that could
    truly fundamentally alter the strategic balance?
        I would add that Ms. Sapp talked about the development of
    AI [artificial intelligence] as one of the things that we are
    investing in. I mean, China has made a commitment to be the
    world's leader in AI by 2030. You have never heard such a
    commitment from us.
        I am just concerned that we are falling behind and this is
    a place where, because of the strategic implications, we
    clearly have to lead.
        General Raymond. Space is a warfighting domain, just like
    air, land, and sea, and it has become very contested, as you
    talked about, everything from low-end reversible jamming to the
    high-end direct ascent ASAT [anti-satellite weapon] that was
    demonstrated in 2007, which you highlighted in your question.
        One of the things is we have a strategy, and really it is a
    strategy that we share between the NRO and the Department of
    Defense. We have a vision. We took that vision and we wrapped
    an operational concept around it, called the space warfighting
    CONOPS. We have trained and exercised for that, and there are
    several lines of effort that we are doing.
        Again, if you are responsible for operations in the
    warfighting domain, you have to have the ability to have domain
    awareness, SSA, so we are enhancing that in this budget.
        You have to have the ability to command and control, and so
    we are invested significantly in our command and control
    capabilities.
        You have to have defendable architectures, and in this
    budget we have made a significant shift towards having those
    architectures that we are able to defend.
        You have to have partnerships, just like we have in all
    other aspects of joint warfare.
        Mr. Moulton. If I may interrupt, that all sounds wonderful.
    But the question really is, are those investments significant
    enough? Are they significant enough to compete with our great
    power adversaries, who have really stuck their flag in the sand
    and said, ``This is where we will be in 2020 and 2030''?
        General Raymond. So my view is that we still have the best
    space capabilities in the world, operated by the best airmen.
    We have competitors that are moving very quick, and we need to
    pick up the pace to stay ahead of that threat.
        I am comfortable that the $7 billion that we have invested
    across this FYDP is going to shift and provide us the
    capabilities that we need to stay ahead of that threat as we
    continue down the path.
        Mr. Moulton. Director Sapp or Assistant Secretary Rapuano,
    would you like to add to that?
        Ms. Sapp. I will just agree with General Raymond that I
    think we have not only plans, but programs in place to defend
    against the weapons you are talking about. I think we could
    give you some more detail in the classified follow-on.
        I would also mention that we have been working automated
    intelligence, automated target recognition for quite some time
    and have made real progress. In fact, it is in operations
    today.
        Secretary Rapuano. I think it is well covered by General
    Raymond and Director Sapp. And just to reiterate, the emphasis
    is that we are going to be able to prevail in all of those
    domains critical to our national security in achieving our
    objectives.
        Mr. Moulton. Thank you.
        Thank you very much, Mr. Larsen.
        Mr. Chairman, thank you.
        Mr. Rogers. The gentleman yields back.
        The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Colorado, Mr.
    Coffman, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Coffman. Mr. Chairman, I will follow up with these
    questions in the classified setting, as well.
        General Raymond, it is my understanding that the
    traditional Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle, EELV, providers
    are contracted under Federal Acquisition Regulations, the FAR,
    15, while new entrants are contracted under FAR 12. It is also
    my understanding that FAR 12 is a more commercial way of doing
    business than FAR 15.
        Could you explain the difference in procuring launch
    services using FAR 12 versus FAR 15? And does DOD have the same
    insight on cost, as well as oversight on mission assurance,
    when using both of these contracting methods, or is one more
    stringent than the other?
        General Raymond. Congressman, first of all, it is good to
    see you. I am going to take that for the record. I am not an
    acquisition background guy, and I just don't know the answer to
    your question. So I will be happy to take it back and talk to
    our acquisition professionals and get you an answer.
        [The information referred to was not available at the time
    of printing.]
        Mr. Coffman. Okay.
        At the hearing yesterday, General Raymond, about space
    warfighting readiness, the panelists made it quite clear that
    our Nation's space warfighting construct must adapt to the
    threats we face today and in the future. It is evident that the
    Air Force recognizes this.
        However, the new start program to SBIRS [space-based
    infrared system], the Next-Generation Overhead Persistent
    Infrared, is not clear. As the panelists put it, ``It is not
    clear how the alternative is substantially a different
    approach,'' unquote. Quote, ``The budget request is not more
    resilient,'' unquote. And, quote, ``Disaggregating does not
    necessarily improve missions or deterrence,'' unquote.
        Could you comment on that?
        General Raymond. I will be happy to comment on it.
        It is more resilient. In fact, the NDAA required STRATCOM
    [U.S. Strategic Command] and SSDP [Space Security and Defense
    Program] to do an assessment of that. They have done that. And
    I will be happy to talk to you more in the closed session about
    it.
        Mr. Coffman. Okay.
        Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Rogers. The gentleman yields back.
        The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr.
    Garamendi, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Garamendi. I will pass and hopefully get to the
    classified ASAP [as soon as possible].
        Mr. Rogers. We have no further Republicans.
        The Chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from Guam, Ms.
    Bordallo.
        Ms. Bordallo. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        And thank you to our witnesses for being here today.
        General Raymond, there is an urgent need to rapidly
    reconstitute and replenish critical space capabilities to
    preserve continuity of operations capability. So can you speak
    to some of the investments in low-cost responsive launch
    options that you would recommend the Department pursue to
    fulfill this need?
        General Raymond. Thank you. And it is great to see you
    again.
        We have invested in this budget pretty significantly in
    small launch options. I think it is really important, as you
    said, for replenishment.
        We have gone through a period of this before. We did this
    in the early 1990s when we first launched satellites called
    Iridium, where there is a large constellation of smaller
    satellites, and there were a lot of companies that were being
    developed to do the replenishment launches.
        As you look to new space and constellations that are going
    to be of significant size, I think it is going to be important,
    and we have invested in that in this budget.
        Ms. Bordallo. All right. This next question is important to
    me, and I guess any of you could answer, if you could.
        Today, nearly all U.S. national security satellites are
    launched from fixed coastal U.S. launch sites that could easily
    be disrupted. These fixed sites also provide predictable
    locations from which adversaries could get clues to discern
    U.S. capabilities.
        Is the Department of Defense developing more launch sites
    using new commercial capabilities to address these weaknesses
    and support a rapid, responsive, and resilient launch
    capability?
        I am a Representative from Guam, and I will say here that
    there have been inquiries about space capabilities in our
    territory from commercial investors. Very recent were these
    visits, and they are very ambitious to begin operations.
        So could any of you comment on this?
        General Raymond. Yes. There are commercial launch sites
    that are available today. We have got them. On our fixed bases,
    we have commercial sites. We also have different space ports in
    New Mexico, in Alaska, in Florida, and in Virginia. So there
    are multiple space ports.
        Ms. Bordallo. Is Guam on the list, General?
        General Raymond. We would be happy to put Guam on the list,
    because I think it is important. I think resiliency is
    important.
        I will say, one of the big things that has happened over
    the course of the last year, which is significant, and it
    doesn't get a lot of press, and that is the move to autonomous
    flight termination systems in the autonomous ranges.
        So today every time SpaceX does a launch, they do it
    autonomously. So we have to have the ability to protect
    populations. You have to have the ability to blow up a rocket
    if it were to go astray. We typically have radars and telemetry
    dishes and command destruct antennas and a bunch of contractors
    working that.
        Today with SpaceX, when they launch, it is all done
    autonomously. That helps reduce the range infrastructure and
    make these, in my opinion, a more resilient capability going
    forward.
        Ms. Bordallo. Are there any other comments from the other
    witnesses? Are you aware of the inquiries that have been made
    to Guam? They have been to Guam to look at, of course, our
    Andersen Air Force Base and the Guam International Airport. So
    is anyone aware of that?
        Ms. Sapp. Some of the commercial launch providers are going
    to do their own assessment as to what makes sense for their
    business, and we are going to use those commercial launch
    providers. So we are going to go where they end up going.
        Ms. Bordallo. Well, they were very interested in Andersen
    Air Force Base, so I just thought maybe.
        So I have no further questions, and I yield back, Mr.
    Chairman.
        Mr. Rogers. The gentlewoman yields back.
        Seeing no further questions, we will--oh, he showed up.
    Slipped out on me and came back.
        The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from the great State
    of Alabama, Mr. Byrne, for any questions he may have.
        Mr. Byrne. Mr. Chairman, I did show up. I am glad you
    noticed.
        General, I hate to keep you for a few more minutes, but my
    questions really pertain to personnel. A lot of times when we
    talk about space we like to get talking about the technological
    stuff, but it is the people, as you know better than I do, that
    matter.
        Do you think you have the proper number of service members
    to do this? Do you believe you are efficiently manned to shift
    from a peacetime operational tempo to a warfighting one? And
    are we effectively utilizing the skills of these service
    members to capitalize on their talents?
        General Raymond. First of all, thank you for the question.
    And it gives me a chance to brag on the airmen that I am
    privileged to lead. We have got the world's finest airmen, and
    they are doing spectacular work for our Nation and our joint
    force.
        The Air Force has more mission than it does resources. And
    so, as part of that larger issue, looking forward to a
    contested environment, I do think there is room for growth.
        In fact, the Secretary of the Air Force and Chief of Staff
    of the Air Force have tasked me to conduct a study, which we
    are doing as we speak, to look at the structure, the size, the
    scope, the scale, the professional development aspects of those
    airmen, and I will report back to them this summer.
        Mr. Byrne. Do you think that you can shift, with your
    present number, from a peacetime scenario to a wartime
    scenario? Would you have to have an increase to do that?
        General Raymond. We operate 24/7, 365. It is global
    operations all the time. I am very comfortable that I have got
    the capabilities that I need today.
        Mr. Byrne. Okay. And you would be unusual if you weren't
    like everything else in the private sector, or in the public
    sector, and that is the rapidly changing need for skills
    development, because technology is moving so fast.
        Do you feel like you have got the resources you need to
    continually provide the skills training these folks need?
        General Raymond. I do. And as I mentioned, one of my big
    priorities for the command is professional development and
    developing operators to be able to operate in this contested
    environment. We have completely transformed how we train our
    operators. In this budget we, again, have invested in--I think
    you might have been out--$175 million in training
    infrastructure to be able to get after the challenges that we
    currently face.
        Mr. Byrne. Well, I am a strong supporter for what you are
    doing. I ran the workforce training system in Alabama, and you
    know what we are doing in Huntsville and at Maxwell Air Force
    Base. And keeping the civilian folks coming into that was part
    of my portfolio, and I was amazed at how rapidly things were
    moving.
        And I just know that you have got that on steroids. And I
    just want to express my support for what you are doing. And if
    you think you need more resources or help from us, please let
    us know.
        General Raymond. I really appreciate your support. Thank
    you.
        Mr. Byrne. Thank you.
        I yield back.
        Mr. Rogers. The gentleman yields back.
        We will now go into recess and reconvene in the SCIF
    [Secure Compartmented Information Facility] in about 10
    minutes.
        [Whereupon, at 5:10 p.m., the subcommittee proceeded in
    closed session.]

    =======================================================================

                                A P P E N D I X

                                 March 15, 2018

    =======================================================================

    =======================================================================

                  PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                                 March 15, 2018

    =======================================================================

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    =======================================================================

                  QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING

                                 March 15, 2018

    =======================================================================

                       QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. ROGERS

        Mr. Rogers. You have been dual-hatted as both the JFSCC and Space
    Command, did you receive any additional resources to execute those
    additional missions? Do you anticipate needing any in the future?
        General Raymond. [The information was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Mr. Rogers. You frequently deferred to the classified session a
    number of issues I asked about, and in the classified session you
    frequently deferred again citing insufficient classification. This kind
    of purposeful dodging is unacceptable. In the context of deterrence,
    messaging your adversaries is an essential component of reducing
    misunderstanding and miscalculation. What are you doing to review
    appropriate classification guidance documents to ensure that you can
    share with Congress all the information necessary to perform our
    oversight in a transparent manner and message our adversaries about our
    capabilities?
        General Raymond. [The information was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Mr. Rogers. I hear conflicting things about disaggregation and the
    budget documents are equally confusing. Is disaggregation a path the
    Department and the Air Force is walking down? If so where is it
    demonstrated in your Air Force Programs?
        General Raymond. [The information was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Mr. Rogers. How is SMC reorganizing to better streamline space
    acquisitions?
        General Raymond. [The information was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Mr. Rogers. How are you executing the enhanced OT&E authorities for
    space that we provided you in last year's NDAA?
        General Raymond. [The information was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Mr. Rogers. How much of your time do you spend on space policy and
    space budget oversight in your role as ASD for Homeland Defense and
    Global Security? Do you feel you have the appropriate resources to
    oversee the DOD space policy and budget responsibilities as we
    transition to a warfighting domain?
        Secretary Rapuano. [The information was not available at the time
    of printing.]
        Mr. Rogers. What is your role in space licensing and registration
    for commercial remote sensing?
        Secretary Rapuano. [The information was not available at the time
    of printing.]
                                     ______

                       QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. LAMBORN
        Mr. Lamborn. The Wideband SATCOM AoA seeks to identify the best mix
    of military and commercial SATCOM and consider which mission support
    roles could be filled using emerging COMSATCOM capabilities.
        (1) Given the wide range of commercial SATCOM capabilities and the
    high cost and lengthy process for building and launching purpose-built
    satellites, what steps are being taken to fully leverage commercial
    space capabilities to enhance space resiliency?
        (2) Furthermore, what changes to the acquisition and budget
    processes are needed to make acquiring commercial SATCOM communications
    capabilities and integrating MILSATCOM and COMSATCOM a more enduring,
    collaborative, efficient, and timely process?
        (3) How do you envision AFSPC Commander General Raymond using his
    new authorities in this area, between the FY18 NDAA and his recent
    dual-hatting as your Joint Force Space Component Commander?
        General Raymond. [The information was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Mr. Lamborn. (1) From SATCOM, to imagery, to weather data, SSA, and
    other areas, what are you doing to build bridges and leverage our
    significant advantages in commercial space entrepreneurialism?
        (2) What barriers do our space acquisition professionals face to
    deliberately and purposefully leverage commercial space to enhance the
    resilience and capacity of our military advantages in space?
        General Raymond. [The information was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Mr. Lamborn. (1) From SATCOM, to imagery, to weather data, SSA, and
    other areas, what are you doing to build bridges and leverage our
    significant advantages in commercial space entrepreneurialism?
        (2) What barriers do our space acquisition professionals face to
    deliberately and purposefully leverage commercial space to enhance the
    resilience and capacity of our military advantages in space?
        Ms. Sapp. [The information was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Mr. Lamborn. Now that AFSPC Commander Gen Raymond is dual-hatted as
    the Joint Force Space Component Commander, what are your thoughts on
    taking that a step further and making him a sub-unified joint commander
    under USSTRATCOM?
        (1) Would this help further align in a single person authorities
    for OTE with the authorities to plan, task, and direct space forces in
    the joint warfighting domain?
        (2) Would this create ``unity of decision'' in one person, similar
    to other organizations that have outpaced the threat (i.e., SOCOM, Navy
    Submarines, Strategic Air Command)?
        (3) Do you agree that we need one person with the right authorities
    to wake up every day and think about how to have the best military
    space program in the world? How would this change help accomplish this
    goal?
        Secretary Rapuano. [The information was not available at the time
    of printing.]
        Mr. Lamborn. The Wideband SATCOM AoA seeks to identify the best mix
    of military and commercial SATCOM and consider which mission support
    roles could be filled using emerging COMSATCOM capabilities.
        (1) Given the wide range of commercial SATCOM capabilities and the
    high cost and lengthy process for building and launching purpose-built
    satellites, what steps are being taken to fully leverage commercial
    space capabilities to enhance space resiliency?
        (2) Furthermore, what changes to the acquisition and budget
    processes are needed to make acquiring commercial SATCOM communications
    capabilities and integrating MILSATCOM and COMSATCOM a more enduring,
    collaborative, efficient, and timely process?
        (3) How do you envision AFSPC Commander General Raymond using his
    new authorities in this area, between the FY18 NDAA and his recent
    dual-hatting as your Joint Force Space Component Commander?
        Secretary Rapuano. [The information was not available at the time
    of printing.]
        Mr. Lamborn. (1) From SATCOM, to imagery, to weather data, SSA, and
    other areas, what are you doing to build bridges and leverage our
    significant advantages in commercial space entrepreneurialism?
        (2) What barriers do our space acquisition professionals face to
    deliberately and purposefully leverage commercial space to enhance the
    resilience and capacity of our military advantages in space?
        Secretary Rapuano. [The information was not available at the time
    of printing.]
                                     ______

                       QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. TURNER
        Mr. Turner. Last year's NDAA FY18 Conference Report terminated the
    position and office of the Principal Department of Defense Space
    Advisor (PDSA) and transferred duties, responsibilities and personnel
    to a single official selected by the Deputy Secretary of Defense. How
    does this new change impact the Air Force, the Department, and our
    readiness in the space warfighting domain?
        General Raymond. [The information was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Mr. Turner. In order to maintain great power competition, should we
    be focusing on administrative changes such as a formation of a new
    service or the lethality of our national security space programs? Does
    our current budget reflect the latter?
        General Raymond. [The information was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Mr. Turner. In order to maintain great power competition, should we
    be focusing on administrative changes such as a formation of a new
    service or the lethality of our national security space programs? Does
    our current budget reflect the latter?
        Ms. Sapp. [The information was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Mr. Turner. During the hearing you mentioned that the President is
    ``very focused on outcomes'' and is ``interested in the Department
    [being] best organized and equipped to achieve our vital missions in
    space''. You also mentioned that Deputy Secretary Shanahan will be
    providing the best set of options, per the request of Congress, in the
    final report due in August. Given our issues with great power
    competition against Russia and China, do we have the luxury of waiting
    for the final report or are there steps that Congress should be taking
    prior to the report?
        Secretary Rapuano. [The information was not available at the time
    of printing.]
        Mr. Turner. In order to maintain great power competition, should we
    be focusing on administrative changes such as a formation of a new
    service or the lethality of our national security space programs? Does
    our current budget reflect the latter?
        Secretary Rapuano. [The information was not available at the time
    of printing.]
                                     ______

                       QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. COFFMAN
        Mr. Coffman. It is my understanding that traditional Evolved
    Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) providers are contracted under Federal
    Acquisition Regulations (FAR) 15, while new entrants are contracted
    under FAR 12. It is also my understanding that FAR 12 is a more
    commercial way of doing business than FAR 15. Please explain the
    differences in procuring launch services using FAR 12 vs. FAR 15. Does
    DOD have the same insight on costs, as well as oversight on mission
    assurance when using both of these contracting methods, or is one more
    stringent that the other? Should the Air Force consider contract
    mechanisms that ensure DOD has access to enough technical data to make
    an independent assessment in the case of an anomaly or launch failure?
    If so, what would that look like and if not, why not?
        General Raymond. [The information was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Mr. Coffman. It is my understanding that traditional Evolved
    Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) providers are contracted under Federal
    Acquisition Regulations (FAR) 15, while new entrants are contracted
    under FAR 12. It is also my understanding that FAR 12 is a more
    commercial way of doing business than FAR 15. Please explain the
    differences in procuring launch services using FAR 12 vs. FAR 15. Does
    DOD have the same insight on costs, as well as oversight on mission
    assurance when using both of these contracting methods, or is one more
    stringent that the other? Should the Air Force consider contract
    mechanisms that ensure DOD has access to enough technical data to make
    an independent assessment in the case of an anomaly or launch failure?
    If so, what would that look like and if not, why not?
        Secretary Rapuano. [The information was not available at the time
    of printing.]