[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.]