[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


.                                     
                         [H.A.S.C. No. 118-33]

                                HEARING

                                   ON

                   NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT

                          FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024

                                  AND

              OVERSIGHT OF PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED PROGRAMS

                               BEFORE THE

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                         FULL COMMITTEE HEARING

                                   ON

      DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE FISCAL YEAR 2024 BUDGET REQUEST

                               __________

                              HEARING HELD

                             APRIL 27, 2023

                                     
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                               __________

                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
53-337                     WASHINGTON : 2024                    
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------   
                                     
                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                      
                    One Hundred Eighteenth Congress

                     MIKE ROGERS, Alabama, Chairman

JOE WILSON, South Carolina           ADAM SMITH, Washington
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio              JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado               JOHN GARAMENDI, California
ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia, Vice    DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey
    Chair                            RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona
AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia                SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts
SAM GRAVES, Missouri                 SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California
ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York          RO KHANNA, California
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee          WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts
TRENT KELLY, Mississippi             ANDY KIM, New Jersey
MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin            CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania
MATT GAETZ, Florida                  JASON CROW, Colorado
DON BACON, Nebraska                  ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan
JIM BANKS, Indiana                   MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey
JACK BERGMAN, Michigan               VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida               JARED F. GOLDEN, Maine
MIKE JOHNSON, Louisiana              SARA JACOBS, California
LISA C. McCLAIN, Michigan            MARILYN STRICKLAND, Washington
RONNY JACKSON, Texas                 PATRICK RYAN, New York
PAT FALLON, Texas                    JEFF JACKSON, North Carolina
CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, Florida           GABE VASQUEZ, New Mexico
NANCY MACE, South Carolina           CHRISTOPHER R. DELUZIO, 
BRAD FINSTAD, Minnesota                  Pennsylvania
DALE W. STRONG, Alabama              JILL N. TOKUDA, Hawaii
MORGAN LUTTRELL, Texas               DONALD G. DAVIS, North Carolina
JENNIFER A. KIGGANS, Virginia        JENNIFER L. McCLELLAN, Virginia
NICK LaLOTA, New York                TERRI A. SEWELL, Alabama
JAMES C. MOYLAN, Guam                STEVEN HORSFORD, Nevada
MARK ALFORD, Missouri                JIMMY PANETTA, California
CORY MILLS, Florida
RICHARD McCORMICK, Georgia

                      Chris Vieson, Staff Director
                 Ryan Tully, Professional Staff Member
                Maria Vastola, Professional Staff Member
                    Brooke Alred, Research Assistant
                            
                            
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

              STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

Rogers, Hon. Mike, a Representative from Alabama, Chairman, 
  Committee on Armed Services....................................     1
Smith, Hon. Adam, a Representative from Washington, Ranking 
  Member, Committee on Armed Services............................     2

                               WITNESSES

    Brown, Gen Charles Q., USAF, Chief of Staff, U.S. Air Force..     6
    Kendall, Hon. Frank, Secretary of the Air Force, U.S. Air 
      Force......................................................     4
    Saltzman, Gen B. Chance, USSF, Chief of Space Operations, 
      U.S. Space Force...........................................     8

                                APPENDIX

Prepared Statements:

    Kendall, Hon. Frank, joint with Gen Charles Q. Brown and Gen 
      B. Chance Saltzman.........................................    71

Documents Submitted for the Record:

    SecAF Selects Huntsville, Alabama as Preferred Location to 
      Host USSPACECOM............................................    91
    Department of the Air Force, US Space Command Headquarters 
      Selection Process (Alabama)................................    92
    Department of the Air Force, US Space Command Headquarters 
      Selection Process (Colorado)...............................   103
    Overall Conclusions from Inspector General Department of 
      Defense Report on Evaluation of the Air Force Basing Action 
      Process (DODIG-2022-096)...................................   114
    Department of the Air Force response to Mr. Gaetz............   117

Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:

    Mr. Bacon....................................................   121
    Mr. Banks....................................................   121
    Mr. Fallon...................................................   123
    Mr. LaLota...................................................   123
    Mrs. McClain.................................................   122
    Ms. Sewell...................................................   123
    Mr. Strong...................................................   123
    Mr. Turner...................................................   121

Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:

    Mr. Bergman..................................................   138
    Mr. Davis....................................................   145
    Mr. Fallon...................................................   143
    Mr. Finstad..................................................   145
    Mr. Gaetz....................................................   136
    Mr. Gallagher................................................   135
    Mr. Garamendi................................................   128
    Mr. Lamborn..................................................   129
    Ms. Mace.....................................................   144
    Mrs. McClain.................................................   142
    Dr. McCormick................................................   146
    Mr. Rogers...................................................   127
    Mr. Scott....................................................   130
    Ms. Sherrill.................................................   136
    Ms. Stefanik.................................................   134
    Ms. Strickland...............................................   141
    Mr. Turner...................................................   128
    Mr. Waltz....................................................   139
    Mr. Wittman..................................................   129
      
      
      
      DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE FISCAL YEAR 2024 BUDGET REQUEST

                              ----------                              

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                          Washington, DC, Thursday, April 27, 2023.
    The committee met, pursuant to call, at 12:29 p.m., in room 
2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Mike Rogers (chairman 
of the committee) presiding.

 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE ROGERS, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM 
         ALABAMA, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

    The Chairman. This committee will come to order.
    Today, we continue our fiscal year 2024 budget hearings 
with the Department of the Air Force.
    I want to thank our witnesses for being here and their 
service to our Nation.
    The budget request for the Department of the Air Force is a 
mixed bag. First, the good news. The Space Force benefits from 
a much-needed 15 percent increase. I am pleased with the 
increased investments toward our distributed architecture in 
space. We need to transition from large, exquisite satellites 
in orbit to many smaller satellites in a variety of orbits. 
This is especially important for missile warning. 
Diversification will provide us the resilience needed to 
mitigate the threats we face from China and other adversaries.
    I also want to highlight General Saltzman's request to make 
it easier to move Guardians between Active and Reserve status. 
This is exactly the type of innovative approach to warfighting 
we envisioned when we created the Space Force. I'm interested 
in hearing from General Saltzman on the development of the 
doctrine and training required to ensure Space Force is 
postured to fight and win in space. It is a fundamentally 
different way of thinking than we have become accustomed to 
these last decades, but it is critically important.
    With respect to the Air Force budget, the President is 
requesting a meager 2.9 percent increase. Given today's record 
inflation, the President's budget effectively cuts the Air 
Force by 3 percent. That will make it harder for the Air Force 
to manage risk in the near term, especially as it focuses 
investments on long-term modernization. We should be divesting 
of capabilities that aren't survivable in a fight against 
China, and we should be using those savings to invest in 
advanced technologies capable of prevailing in that conflict.
    And while I support that approach, we should also ask tough 
questions about how much risk we are absorbing and for how 
long. Because the fact is, many of these advanced technologies 
are a decade away. Based on the testimony we have heard from 
military leaders over the last year, the CCP [Chinese Communist 
Party] is unlikely to wait 10 years before they force a 
conflict on us. We need to accelerate planned upgrades to our 
existing fighters, especially the F-35s. We also need to more 
quickly field promising new technologies, such as unmanned 
collaborative drones, and pair them with our existing fleet to 
enhance capabilities.
    Fielding new capability in the short term is the key to 
maintaining a credible deterrence. Unfortunately, the Air Force 
is missing an opportunity to do that with its tanker 
acquisition strategy. Frankly, it is foolish to double down on 
a platform that has consistently failed to meet basic 
requirements and won't meet them for another 5 years, if we are 
lucky. Relying on a tanker that has trouble refueling when it 
is too cloudy or too sunny is a tremendous risk. This committee 
will be conducting vigorous oversight of the tanker program and 
the Air Force's acquisition strategy.
    This committee will also be closely monitoring progress on 
the modernization of our nuclear triad. I'm pleased the budget 
continues to fully fund Sentinel and the B-21 programs. These 
programs have received strong bipartisan support from Democrats 
and Republicans, and the White House and Congress, because we 
all understand how critical they are to our national security. 
I look forward to working with my colleagues to support triad 
modernization and accelerate infrastructure needed to support 
it. I also look forward to hearing from General Brown on how we 
can best expedite the fielding of enhanced capability to 
mitigate near-term risk.
    Finally, Secretary Kendall, we are beyond the point of 
frustration with the continued delay in announcing the final 
decision on SPACECOM [U.S. Space Command] basing. Twenty-seven 
months ago, the Air Force made the right decision to go with 
Huntsville, Alabama. Twelve months ago, the GAO [Government 
Accountability Office] and the DOD [Department of Defense] 
Inspector General affirmed that decision. There is only one 
State still protesting, and that State came in fifth in the 
competition. The political games must end. Your continued 
handwringing is delaying SPACECOM's full operational capability 
and undermining our ability to defend this Nation. You need to 
end this charade and make that announcement soon.
    With that, I yield to my friend, the ranking member, for 
any comments he may have.

STATEMENT OF HON. ADAM SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM WASHINGTON, 
          RANKING MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

    Mr. Smith. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I will not 
touch that last topic you raised.
    [Laughter.]
    I am not that State. So, plenty to fight about, not my 
direct fight.
    I do want to point out--welcome our witnesses.
    And we have a fairly steady drumbeat on this committee 
about disappointment with the size of President Biden's defense 
budget. Yesterday, the House voted to go back to the fiscal 
year 2022 level. All of the Republicans voted for it; no 
Democrats voted for it. So, you are saying the budget isn't big 
enough, but we should cut it by 20 percent.
    Now, I understand that there is this fantasy that somehow 
defense will be held harmless in this conversation, but it is a 
fantasy. Defense is roughly 55 percent of the discretionary 
budget. If you are going to meet the ridiculous number that was 
set yesterday by the House, you would have to cut--if you are 
going to meet it without touching defense--you are going to 
have to cut everything else by roughly 50 percent. That is not 
going to happen.
    So, if you are in favor of going back to the fiscal year 
2022 defense budget numbers, I mean, that is an argument we can 
have. We can have that discussion. But to be in favor of going 
back to the fiscal year 2022 discretionary budget numbers, and 
then to complain that we are not spending enough in the 
discretionary budget, I mean, it plays politically, if you are 
careful enough about how you do it, but in the real world that 
we are all going to have to live in pretty soon--like June, 
when the debt ceiling gets hit, and certainly, October 1, when 
this year's fiscal budget runs out--then we are going to have 
to start occupying the real world, instead of the political 
one, pretty soon, or defense is going to pay a very high price 
for that. Because that sort of ``cognitive dissonance,'' if you 
will--there is another more blunt way of describing that, by 
the way, but let's just call it ``cognitive dissonance'' for 
the moment--is going to cripple defense.
    And I applaud the chairman. At every hearing, the other 
thing he does--rightly so--is to have every witness up here 
tell us how horrible a CR would be for the Department of 
Defense. Continuing resolutions--also, by the way, horrible for 
every aspect of the discretionary budget. All right? It is not 
just defense that gets killed by the fact that you are forced 
into a CR, where you can't start any new programs and you can't 
get rid of any old programs, and you are frozen at a budget 
number. It is a horrific way to run any--any--financial entity. 
Okay? But let's start to have a more realistic conversation 
about this, or we are going to drive the whole thing off the 
cliff in a way that is going to be devastating to defense.
    And that sort of leads into the other opening comments I 
have. You gentlemen have an enormously difficult challenge. 
Modernization is so important right now, certainly in 
everything the Air Force does in space and the traditional Air 
Force as well. You have to modernize while maintaining our 
current capability. You have to make a lot of decisions about 
which systems to invest in that are going to meet both of those 
very difficult challenges.
    So, you don't need massive budget cuts and trying to deal 
with a CR, or just guessing whether or not we are going to have 
a government shutdown or a CR, as you are trying to meet those 
very difficult challenges.
    I do really appreciate what the Space Force is doing. I 
appreciate the chairman, who he and Congressman Cooper had the 
vision way back that we needed to create the Space Force and 
how it is important to support it. I look forward to hearing, 
now that we are--what, about 5 years into it, 4 years? No, less 
than that, 4 years into it. How is that going? Has it been a 
difficult transition? I think you have done an excellent job. 
We want to hear how that is working going forward and what your 
key modernization priorities are. I think the chairman 
described them quite well in terms of moving to more 
distributed systems; using, taking advantage of commercial 
opportunities--all to put us in a better position going 
forward.
    And then, on the Air Force side, we have got a lot of big 
decisions that we are in the middle of--certainly, on the F-35 
engine, and would like to get an update on the tanker, how that 
is going. Those decisions have somewhat been made.
    But those modernization decisions are going to be key in 
figuring out how we can meet our current needs and be ready for 
the future. So, definitely want to hear how we are handling all 
of those challenges.
    And then, lastly, the recruitment issue, which is a 
challenge across all services, some more than others. But would 
really love your thoughts on what we can do to make sure that 
we are able to continue to attract and retain the talent that 
we need. I know this is a particular problem for pilots. We 
have put some incentives in there, but what more can we do to 
make sure that we can recruit and retain the airmen and 
Guardians that we need in order to meet our national security 
needs?
    And with that, I yield back. Thank you.
    The Chairman. I thank the ranking member.
    I would like to introduce our witnesses.
    First, we have the Honorable Frank Kendall, Secretary of 
the Air Force. General C.Q. Brown, Jr., is Chief of Staff of 
the Air Force, and General Chance Saltzman, Chief of Space 
Operations.
    Welcome to all of our witnesses.
    Secretary Kendall, we will start with you. You are 
recognized.

 STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK KENDALL, SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE, 
                         U.S. AIR FORCE

    Secretary Kendall. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member Smith, members of the 
committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today on 
the Department of the Air Force's fiscal year 2024 budget 
submission.
    Approximately 1 year ago, I began my testimony before this 
committee with a quote from General Douglas MacArthur reminding 
us that ``The history of failure in war can almost always be 
summed up in two words: Too late.'' That warning is even more 
valid today.
    Over the past year, under the rubric of seven Department of 
the Air Force operational imperatives, the Department of the 
Air Force has worked to define the capabilities and 
technologies that we need, along with the programs and 
resources required, to deter, and if necessary, prevail over 
our pacing challenge--China, China, China.
    In fiscal year 2024, we are requesting, approximately, $5 
billion as a direct result of this work and over $25 billion 
for operational imperative-related investments. War is not 
inevitable, but successfully deterring conflict is heavily 
dependent on our military capabilities.
    In our fiscal year 2024 budget request, there are 
approximately 20 completely new or significantly rescoped 
program elements, some of which are classified, that we must 
develop, produce, and field if we desire to maintain the air 
and space superiority that America and our allies have counted 
on for decades. In order to proceed with any of these programs, 
the Department of the Air Force needs timely authorizations and 
appropriations. The Department is ready to move forward with 
the next generation of capabilities we need, and there is no 
time to lose.
    In addition to those new starts or enhanced efforts, the 
fiscal year 2024 budget includes requests for additional 
resources to increase production and accelerate development of 
programs essential to the DAF's [Department of the Air Force's] 
missions, as defined in the National Defense Strategy.
    For the strategic triad, we have fully funded the Sentinel 
ICBM [intercontinental ballistic missile], the B-21 Raider 
bomber, the Long-Range Standoff Weapon, and our nuclear command 
and control programs.
    For the conventional forces, we are increasing production 
of both the F-35 and F-15EX. The Next Generation Air Dominance 
program is funded to move forward. And as indicated last year, 
an uncrewed Collaborative Combat Aircraft program of record is 
fully funded in our fiscal year 2024 request.
    We are also continuing the acquisition of sensor programs, 
like the E-7 Wedgetail and the new, resilient missile warning 
and tracking space program.
    As we indicated last year, hard choices have been required 
to move the Department into the future. We deeply appreciate 
the support of Congress and this committee for the divestitures 
we requested last year. This year, we must continue the 
divestment of the over 40-year-old A-10 Warthog. This program 
has served us well, but is absorbing resources needed for 
higher priorities. We ask for Congress' continued support for 
this and other identified changes we must make to field the 
forces we need to be successful against our pacing and other 
challenges.
    But, of course, it isn't all about the equipment we need to 
perform our missions. It is also about the men and women who 
serve in the total force--Active, Guard, Reserve, and those who 
support them. We appreciate Congress' support for a 4.6 percent 
pay raise last year. This year, we are asking for a 5.2 percent 
pay increase--the largest 1-year increase we have ever 
requested.
    In line with Secretary Austin's Taking Care of People 
initiative, we are continuing to invest in child development 
centers and housing to meet the highest priority needs of our 
airmen, Guardians, and their families.
    Like the other services, with the exception of the Space 
Force, the Air Force faces challenges in recruiting in a 
generation where the propensity to serve is the lowest that we 
have seen in decades. We are removing barriers to service to 
ensure that everyone with a capability and desire can serve to 
their full potential.
    Under the National Defense Strategy, we are also 
strengthening teams, both in the joint force and with our 
allies and partners. Building these relationships and investing 
in our ability to work together is the essence of integrated 
deterrence. The effectiveness and importance of these 
relationships are on display in Europe today, where NATO [North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization] is stronger than ever. I recently 
returned from the Indo-Pacific, where I met with a number of 
our teammates and where I participated in the groundbreaking 
event for one of the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement air 
bases in the Philippines. Our budget request also supports 
strengthening our partnerships around the world, especially 
when we confront our pacing challenge and most acute threats.
    I started by talking about the value of time, and I will 
finish by highlighting a legislative proposal that can save us 
up to 2 years of that valuable time. Our proposal would expand 
rapid acquisition authority, so that military departments can 
move quickly and respond to emerging threats and take advantage 
of evolving technology.
    Within reasonable constraints, this legislative proposal 
would allow progress on compelling national security needs that 
would otherwise be delayed until the next submission and 
approval of the President's budget. I have been pushing this 
reform for decades, and we look forward to working with the 
Congress on this proposal.
    In closing, I believe the Department of the Air Force is 
well-postured to move into the future. Our work to define that 
future is not complete, but has produced compelling results 
that are reflected in our fiscal year 2024 budget submission.
    We look forward to your questions today. We would like to 
offer a more complete briefing on the classified details of our 
submission at your convenience.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    [The joint prepared statement of Secretary Kendall, General 
Brown, and General Saltzman can be found in the Appendix on 
page 71.]
    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
    General Brown, you are up.

 STATEMENT OF GEN CHARLES Q. BROWN, USAF, CHIEF OF STAFF, U.S. 
                           AIR FORCE

    General Brown. Good afternoon, Chairman Rogers, Ranking 
Member Smith, and distinguished members of this committee.
    I'm proud to represent the 689,000 total force airmen 
serving our Nation. I want to thank you for your steadfast 
support for our airmen and their families.
    It is an honor to join Secretary Kendall and General 
Saltzman to testify on the fiscal year 2024 budget submission. 
This budget builds on the progress made in fiscal year 2023. It 
marks the next milestone towards the transformation of the Air 
Force to address the evolving security challenges outlined in 
the National Defense Strategy.
    As I emphasized last year, we must continue to accelerate 
change or risk losing our strategic advantage. The Department 
of the Air Force's operational imperatives describe key 
capabilities that must be attained to enable the Air Force's 
modernization in the face of a rapidly changing threat 
environment.
    We remain dedicated to ensuring our investments and 
resources outlined in this budget submission are aligned with 
the National Defense Strategy, so the Air Force can continue to 
deter our adversaries, prevail in conflict, and execute our 
mission to ``Fly, Fight, and Win . . . Airpower Anytime, 
Anywhere.'' Not sometime in some places. Anytime, anywhere.
    This budget ensures the Air Force continues to provide the 
Nation the assurance of air superiority, the advantage of 
global strike, the agility of rapid global mobility, and you 
combine that with the adaptability of intelligence, 
surveillance, and reconnaissance, and the authority in our 
command-and-control capabilities--providing the ability to 
sense, make sense, and act. That is what we must do today and 
what we must be prepared to do tomorrow.
    In order to provide these core functions to the Nation, we 
must accelerate development of programs essential to our 
mission with this budget submission. To provide the assurance 
of air superiority, we are increasing production of F-35 and F-
15EX, as highlighted by Secretary Kendall, while the Next 
Generation Air Dominance family of systems continues 
development.
    To provide the advantage of global strike, we have fully 
funded the Sentinel ICBM and the B-21 Raider bomber. To provide 
agility and rapid mobility, we continue recapitalization of the 
KC-135 fleet with the KC-46, while moving towards the Next-
Generation Air Refueling System.
    To provide the adaptability of intelligence, surveillance, 
and reconnaissance, we are transitioning to the E-7A Wedgetail, 
complemented by other persistent connected survivable systems.
    And to provide the authority in our command and control, we 
continue to mature our Advanced Battle Management System by 
investing in digital infrastructure and modernizing our cloud-
based communications.
    Last year's budget started our necessary transformation. We 
indicated that hard choices would have to be made. Often, these 
choices are between current capacity, readiness, and future 
capabilities. Our message this year has not changed. The Air 
Force must modernize to counter strategic competitors, while 
balancing risks by divesting platforms and capabilities that 
have decreasing relevance against the pacing challenge. 
Investments in speed, agility, and the lethality of Air Force 
capabilities underwrites the joint force.
    Our airmen remain the backbone of our Air Force, and we 
have committed to ensuring their well-being and their 
development, while providing them the resources and 
opportunities to reach their full potential whenever and 
wherever the Nation calls. The Air Force is dedicated to 
reducing barriers in improving the quality of service and 
quality of life for our airmen and their families.
    Additionally, the success of airpower doesn't happen alone. 
Success is only possible through collaboration with our many 
stakeholders and teammates. I want to thank the Congress and 
this committee for their past and continued support.
    We look forward to working with you on our fiscal year 2024 
legislative priorities, like expanding rapid acquisition 
authority, furthering modernization at the Nevada Test and 
Training Range, preventing encroachment on nuclear launch and 
control facilities, and supporting pilot production through 
civilian contractor position conversion.
    While we remain the strongest Air Force in the world, we 
must continue the change required to address both today and 
tomorrow's national security threats. We must have teamwork and 
collaboration with all of our key stakeholders to accelerate 
providing our airmen the capabilities they need to deter and 
project credible combat power.
    We must have on-time appropriations and avoid a continuing 
resolution to stay ahead of the pacing, acute, and unforeseen 
challenges now and into the future. There's not a moment to 
lose.
    Thank you for the opportunity to be here with you today, 
and I look forward to your questions.
    The Chairman. Thank you, General.
    The Chair now recognizes General Saltzman for 5 minutes.

   STATEMENT OF GEN B. CHANCE SALTZMAN, USSF, CHIEF OF SPACE 
                  OPERATIONS, U.S. SPACE FORCE

    General Saltzman. Thank you. Again, Chairman Rogers, 
Ranking Member Smith, distinguished members of the committee, 
thank you for the continued support and for the opportunity to 
testify on the fiscal year 2024 submission.
    As the Space Force enters its fourth year, we continue to 
mature as an independent service and are fully delivering on 
our assigned missions. Since assuming my responsibilities in 
November, I have traveled globally to engage with Guardians, 
combatant commanders, military service chiefs from partner 
nations, to better understand where the Space Force should 
focus our efforts. Across the board, each of these groups 
emphasize the vital role space plays in strategic competition 
and integrated deterrence.
    As this committee well understands, competition and 
deterrence require investment in and modernization of 
technology, training, and partnerships. This is what the fiscal 
year 2024 budget submission for the Space Force does.
    This budget submission is directly in line with the 
National Defense Strategy and the Department of the Air Force 
operational imperatives, as the fiscal year 2024 budget will 
allow us to further efforts to develop a resilient space order 
of battle and prepare for rapid transition to a wartime posture 
against any potential adversary to fight--and win--a high-
intensity conflict.
    In conjunction with ongoing modernization projects, the 
Space Force has several new starts for fiscal year 2024 to 
support those efforts. Investing in these modernization 
projects will allow us to execute our assigned missions as we 
move forward to better posture for the emerging complexities of 
the space domain and the threat systems being fielded by 
strategic competitors.
    Space is now, undeniably, a contested warfighting domain. 
China and Russia define space as such and are investing in 
technology meant to undermine U.S. advantage in the domain. 
China, our pacing challenge, is our most substantial threat in, 
to, and from space, but Russia also remains an acute threat. 
Both present serious challenges of space capabilities that can 
track and target U.S. military forces on land, at sea, and in 
the air.
    Both can hold U.S. space assets at risk with cyber and 
electronic warfare, lasers, ground-to-space missiles, and 
space-to-space orbital engagement systems. These systems 
threaten the space architecture the Nation relies on for 
prosperity and security.
    To meet these challenges, the Space Force will prioritize 
three lines of effort.
    First, fielding ready, resilient, and combat-credible 
forces.
    Second, we will amply what I'm calling the ``Guardian 
Spirit.''
    And third, we will partner to win.
    These are directly in line with Secretary Austin's mission, 
people, and team priorities.
    In sum, this budget request is designed to deliver the 
forces, personnel, and partnerships that Space Force requires 
to preserve U.S. advantages in space.
    To build resilient, ready, combat-credible space forces, we 
are accelerating the pivot towards modern, more defendable 
satellite constellations and support infrastructure. We are 
conducting transformational force design analysis, based on 
threats, operational needs, and costs, so that we can maximize 
our budget while investing in effective missile warning, space 
domain awareness, communication, and navigation systems.
    Additionally, we are investing to ensure our networks are 
hardened to defeat cyber threats and that we have the 
operational test and training infrastructure necessary to 
prepare Guardians for high-intensity conflict.
    With our second line of effort, we are amplifying the 
Guardian Spirit by recruiting, developing, and retaining the 
best talent and empowering Guardians to succeed. Investment in 
space-centric curriculum for entry-level schools will build 
Guardians laser-focused on space operations in both competition 
and conflict. Guardians will be empowered through mission 
command to innovate and execute in these scenarios.
    Notably, and with congressional support, we plan to 
integrate the space mission elements of the Air Force Reserve 
into the Space Force to offer Guardians flexible career paths, 
including both full-time and part-time duty to retain talent 
and bring private sector experience to the force.
    A third line of effort acknowledges that the Space Force 
relies on partnerships to accomplish our mission. We are 
investing in training, education, data sharing, and integrated 
capabilities with our allies and partners. The Space Force will 
strengthen our presence in all combatant commands, where 
Guardians are already making solid connections with allies and 
partners.
    Because of its critical importance, the Space Force is 
collaborating with commercial space partners to build resilient 
capacity and leverage emerging technologies. To enhance this 
partnership, the Space Force is working to eliminate barriers 
to such collaboration, so that we can build enduring advantages 
and field these capabilities more rapidly.
    In conclusion, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the 
fiscal year 2024 budget request. The Space Force continues to 
be the preeminent military space organization in the world. Our 
adversaries seek to challenge our advantage in space, but with 
the support of this committee, our Guardians will be able to 
outwork, out-innovate, and out-compete our potential 
adversaries to ensure that we maintain that advantage. The 
fiscal year 2024 budget submission will make this possible, but 
only if Congress passes timely appropriations.
    I look forward to your questions.
    The Chairman. Thank you. I appreciate that.
    And I will recognize myself for some questions.
    And that teed up exactly where I was going. As the ranking 
member mentioned, I try to give all of you a chance to talk 
about what a continuing resolution means. Each of you testified 
about the importance of your operations, modernization, and as 
most important, the people and taking care of service members 
and their families. I would like for each of you to tell me 
what a continuing resolution would--what impact would it have 
on your ability to deal with those three priority areas?
    Secretary Kendall, we will start with you.
    Secretary Kendall. Well, in a word, it is devastating. We 
have gotten used to having a one-quarter or so continuing 
resolution, and we have made some adjustments in our planning 
to take that into account--contracting, in particular. But the 
impact is significant.
    And as we enter more completely into an era of competition 
with a strategic competitor like China, it is even more 
significant. I mentioned the numbers of new starts that we 
have. We can't start those programs until we have authorization 
and appropriations.
    We are, effectively, giving away a significant block of 
time to our adversaries to move forward while we are standing 
still. I used a quote the other day from the movie Casablanca 
where people come to Casablanca, and they sit and wait and wait 
and wait. We are waiting now. We did the work to define the 
operational imperative requirements and priorities. We spent 
most of the last year getting that into the budget and getting 
it over here to be submitted to the Congress. And now, we are 
waiting for the Congress. All that is time that we could use to 
move forward, potentially.
    A CR has that impact. It has impact on our people across 
the board. The pay raise that I talked to you about, we would 
probably find some way to keep that going. We would have to 
fund it out of other things.
    So, there are a number of impacts, and overall, I will just 
repeat--it is devastating to the Department.
    The Chairman. General Brown.
    General Brown. I would echo exactly what Secretary Kendall 
cited. It is devastating. If you have a pacing challenge, it is 
hard to stay ahead of your pacing challenge when you continue 
to take breaks because of continuing resolutions. We have got 
to keep the momentum going.
    It not only impacts what we do for our operational 
capabilities; it impacts the defense industrial base and all 
the work, our partners there. But it also impacts our airmen 
and their families, because as we start to look at each summer 
cycle for moves and pay raises, and those kinds of things, a 
lot of uncertainty for them. Our job, as leaders, is to provide 
them some level of certainty in a very uncertain world.
    The Chairman. Yes.
    General Brown. So, that creates a huge challenge for us and 
we want to continue to get the funding on time, so we can 
actually not lose buying power. Because if we lose for this, 
for the Department of the Air Force, it would be about $9 
billion of lost buying power, in addition to the new starts 
that Secretary Kendall highlighted.
    The Chairman. Yes. General Saltzman, it is obvious, since 
you would get a 15 percent increase, what it would mean to you. 
Can you give us a couple of specifics, new start programs that 
would be impeded by a CR?
    General Saltzman. Sir, it would be devastating--let me just 
start there--if we, one, had to go back fiscal year 2022 
levels, because that doubly compounds the increases we have 
gotten over the last couple of years, or could get over the 
next couple of years. It cripples the effort of the Space 
Force.
    The counterspace capabilities that we are putting in place 
to both pivot to a more resilient architecture, to protect our 
mission set, as well as be able to conduct full-spectrum 
operations that creates deterrence against our pacing 
challenge, those mostly are still in new start status. And so, 
I am losing the time and efforts that are going into that to be 
able to respond to a contested space domain under a CR.
    The Chairman. Right. Well, you know, we need to stop 
calling a CR a continuing resolution and recognize it is a 
Chinese resolution. That is the only entity that benefits if 
Congress does not do its work and get spending bills passed in 
a timely manner.
    General Brown and General Saltzman, if you all had the 
resources, which technologies would you move to the left to 
help you close the gap between what we and the Chinese would be 
doing in Taiwan?
    General Brown. Well, Chairman, I would look at several 
things. You know, part of it is just the capacity as we start 
to bring in some of our new aircraft. I would also add in 
aspects of munitions because that is an area that we have not, 
historically, funded as well. You will see in this year's 
budget we have multiyear procurement for three weapons--for 
AMRAAM [Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile], JASSM-ER 
[Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile-Extended Range], and 
LRASM [Long Range Anti-Ship Missile]. I would look at being 
able to do that.
    I would also look at the aspects of the things we put into 
the operational imperatives. And one of those for the Air Force 
is a collaborative combat aircraft to be able to ensure that 
continues forward.
    I would also highlight our nuclear portfolio to ensure it 
stays fully funded.
    And then, as we work with small companies and other parts 
of the commercial sector, the ability--with the legislative 
proposal that Secretary Kendall outlined. It is tough to keep 
them alive and those good ideas alive over 2 years. And so, to 
be able to bring those forward with that legislative proposal 
provides that opportunity to look at the advanced capabilities 
that we can bring into the Air Force much faster than we do 
today.
    The Chairman. My time has expired.
    The Chair now recognizes the ranking member.
    Mr. Smith. Thank you.
    Mr. Secretary, can you talk a little bit about the 
programs, how important it is to discontinue some of the 
programs you are discontinuing? We frequently have those fights 
here. I just want to sort of cue members up. Again, 
modernization is so important. What are you discontinuing and 
why is important that we try not to get in your way?
    Secretary Kendall. ``Continuing,'' I think was the word?
    Mr. Smith. Yes, well, programs that you are terminating to 
order----
    Secretary Kendall. Terminating?
    Mr. Smith. Well, ``terminate'' is the wrong word.
    Secretary Kendall. Divesting.
    Mr. Smith. Right, divesting from certain programs, shutting 
down certain [inaudible]. You do that in order to free up the 
money for a lot of the investments that the chairman was 
talking about.
    Secretary Kendall. It is certainly true--well, I will start 
with A-10, which I mentioned in my opening comments.
    Mr. Smith. Yes.
    Secretary Kendall. It's over 40 years old. It was in its 
time a great aircraft. It served us well. I was an advocate for 
that program for a long time, but it doesn't scare China. It 
still has some limited utility, but we have to get on with 
things which are going to be more capable relative to the 
threat.
    We have some other divestitures. We are taking out the rest 
of the AWACS [Airborne Warning and Control System], JSTARS 
[Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System], so we can 
transition to a new generation of sensors which are more 
survivable. Some of that will, of course, be in space. Some of 
that will be programs like the E-7.
    We are taking out, as an efficiency, basically, another 
tranche of T-1 trainers and we are moving to a more efficient 
training program that doesn't rely on that intermediate trainer 
step as part of the process.
    We are taking out the oldest F-22s, something we asked for 
last year. Those are not fully combat-capable. They are only 
used for training, would not be deployed in wartime against the 
pacing challenge, and basically represent a savings of about $2 
billion that we can turn to things which would be much more 
effective.
    So, I think those are kind of at the top of the list. There 
are a few others that are being replaced, as a result of 
recapitalization, primarily--F-15Cs and KC-135s, for example.
    So, does that get to your question?
    Mr. Smith. Yes, that's very good.
    General Brown, did you want to comment on any part of that 
and how important it is for the Air Force?
    General Brown. Well, it is not only--Secretary Kendall did 
an excellent job of laying out all the programs, and there is 
not anything else I think I would add to that.
    But what I would add is it is the airmen, the aspect of the 
airmen that actually operate and maintain the platforms that--
those that want to hold on are the same airmen that will 
operate and maintain the things we are trying to buy. And so, 
we have a disconnect. And they have got to be trained to 
operate those new platforms. And so, we have to phase that out. 
And if we continue to hold onto things, then those airmen are 
tied up and we can't move to the future, to those additional 
capabilities we are trying to invest in. So, we have got to do 
all that together to help us move forward.
    Mr. Smith. Terrific. Thank you, General.
    General Saltzman, when it comes to space launch--and the 
chairman again mentioned the modernization efforts there--I 
know we are coming up on, I think, the Phase 3 awards for the 
next series of launches. Competition is really important where 
that is concerned. And the advancements we have made just in 
the last, gosh, 15, a little over 15 years now, and we used to 
just have one launch provider. Now, there are multiple that are 
trying to get in.
    I just want to really emphasize the importance of trying to 
make sure that there is as much competition as possible. But 
can you talk a little bit about your Phase 3 plans; how 
competition and the better use of commercial partnering is 
going to help get us a better, more cost-effective satellite 
infrastructure?
    General Saltzman. Yes, sir. Thank you.
    I think the idea of two lanes for space launch providers is 
a solid way of both protecting the access to space for our most 
heavily mission-assured missions, our lowest risk tolerance 
missions, while opening up an avenue for highly competitive, 
emerging launch providers to also have business and be able to 
conduct launches and prove themselves as providers.
    We have to thread the needle a little bit because we have 
to have assured access for the national security launches, but 
we want to maximize competition for those emerging providers. I 
think a two-lane approach is a nice balance of those competing 
requirements.
    Mr. Smith. And I think that makes sense. And as we talked 
about yesterday when we met, you know, one of the keys to that, 
though, is on those more difficult launches. And it is not a 
bright-line distinction, as we have discussed, some to move one 
to the others.
    If you get into one of those contracts for those first 39 
launches, you get support money to make sure you are meeting 
those more difficult national security ability. And we would 
like to have as many people, as many providers, capable of 
doing that as possible. So, I hope you will consider that as 
you are finalizing the plans to make sure we maximize the 
competition in that way.
    Thank you very much. I yield back.
    The Chairman. Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Ohio, 
Mr. Turner.
    Mr. Turner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Secretary, I want to begin by thanking you for hosting 
the Intelligence Committee at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base 
for our retreat. Your contribution in making the point of the 
Department of Defense, and certainly, the Air Force, not only 
as a customer of intelligence, but a generator of intelligence, 
was well received.
    And I also want to thank you for staying and participating 
as we had the Director of the CIA [Central Intelligence 
Agency], the Director of National Intelligence, and the 
Director of NSA [National Security Agency]. It was very 
wonderful for everybody to have you and for it to be hosted by 
you. So, I appreciate that.
    My first question is going to be about the F-35 program, to 
you, Mr. Secretary. The Adaptive Engine Transition Program 
[AETP] that you were not able to avail yourself of is not in 
this budget. At the McAleese Security Conference in mid-March 
of this year, you stated, quote, ``If we had the opportunity to 
reconsider the Adaptive Engine Transition Program, I think that 
would be something I'd like to have another shot at.''
    Could you take a moment and just tell us what the AETP 
technology program would provide you? And is this a funding 
constraint? Because, obviously, that is of great concern to us 
here.
    Secretary Kendall. Well, thank you, Chairman--or 
Congressman Turner.
    And to follow up on your comment, I did enjoy that very 
much. I thought that it was a great conference you put on. So, 
thank you for doing it.
    AETP is, I think my exact expression in the conference was 
something to the effect that, if there were something I 
regretted in the budget, it was the fact that we were not able 
to afford it.
    I support the decision that we did make, which is to go 
with the ECU [Engine Core Upgrade], which is the upgrade to the 
existing engine. The AETP alternative offers significantly more 
cost--more range and fuel efficiency. It also would offer more 
takeoff power to use--drive all systems on the aircraft.
    The only service that had a strong interest in that engine 
was the Air Force, and as you know, the F-35 supports the 
Marine Corps, the Navy, and the Air Force in various versions. 
There is a question as to whether or not you could get the AETP 
into the Navy's version. It can clearly not go into the Marine 
Corps version. So, when the Department looked at this overall, 
and looked at its alternatives, the right decision for the 
Department as a whole was to go with ECU.
    The cost increment to get AETP into production is several 
billion dollars over the FYDP [Future Years Defense Program]. 
And it was just more than we could bear from the point of view 
of the Air Force trying to finance that on its own. So, that is 
where we ended up.
    Mr. Turner. All right. Those do sound like they are 
significant advances, though. I do appreciate you listing those 
for us.
    Mr. Secretary, as you noticed, because you were there, I'm 
from an Air Force town. I'm always concerned about the Air 
Force's ability to market itself. And marketing sometimes is 
used as a commercial word, but the reality is sometimes it is 
just standing up for yourself and advocating for yourself.
    I was a little concerned when I got the posture statement 
from the Air Force, and that everything was combined. You have 
got the Space Force, which the chairman spent a significant 
amount of time and advocacy for establishing, is 3 pages in 
your posture statement. And I went and looked at the Navy's, 
because I thought, you know, that is the best structure that we 
could have. The Secretary of Navy's last year was 27 pages. The 
Marines, who have been around for a while--this isn't like the 
Space Force which is brand-new--was 24 pages. And then the 
Chief of the Navy was 14 pages. And we get from all of you guys 
today 14, with Space Force being just 3.
    And I just think that there is a whole lot more we probably 
need to look at with respect to Space Force. And I have a 
couple of questions for you, General Saltzman. And I hope next 
time you guys take advantage of the opportunity for--make the 
case. Make the case for the Air Force. Make the case for each--
for the Space Force, and some of the things that you need for 
us. This is your opportunity to advocate.
    So, General Saltzman, one of the concerns I had--and I 
think everybody up here has--with respect to the Space Force is 
that you are not an agency; you are not a bureau. You are our 
new service branch. And we wanted you to have the best and the 
greatest flexibility, because we have to move at the speed of 
our adversaries, especially in space.
    Do you have the hiring flexibility that you need and do you 
have the acquisition flexibility that you need? Because those 
were two of the major tenets that the chairman was waving when 
we all marched behind and established Space Force. General.
    General Saltzman. Well, I won't pretend that we are not 
rapidly learning lessons that we need to learn as a brand-new 
service. But I think we have come a long way in our first 3 
years, starting our fourth year now. I think we have the 
processes, the procedures.
    I believe Mr. Calvelli, after he has been installed as the 
Under Secretary for--Assistant Secretary for Space 
Acquisition--has done a tremendous job laying out a new set of 
tenets for how we acquire space capabilities. I think, in the 
last 15 months, we have shown a demonstrated way to put 
capabilities on orbit faster.
    And from a hiring standpoint----
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 121.]
    The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. 
Garamendi, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Garamendi. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The minority side of this appreciates facts quickly 
delivered in concise manners. We don't need 27 pages. We need 
facts. And so, we are happy with 3 pages. Perhaps the gentleman 
reads more quickly than we do. Do not baffle us with your 
length of words.
    Secretary Kendall, I know that you are recused from 
decisions regarding the Sentinel. However, I suspect you are 
up-to-date on the scheduling problems for the Sentinel. Could 
you please tell us we are with the scheduling for the Sentinel 
and what you are doing about it?
    Secretary Kendall. Yes, I am recused because of a 
consulting relationship I had with the prime when I was out of 
government. I am monitoring the program, but I am not able to 
make any decisions on it.
    There is just an adjustment to the program that Acquisition 
Executive Andrew Hunter worked with Under Secretary LaPlante. 
The program is realizing some risk areas.
    What they are doing on the program is trying to address all 
the possible ways that the program could get in trouble, not 
just the ones currently on the critical path, and trying to 
move forward as efficiently as possible across the front.
    It is a very complicated, very large program, both of which 
adds a lot of risk to the program. It has also been a very long 
time since we did an ICBM like this. So, we don't have the sort 
of recent experience we would like to have.
    At this point, as far as I know, we are still holding to 
the schedule for IOC [initial operating capability], but my 
sense of this is that I think it is going to be a challenge to 
make that, and we have to do everything we can to get that 
system fielded on time.
    Mr. Garamendi. Thank you. Thank you, sir.
    Needless to say, the Sentinel has been of significant 
controversy in this committee, and the schedule is of utmost 
importance to us, to understand it, given that we have a no bid 
contractor, no competition contractor. So, we are going to 
watch it closely.
    My next question really goes, again, to you, and to General 
Brown. Land acquisition around our key Air Force bases is ever-
increasing. For example, Travis Air Force Base in California is 
now surrounded on three sides by some LLC [limited liability 
company]. We have no idea who the owner is. Frankly, I think 
that the Air Force, and also the other departments, need to pay 
more attention to what is going on outside the fence.
    Could you please comment about your intense interest in 
resolving these issues and making it a priority? If it is not 
your intense interest, then I shall comment again.
    Secretary Kendall. It is a concern. And we have had one 
instance where we found that the tools available to us would 
not allow us to prevent a foreign-controlled entity, basically, 
from establishing itself fairly close to one of our sensitive 
facilities.
    And we were able to work with the local community to affect 
that, so that didn't happen in that case. But that is a very 
awkward and one-at-a-time kind of an approach to a problem that 
may be much more systemic than we would like. So, it is a 
concern. I share that concern with you.
    The tools we have, like CFIUS [Committee on Foreign 
Investment in the United States], for example, which are used, 
you know, to monitor, and to block, if necessary, business 
acquisitions wouldn't apply in this situation. Quite frankly, I 
think some of our potential adversaries are pretty intelligent 
about finding options that allow them to get access to places 
where they want to be able to see what we are doing. And we 
have to be vigilant about that and develop new tools, as 
necessary, to respond to that.
    Mr. Garamendi. I would expect, sir, you, and General Brown 
to tell your base commanders, all of them everywhere, to pay 
attention to what is going on outside the fence. That did not 
happen at Travis. Perhaps nearly three-quarters of a billion 
dollars now have been spent acquiring land on all three sides, 
and very [inaudible]. I will let it go at that. Be sure that we 
are going to be following up on it.
    Finally, in the pandemic, there were advanced payments made 
to keep the contract, the prime contractors in business. It 
turns out that the reports from those of that money indicated 
that the money was not spent to advance R&D [research and 
development] or capital outlays, but, rather, to buy back stock 
and to advance the well-being of the executive officers.
    I, therefore, hope--and this will be a final comment here--
that we do not continue to advance 100 percent advance 
payments. Attention to that report would be necessary, Sir. you 
have got about--a very, very short period of time, but your 
comments?
    Secretary Kendall. Yes, we are paying attention to that. 
And I think that the Under Secretary for Acquisition is about 
to modify the rules, so that we don't advance quite as much as 
we did during COVID. That was----
    The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. 
Lamborn, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Lamborn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you all for being here.
    Secretary Kendall, overclassification of space matters is a 
serious issue that I believe is inhibiting rapid progress in 
space technology developments. Congress and this committee, led 
by Chairman Rogers, have made it clear that we want the 
Department to review classification of space programs and 
reclassify, where possible, to facilitate broader collaboration 
between industry and foreign partners, along with a more robust 
public discussion.
    I chaired a Strategic Forces Subcommittee hearing yesterday 
in which Assistant Secretary Plumb assured me that the 
Department is working on this, but I'm interested in your 
opinion on this issue and what steps you are taking to ensure 
that this review will be completed rapidly that we have called 
for and reported back to Congress.
    Secretary Kendall. We are looking at classification in 
general for several reasons. One is to enhance cooperation, as 
you said, to make it easier for people to work together. The 
major effort that we have done recently on that is through 
special access programs, where the Air Force, in particular, 
has a great many compartments and it is hard to move across 
them.
    The work we were doing on the operational imperatives, we 
had to do an extensive amount of bureaucratic work to allow 
people just to talk to each other, so they could share 
information. And that was true not just within the Air Force, 
but also across services. Now, that is for our more highly 
protected things.
    At the other end of the spectrum are things where we can 
work with our partners. I work with commercial industry much 
more effectively if we can declassify. So, we are looking at 
that as well.
    We do need to protect our sensitive information. I just saw 
a glaring example, a very visible example of what happens when 
you don't do that; what kind of things can get out.
    So, this is not a simple problem. It has a lot of different 
dimensions, and we are trying to attack all of them, 
Congressman.
    Mr. Lamborn. Okay. Thank you.
    Also, Secretary Kendall, I want to bring up this issue. I'm 
deeply concerned about moving Space Command's headquarters. I 
believe it will undermine our national security at a time when 
China and Russia are becoming more aggressive with their space 
capabilities. I understand that the command is months away from 
achieving full operational capability at Peterson Space Force 
Base in Colorado Springs. This means that we would be moving 
backwards in our efforts to organize space as a warfighting 
domain if we move the command away from Colorado Springs, 
wherever it might be moved to, because moving would delay full 
operational capability by 4 to 6 years.
    I'm encouraged by reporting that suggests that these issues 
are being seriously considered in the reevaluation of the 
previous basing decision, and I am happy to continue providing 
any information or insights that would be helpful.
    Will you commit that all relevant criteria will be weighed, 
as you make the final decision, and that we can continue having 
an open dialog on this issue?
    Secretary Kendall. Yes, Congressman, I will. I think you 
and the chairman might have slightly different points of view 
on this, but we are taking into account all the issues that 
have been raised.
    As you mentioned, final operational capability will be 
reached in the relatively short period of time, shorter than 
was originally planned. However, there is a disruption, of 
course, associated with any move. So, we are trying to take 
into consideration all possible factors that will affect the 
final decision.
    Mr. Lamborn. Very good. Thank you so much.
    And I'm going to revisit an issue that the ranking member 
brought up, General Saltzman, with the space launch Phase 3 
approach. General Saltzman, you gave a good answer to the 
ranking member.
    Secretary Kendall, I would like to see your response with 
the Phase 3 approach, and do you agree with General Saltzman? 
And what would be the advantages or disadvantages of having the 
two lanes in the Phase 3 approach?
    Secretary Kendall. Yes, I approved the acquisition strategy 
that Frank Calvelli came up with. I thought it really balanced 
a lot of competing things very well. It allows us to bring new 
entrants in fairly fluidly, but it also gives us the assured 
access for the higher risk missions that General Saltzman 
mentioned.
    You know, I talked to Mr. Calvelli this morning about this, 
in fact. We had a draft RFP [request for proposal] on the 
street. We have gotten like 2,000 comments on that draft RFP. 
He is going to go through all those. He is open to other ideas. 
That is why we put out a draft.
    At the end of the day, what happens in lane two, in 
particular, where the more high mission assurance missions--it 
depends a lot on the business case for that. And there are some 
costs associated with having an additional competitor there and 
you lose some of the economies of scale if you do that. But he 
will take a look at that and see if it makes sense.
    Mr. Lamborn. All right. Thank you.
    And, General Saltzman, anything else to add to what was 
just said?
    General Saltzman. No, sir.
    Mr. Lamborn. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    General Saltzman. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Chair now recognizes the gentleman from New 
Jersey, Mr. Norcross.
    Mr. Norcross. Thank you, Chairman, and the witnesses for 
being here today.
    And for Space Command, if you two can't figure it out, 
Jersey will take it, with no problems. We will handle it up for 
you.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Norcross. Secretary Kendall, thanks for the meetings 
that we have had, and particularly when we are talking about 
whatever you want to call it, a retirement, a divestiture. Some 
people might even call it ``a target.'' But we understand that, 
at some point, we must put an end to some of the legacy systems 
that are no longer useful. The wisdom comes in what is useful 
and what isn't.
    But, for the F-22 Block 20 that we have spoken about, I 
think it was $470 million for 2024 that you would look at for 
savings. What was slightly different about the retirement that 
was proposed is that you suggested these funds would go 
directly to NGAD [Next Generation Air Dominance], that next-
generation air flight that we are looking at.
    Can you talk to us why we are going to take an F-22 that 
some suggest is not up to the fight anymore and put it directly 
to NGAD? Are they a one-to-one switch?
    Secretary Kendall. You can make that comparison, 
Congressman, but money is fungible. You can look at different 
things that one could buy with the savings from retiring those 
F-22s. I think they are the equivalent of about 17 F-35s, 
right, if you look at the $2 billion over the FYDP. So, that is 
currency; you can talk about it, and kind of help you with the 
decision.
    NGAD is the priority right now. Getting the replacement for 
F-22 through development and into fielding is a priority for 
us, but it is not necessarily a this or that. It is not that 
straightforward. We would have to go look at our lowest 
priority thing to cut in order to fund, put additional funds 
into the F-22, and that would not be NGAD.
    Mr. Norcross. Thank you.
    Let me shift things over a little bit to what is being 
suggested you call NGAS [Next-Generation Air-Refueling 
System]--just to confuse people a little bit more. It is that 
next generation of air refueler. We right now have the KC-46 
which is coming online and is servicing the bulk of our force. 
But we are talking about looking at a stealth technology that 
would be in contested areas.
    You are going to ask for the analysis of alternatives this 
year, but can you talk to us about the technical feasibility 
and affordability of this new platform and how that would fit 
in?
    Secretary Kendall. Yes, the program you are referring to is 
NGAS, which is the Next-Generation Aerial Refueling System. As 
I have been in office, the threat continues to get more 
stressing. And one of the things we recognized this year was 
that the threat--the range of anti-air capability being fielded 
by the threat is reaching further out, and it is getting out to 
the ranges at which it threatens aircraft like our tankers.
    And to have tactical fighters that can operate effectively, 
you have got to retank them within a few hundred miles of where 
they are going to operate. So, we need tankers that can get 
into ranges where they are now threatened. Current tankers are 
not very effective at that. And a commercial-derivative tanker, 
which is a traditional route to getting one, is probably not 
going to be effective, either, although that is not off the 
table yet.
    So, the analysis you mentioned would start us down the path 
of working with industry to define options and sort out what 
our requirements were. Something that is more stealthy is 
certainly one approach that would have some interest.
    Also, if you are going to go to a new design, there is some 
new technologies that are much more efficient from a fuel-
efficiency point of view that we could possibly consider, that 
currently don't exist in the commercial world.
    So, it is a wide-open study that we are talking about at 
this point, but it is all driven by the threat. And as far as 
affordability is concerned, we don't have an option. If we are 
going to be able to operate effectively, we are going to have 
to do this. And maybe General Brown might want to comment on 
that, but I don't think we have any choice, Congressman, about 
that.
    Mr. Norcross. Thank you.
    General Brown.
    General Brown. I would just add, you know, initial 
analysis, I don't think we should constrain ourselves from an 
affordability standpoint. I think we need to look broadly at 
what the options are, and then, be able to back into what 
options we are going to be able to afford to put onto whatever 
platform ends up being the Next-Generation Air Refueling 
System. And so, I wouldn't necessarily want to constrain 
ourselves in the initial analysis to determine what 
capabilities are available.
    Mr. Norcross. Thank you, and I yield back, Chairman.
    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
    Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Scott, 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    General Brown, the Air Force originally planned to purchase 
144 F-15EXs, is that correct?
    General Brown. That is correct.
    Mr. Scott. And now, we are looking at 104?
    General Brown. That is correct.
    Mr. Scott. All right. That is a 30 percent reduction. That 
is a pretty significant reduction. These aren't aircraft that 
we are just standing down. These are new aircraft that we are 
not going to purchase, correct?
    General Brown. That is correct.
    Mr. Scott. So, I know we have talked about the A-10s a lot. 
Right now, we have 57 fighter squadrons. Seven of those are A-
10s. If we take all those down, now we are at 50. Air Combat 
Command says that we need 60 fighter squadrons.
    I mean, it seems to me, as we stand down the older 
equipment, the legacy fleets, that we are not purchasing the 
replacements for them fast enough to create the additional 
squadrons that we need.
    General Brown. Well, one part I would offer is what really 
helps us out is to have a budget on time, so we can get the 
capability.
    The other thing I would also share with you, the analysis 
done by--and what the Commander of Air Combat Command just 
talked about--is we continue to operate exactly the way we do 
today. Then, that drives one requirement. But I also think 
about how we have to operate in the future, which means we are 
going to have to do some things differently.
    And I also think about not just the platforms, but it is 
also the mix of other capabilities that come with those 
platforms. So, it is not just the fighters. It is the 
munitions; it is the sensors that go with it, to increase the 
capability of the platforms that we are purchasing going 
forward.
    If you think about how we have operated in the past, you 
know, we have had a number of--you know, back in World War II, 
it would take a number of bombers to hit one target. We are 
much more capable today, and that is the aspect of how we have 
to think about, as we balance that risk and as we work the 
demands of [inaudible] combatant commands.
    Mr. Scott. I understand that, but I just want you to know 
there is concern about taking down squadrons faster than 
standing them up. And our readiness rate on our fifth-gen 
equipment is certainly not where any of us want it to be.
    And so, my concern, when I look at all of it, is not taking 
down legacy fleets. It is not recapitalizing the fleet as a 
whole and making sure that we have the equipment that we need 
to do the things we are having to do right now; plus, take on 
China, especially if the readiness rate of our fifth-gen 
equipment doesn't improve. And so, I'm more concerned about not 
purchasing the additional F-15EXs and not creating additional 
squadrons than I am standing down some of the legacy equipment 
that we know will not last in the fight against China.
    One final question that I have, as we talk about the 
airmen, the pilots, the pilot shortages, what plans do we have 
for retention of pilots pushing forward? If we are standing 
down these units these pilots want to fly, and they are not 
going to hang around if they don't know there is going to be an 
aircraft for them to fly, how are we handling and mitigating 
the loss of our pilots?
    General Brown. One of the things, Representative Scott, is 
we are trying to--our goal is to stay ahead of the aspect of 
when our airmen decide and hit that fork in the road when their 
Active Duty service commitment is over. And so, one aspect we 
have been able to do with the legislation and the NDAA 
[National Defense Authorization Act] for 2023 was to approach 
these pilots, not in the year that they are getting ready to 
separate, but several years prior to when they are going to 
separate, when they are having that conversation with their 
family.
    The other part of this is the flexibility in that bonus, 
but also the flexibility in the assignment of preference.
    And then, the last thing I would also highlight is, it is 
not just what we do for the pilots and allowing them to fly, 
which is important, but it is also how we take care of their 
families. Because that is a real key aspect of why many of us 
decide to separate, because of the family dynamics of spouses 
with a career, education of our children, and stability. And 
so, those are the things; we have got to take care of all those 
together to ensure we retain that capability, particularly, as 
we look at how the airlines are hiring as well.
    Mr. Scott. You have got to take care of all of them, but, 
ultimately, General--and you know this as well as anybody--a 
pilot wants to fly. And so, if the commercial aircraft carriers 
are taking care of their families as well, and they have a seat 
in a cockpit of a Boeing that is a commercial airliner, we are 
going to lose those pilots.
    I appreciate you.
    The Chairman. Chair now recognizes the gentleman from 
Arizona, Mr. Gallego, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Gallego. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    General Brown, as you know, Arizona is home to Davis-
Monthan Air Force Base, which serves a crucial role in keeping 
Americans across the country safe. With almost 10,000 service 
members currently stationed there, it has hosted complex 
missions, maintains convenient access to training ranges and 
airspace, and enjoys robust support from the local community.
    My understanding is that the base is transitioning to an 
Air Force Special Operations Command power projection mission. 
Can you describe what this mission would entail from an Air 
Force perspective and what mile-markers the community should be 
aware of leading to it? Also, how can the Air Force best 
support Davis-Monthan as it makes this transition?
    General Brown. Well, first of all, we have great support 
from your delegation, but also from the community, from Davis-
Monthan. And we got a chance to engage with the leadership 
there in the community.
    Yes, as we make the transition from A-10 to this power 
projection wing, Special Operations, it is a combination of 
bringing in our MC-130s, AC-130s, light attack aircraft, in 
addition to the EC-37 that will come into Davis-Monthan, as 
well as aspects of rescue will also come into Davis-Monthan. 
So, it is a combination of capabilities.
    And then, the other key part of this is their access to the 
ranges that are there in Arizona and in the western United 
States will increase their training opportunity.
    As we work very closely with the community and with the 
delegation, it is the flow of airmen and the transition, and as 
we do that, and as we have talked, we will continue the SATAFs, 
[Site Activation Task Force] the visits to the base, 
[inaudible] more detail. We will also look at the MILCON 
[military construction], but also the personnel numbers. 
Because, overall, it should be neutral or maybe just a bit of a 
bump-up in personnel, when it is all said and done.
    Mr. Gallego. As a follow-up then, modernizing the force to 
face the new threat is a key theme in your written statement 
and this year's President's budget. The Department is also 
calling for the additional divestment of 42 A-10s, a platform 
that provides crucial close air support to our troops--
something that I have experienced myself. I understand that the 
intent is for current and future platforms to execute this 
mission through the advancement of technology.
    My concern, however, is an overreliance on technology to 
the point of forces potentially losing basic skills, such as 
non-guided by electronics, and the Air Force forgoing a 
generation's worth of experience. Can you describe how the Air 
Force is ensuring its pilots remain proficient in CAS [close 
air support] as a whole? And what steps is the Air Force taking 
to ensure that technology for CAS can still be effective in a 
comms-degraded environment or a denied environment, which we 
anticipate, should the balloon go up with China?
    General Brown. You know, one thing, Representative Gallego, 
that I would highlight is, not only for the United States Air 
Force, but, really, for the joint team, as you look at our 
joint doctrine, it outlines how we do close air support. I'm 
not sure the technology that we are using to be able to do 
close air support is really based on that very basic doctrine 
before we had the technology. And so, how do we take that 
technology and make it a little bit easier to be able to 
execute?
    What we want to be able to make sure is that our air crew, 
as well as all those who are working close air support, can 
still operate in degraded environments. So, you need to 
understand the basics of how to be able to do this, but then, 
the technology just makes the job easier.
    The other part I would highlight with this is, as we bring 
that technology in, it allows us the capability to bring it 
across a number of different platforms. And I will just tell 
you from personal experience, having flown close air support in 
the F-16, B-1, and B-52 in combat, that technology and being 
able to work, and be able to bring combat airpower to where it 
is needed to support the operation on the ground, or anyplace 
else, is what we are going to do as the United States Air 
Force.
    Mr. Gallego. Secretary Kendall, you mentioned multiple 
times in your testimony that the Chinese Communist Party is our 
pacing threat. I'm deeply concerned by growing aggression and 
provocation from the CCP and believe that Chinese leadership is 
closely watching what is happening in Ukraine. Within that 
context, what lessons has your Department learned from Russia's 
invasion, specifically regarding space technology and the rapid 
employment of commercial technology from the European theater? 
And what should or should we not implement in the INDOPACOM 
[U.S. Indo-Pacific Command] as a result?
    Secretary Kendall. I guess, Congressman, the first things 
on my list would be the importance of space and the presence of 
space on the battlefield, effectively, and the absence of 
airpower, or at least airpower dominance, by either side.
    We are seeing space being used for communications. We are 
seeing space being used for imagery for targeting. We are 
seeing counterspace systems and assumptively soft kill systems. 
You know, space is part of the fight, and it is an important 
part of the fight. So, that is first.
    On the air side, neither side has been able to achieve air 
dominance, and that has had a fundamental impact on what has 
happened on the ground. Both sides have been able to use their 
ground-based air defenses reasonably effectively to counter the 
other side, particularly, though, Ukraine, against a much 
superior force, theoretically with technology, but, certainly, 
with numbers.
    We are watching all this carefully and learning from it. 
The importance of having a well-trained Air Force and an Air 
Force that can work together well as a team and employ 
technologies effectively is fundamental as well.
    The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Mississippi, Mr. 
Kelly.
    Mr. Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    General Saltzman, I understand the Department is costing 
out two options for the Air National Guard space forces: 
establish a Space National Guard or rebuild the mission into 
the Space Force. Can you briefly explain the critical, must-
have capabilities that exist in the Air National Guard? If the 
decision is made to dissolve those National Guard space 
capability, would there be any degradation or loss to your 
ability to support our national defense?
    General Saltzman. Thank you, Congressman.
    Yes, the capabilities in the Air National Guard are vital. 
For example, the Nation's only survivable strategic missile 
warning capability was in the National Guard. About 60 percent 
of our deployable space electronic warfare is in the Air 
National Guard. And, of course, we run a missile warning radar 
through the Air National Guard in Alaska. Vital capabilities 
that we can't do without.
    Mr. Kelly. Thank you.
    And, Secretary Kendall, the Air Force is currently retiring 
KC-10s, the KC-46s are experiencing operational delays and 
deficiencies, all while downsizing our KC-135 fleet. The 
mobility capability requirement study of 2018, and again, in 
2020, both affirm that 479 tankers were sufficient, but at a 
higher level of risk. General Van Ovost testified that 
USTRANSCOM's [U.S. Transportation Command's] recent assessment 
indicates an inventory of 466 total aircraft as sufficient, but 
as elevated risk. Does the current law of 466 air refueling 
tankers meet the needs of the National Defense Strategy or 
should we increase that to 479?
    Secretary Kendall. If I could quickly on the Guard elements 
of the Space Force, they are not going anywhere. They are an 
essential part of the Space Force. We are going to keep them. 
The argument we are having is about what label we put on them, 
but they are definitely going to stay.
    On the tankers, I think 466 is an adequate number. I think 
General Van Ovost is about testify herself, and I think she 
should give you her views on that as well.
    And at the moment, what we are planning to do is, 
essentially, do a one-for-one swap out of K-135s now and 
replace them with KC-46s.
    Mr. Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
    General Brown, last year's NDAA section 155 asked for a 
plan on transferring KC-135 aircraft to air refueling wings of 
the Air National Guard that are classic associations with 
Active Duty units in the Air Force. Will we see this soon? And 
is there considerable cost to permanently transfer ownership of 
the eight KC-135 aircraft to the 141st Air Refueling Wing? And 
has the Air Force considered flipping the association at 
Fairchild Air Force Base from the classic to the active 
association model?
    General Brown. We are working through that particular 
report. You should see that here in the coming weeks. And in 
that report, we are working through a number of different 
options. And, you know, depending on what option you pick will 
determine what that cost will be and the ability to be able to 
transfer, like you describe. So, as we bring that forward to 
you, we will be happy to have a dialog with you and the rest of 
the committee on how best to move forward.
    Mr. Kelly. And I just thank all you gentlemen. But, you 
know, I have served as a traditional guardsman for a lot of 
years. And I think it is so important that we recognize that we 
are not the strategic reserve of the 1980s and 1990s. We have 
become operational since the war on terror. And I don't think 
there is any way that big Air Force, big Army, the Marine 
Corps, or the Navy can operate without an operational Reserve 
Component. So, I just ask your continued commitment, and that 
means equipping and manning and making sure we are resourcing 
those men and women who choose to serve in a part-time 
capacity, that we continue to do that.
    And with my final question, I just want to go to--and it 
may be more of a statement than a question--but, back in 2021, 
I expressed concerns at the speed at which the Air Force was 
moving with plans to retire the T-1A aircraft at Columbus Air 
Force Base and across the country. Two years later, with T-7 
aircraft production delayed until 2027, the Air Force has 
started retiring the T-1A aircraft. The Air Force should delay 
retiring an asset that would keep our prospective airmen and 
women flying and training until we have a full replacement. Do 
you agree with that statement?
    Secretary Kendall. The two aircraft are totally different, 
Congressman. The T-7 is a replacement for the T-38 basic 
trainer. The T-1 is an intermediate aircraft for people going 
on to multi-engine. And we are revising our training program 
for multi-engine, so that it is just no longer necessary. So, 
it is a completely different situation.
    Mr. Kelly. So, you think divesting, not having the 
opportunity or something to train on until we get a 
replacement, or something that is different, you are saying 
that it is okay to train--I mean, what do they train on then? 
What do the people who need that training platform train on?
    Secretary Kendall. Well, General Brown can address this. 
But they will train through simulators, and then go to their 
platform that they are going to operate, which is the way the 
commercial airlines do it.
    Mr. Kelly. Simulators are great, but they are not flying an 
airplane.
    With that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
    Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Connecticut, Mr. 
Courtney, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Again, I just want to start off by saying that I think the 
Air Force made the right decision in its fiscal year 2024 
budget request by fully funding the Engine Core Upgrade for the 
F135 engine. Decisions like this are made, obviously, with 
significant analysis that, in this case, resulted as a result 
of input from the Air Force, the Department of Defense, and 
with our international partners. Upgrading and modernizing the 
existing engine is, undoubtedly, the quickest, lowest risk, 
most cost-effective solution to enable F-35 Block 4 
capabilities and provide a variant common capability across the 
entire fleet.
    And again, it is clear that that is particularly true for 
the sea services. The ECU pathway is, obviously, the most 
aligned with the space constraints on aircraft carriers and 
large-deck amphibious ships.
    Secretary Kendall, I wanted to ask you about the C-130 
basing program right now. In the last administration, we 
watched this process just devolve into something that, 
honestly, was almost intelligible in terms of just, you know, 
who was getting based; you know, which States were getting 
based.
    With newly appropriated aircraft, the Air Force is now 
moving forward after developing and agreeing to a set of 
criteria for determining which installations are most fit to 
receive new aircraft. I have some concerns, still, just because 
of the last administration's experience. And I would just ask 
you to, please, if you could, confirm for the committee that 
you are going to work with us and provide a completely fair and 
transparent process during your evaluation.
    Secretary Kendall. Thank you, Congressman Courtney.
    That decision has been delegated to the Chief of the Air 
National Guard, General Loh. There are eight bases, I think, 
that have been identified as potential candidates, and 
essentially, we are going to field those C-130s at four of 
them.
    And there will be--he is using the strategic basing process 
that the Air Force uses routinely. And I can assure you that it 
will be a transparent and fair process.
    Mr. Courtney. Thank you. I appreciate that answer.
    Just a few days ago, I visited Collins Aerospace, where we 
were, again, getting an update on the C-130 propeller barrel 
issue and the industrial base capacity that was able to meet 
the demand and help us get into a good place to mitigate that 
issue. And Assistant Secretary Hunter testified about that, 
actually, last week.
    The industry was able to surge capacity to increase 
production rates, so that we could get a get-well date for the 
C-130 fleet that actually was ahead of schedule, which is music 
to our ears. Again, I just wondered if you could talk about 
your perspective in terms of the work that industry did with 
the surge capacity and, again, just the general state of the 
program.
    Secretary Kendall. To be honest, that problem has fallen 
off my scope as one of the things I was tracking closely, 
because they were making good progress on it. So, I'm sure what 
Assistant Secretary Hunter had to say was accurate. I'm glad 
that industry was able to respond so well.
    Mr. Courtney. I appreciate that.
    General Saltzman, again, I enjoyed speaking with you a 
month or so ago about where your branch is headed. Just to 
follow up with Mr. Smith's opening comments, yesterday, I was 
under the impression that we were at least going to get a 
deeming budget component to the bill that was passed, but at 
this point that was not included. So, we really now still have 
a budget process that is untethered to any sort of top-line 
target that you can build appropriations 302(b) funding for. 
And we are 4 months into this Congress at this point.
    Again, I know the chairman is determined to move forward 
and we are going to get a top line to mark NDAA but the 
appropriations process, obviously, is the one where CRs sort of 
emanate from. And considering the fact that the Space Force is 
almost entirely a new start from top to bottom, can you just 
sort of talk about what the impact would be to Space Force if 
this budget process doesn't get moving faster and we avoid a 
CR.
    General Saltzman. We have made so much progress. I feel 
like organizing the kinds of equipment that we know we need, 
the kinds of training that I know the Guardians need to be 
successful in the emerging threat environment, that to slide 
back to fiscal year 2022, we were a wholly different Space 
Force then. And so, all of the progress that we made I feel 
like would erode back to those early days of our capabilities. 
As Secretary Kendall has said, we lose time that we never get 
back in addressing the adversary. That is the most critical 
aspect, I think, that is lost in that.
    Mr. Courtney. And real quick, how many new starts are in 
the fiscal year 2024 budget?
    General Saltzman. It depends on how you count it, but we 
have at least seven that I count across the counterspace 
portfolio.
    Mr. Courtney. And that is a big number for a department 
your size.
    With that, I yield back.
    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman from Connecticut for 
allowing the general to make that observation.
    Chair now recognizes General Bacon from Nebraska.
    Mr. Bacon. Thank you, Chairman Rogers.
    We appreciate all three of you being here, and I appreciate 
your testimony. We appreciate your leadership of the Air Force 
and the Space Force.
    My first question--but I wanted to sort of segue into 
quality of life. But I have got a couple of questions upfront 
that I'm hoping to get to.
    Secretary Kendall, I understand the pressures that the Air 
Force is under with new ICBMs, B-21s, F-35s, tankers, and with 
the current budget that we have. It sorts of forces you into 
this accepting divesting of 398 aircraft. But just the cost is 
there because you are going to lose pilots; you are going to 
lose maintainers. It is about 20 squadrons' worth of aircraft. 
And these aircraft still could have some use, say, in the 
Middle East, perhaps not China.
    But my question to you is this: if Congress provided you 
additional funds for acquisition of new aircraft, is there 
capacity to produce more F-35s or more F-15EXs?
    Secretary Kendall. I don't know the answer to that question 
directly. I would have to go check and get that for the record 
for you.
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 121.]
    Mr. Bacon. General Brown, would you, by chance, know?
    General Brown. Not off the top of my head, but here's part 
of the--I think part of the conversation is with our industry 
partners to determine what their capacity is, and then, you 
know, the aspects of some longer lead items that they would 
have to invest in to be able to increase any type of 
production.
    Mr. Bacon. My thought is we have to do everything we can to 
give you more F-35s and F-15EXs. And over the FYDP, we are 
going to be down 398 aircraft in total. That puts off a lot of 
red signals to me, and I would like to help to try to fill that 
gap, if we can.
    And I think it is also worth noting that the Air Force has 
about a 20 percent pass-through. In other words, 20 percent of 
all the money you get doesn't even go to you; it goes to other 
agencies that are not part of the Air Force. The Navy and Army 
have about 1 percent. So, when we look at your budget, it is 
not really the same as the other services.
    General Saltzman, a question for you. Regarding the 
missions like MILSATCOM [military satellite communications] and 
missile warning, do you feel our redundant, fixed, and mobile 
backup systems--so, we are talking about the backup--have the 
necessary level of manpower, system resiliency, and 
capabilities of our primary systems? And do we need to invest 
more in infrastructure and personnel for these backup systems?
    General Saltzman. I will tell you that we are currently 
capable in terms of manning and equipment for our existing 
missions. The problem, of course, is the emerging threat 
environment is going to change those conditions pretty rapidly. 
That is why shifting to a hybrid architecture, where we are 
integrating commercial augmentation, as well as proliferating 
our satellite communications architecture, that is going to 
change the nature of the business, which means we are going to 
have to look at backups differently; we are going to have to 
look at resiliency and redundancy a bit differently. For now, 
yes, but, as the emerging threats change, we are going to have 
to shift.
    Mr. Bacon. There is no doubt that our primary adversaries 
will target space, target our space, in round one of any fight. 
And so, we have to be resilient, redundant, survivable. So, 
thank you.
    Where I want to really put the rest of our time is on 
quality of life. We are going to be standing up this panel in 
June; I'm looking forward to it. And we hear about junior 
enlisted being on the stamp program. I heard a lot from recent 
airmen about housing problems. So, General Brown if I may, what 
is the primary quality-of-life issue that you hear about?
    General Brown. Well, I will tell you, I get some personal 
feedback on a nightly basis from my wife Sharene--[laughter]--
on the areas that are important to military families.
    And with a group of spouses, they have started a look with 
a program called Five and Thrive. It is really the aspect of 
the five things that impact military families. It is childcare, 
education, housing, healthcare, and spouse employment. And so, 
I wouldn't give any one of them priority because they are all 
important.
    Mr. Bacon. Yes.
    General Brown. And this is what we hear from our military 
families and our spouses. This is what I hear when I go home 
each evening, and the things that we need to do as a nation to 
support our military members and our families, because it helps 
our retention in the long run when we take care of those 
issues.
    Mr. Bacon. General Saltzman.
    General Saltzman. I would just add, I have a great wife at 
home, too, who also, when she gets a chance to visit the bases, 
she brings back--she is my best sensor to be out there and talk 
to the families, talk to the spouses, and understand this.
    And I couldn't agree more with what General Brown said. 
Those are the issues. Quite frankly, they have always been the 
issues. That is part of military service, is having to deal 
with some of those complications and those factors. I think now 
it is just about continuing to work them. As the dynamics 
change over time, we have got to continue to work to make sure 
that families are taken care of as well.
    Mr. Bacon. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Chairman, if I may just make a closing comment here, we 
work hard to figure out what is the right housing allowance, 
and then, we say you only get 95 percent, and we keep 5 percent 
from our service men and women. I think that is unacceptable. I 
think Congress needs to fix that, Chairman, and give them the 
100 percent of what they are owed.
    Thank you.
    The Chairman. Well, you are going to be in a position to do 
something about that, General.
    [Laughter.]
    The Chairman. I would urge all of you--as you know, General 
Bacon is going to be chairing the Task Force on Quality of Life 
for us--I would urge you all to work with him, maybe have your 
spouses come and testify before his committee. Because we are 
serious about getting after these things, and I love the idea 
of Five and Thrive. And those are the five areas we need to be 
spending a lot of attention on. So, thank you for that.
    Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. 
Moulton, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Moulton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    And I'm really glad to hear that we are really seeing that 
initiative through with General Bacon. So, thank you very much.
    And I also want to associate myself with the remarks of the 
chairman and the ranking member about budgetary concerns, 
which, of course, are really a critique of us here in Congress, 
not at all of you.
    It is important that we get our budget act together to give 
you a predictable budget with which you can defend our Nation. 
And it is also critical that we support the cuts that you want 
to make. Because it is usually this committee, this body, that 
is the opposition that you face when it comes to making those 
investments of the future, paid for by the cuts you need to 
make of old, legacy systems that are out of date. So, thank you 
for pursuing that.
    Secretary Kendall, could you please talk about some of the 
investments that you need to make in the Indo-Pacific to 
produce a more distributed and resilient posture, a better 
deterrent against the Chinese Communist Party, including force 
posture changes and what you can do to accelerate these changes 
necessary to meet that threat.
    Secretary Kendall. A few months ago, the Deputy Secretary 
asked me what we could do most quickly to respond to our pacing 
challenge. And my answer was proliferation and hardening of our 
bases in the Pacific.
    Under the operational imperatives that we have talked 
about, number five was resiliency of our forward air bases, and 
moving the concept called agile combat employment [ACE], the 
idea that we don't stay on one fixed base that is very easy to 
target, but that we use alternative bases and distribute our 
assets and move them around, so they are harder to target.
    To support that, you need a combination of hardening, 
prepositioning of equipment, mobility assets, defenses, 
deception capabilities--all of these things. Now, we did a 
number of months of analysis to try to define the best mix of 
those, and we put a lot of that into our budget. So, in fiscal 
year 2024, we are, in particular, asking for things that would 
provide a measure of hardening and would provide prepositioned 
equipment to support those kinds of operations.
    We are also working with INDOPACOM on opening up more bases 
that can be used through a combination of MILCON and use of 
organic resources to restore bases that have not been kept up. 
And we are practicing this. We are doing a lot under ACE to 
make people capable of doing this sort of thing.
    Mr. Moulton. General Brown----
    Secretary Kendall. With that kind of mix of things, the one 
thing that we are not funding out of the Air Force is active 
defenses. And there is a study ongoing in the Department, led 
by the Army right now, to try to determine what are the most 
cost-effective defenses we could emplace.
    Mr. Moulton. General Brown, General Saltzman, could you 
briefly add what are your top priorities and what can Congress 
here do to accelerate them in the Pacific?
    General Brown. Very quickly, as the Secretary outlined, it 
is a resilient form of basing, and the aspects of preposition, 
the capability to be able to preposition. It is also upgrading 
some of the facilities, the ability to harden, the ability to 
add in deception. But it is also the training of our airmen in 
some of these areas to be multi-capable. It has been a focus of 
ours as well, of being able, not only for the airmen--it is the 
mindset, but it is also how they train and having the 
capabilities to do that in an environment different than what 
we have done in the Middle East for the past several decades, 
but more focused on being light and being agile.
    Mr. Moulton. General Saltzman, anything to add for the 
Space Force?
    General Saltzman. Very similar to General Brown, we are 
shifting to resilient architectures, which makes it harder to 
target those capabilities, makes them more survivable. But 
then, our Guardians will have to be trained. We have lived in a 
benign space environment for so many years, that we have to 
shift our thinking, and that means also shifting our training 
concepts, so that our Guardians have the tools and tactics they 
need to be successful.
    Mr. Moulton. Great. Thank you.
    Secretary Kendall, the B-21 has been hailed as an 
acquisition success story. That is a rare term to hear in these 
parts. What can we do to learn from that program and apply it 
to other acquisition programs?
    Secretary Kendall. I think it is a little too early to call 
it a success story. It has made good progress. It has stayed 
very close to schedule, and we expect to get the first flight 
later this year. But we still have a long way to go in the 
development program.
    All new development programs are inherently risky. When Dr. 
LaPlante and I laid out this program when I was in my previous 
position, he was the Secretary of the Air Force, we structured 
it to manage the risks, so that we have a good chance of 
success. We also have, I think, a very competent program office 
through the RCO [Rapid Capabilities Office], which has managed 
the program very hands-on and very aggressively. And so far, 
the contractor, the prime, seems to be performing reasonably 
well.
    It is a mix of those things that come together to allow a 
program to succeed. But I can't say enough that new 
development, particularly of cutting-edge designs, is 
inherently risky, and all you can do is set up your program in 
a way which is thoughtful and tries to manage those risks. And 
that is what we tried to do with this program, and so far, it 
is bearing out.
    Mr. Moulton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
    Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Banks, 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Banks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Secretary Kendall, the Air Force is projected to fall short 
by 10 percent of its recruitment goals this year. That is 
better than the Army and the Navy, but it is still concerning--
affecting pilots and maintainers, and others. What is the Air 
Force's plan to do something about it?
    Secretary Kendall. We have a full-court press on this. The 
Vice Chairman of the--the Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force, 
General Allvin, is leading a tiger team that General Brown and 
I have asked him to put together to address some of the 
barriers to entry, to try to relax some of those without 
changing our standards and to cut through bureaucracy and make 
that happen very quickly. Those efforts are bearing fruit.
    We are benefitting from being back in the schools, where we 
couldn't be under COVID for a while. So, that is helping. We 
are seeing some changes in the trajectory that are positive. We 
are hoping now that we can be under 10 percent, but we still 
expect to fall short by the end of the year.
    The Guard and Reserves are having more significant problems 
than we are. Overall, what we are finding is that there is a 
lower propensity to serve in the military, and that is largely 
because people just aren't aware of what the military has to 
offer. They are not familiar with it.
    All of us--I'm sorry there aren't more people still in the 
room to hear this--but all of us should be talking to the 
communities we can address, and this includes Members of 
Congress, to let them know about what the military has to 
offer, to create a positive narrative.
    We offer people interesting work. We offer them work on the 
cutting edge of technology. We offer them the chance to serve 
their Nation, to support a higher calling, a higher mission, 
and to prepare themselves for whatever else they do with the 
rest of their lives, whether it is stay in the military or go 
on and do something else. It is a way to move your life 
forward.
    And we are finding that people who come in are staying. We 
are doing very well on retention. But right now, we have a 
problem with basically communicating to the American people, 
particularly the young people--and in some cases, perhaps their 
parents--that the military has a lot to offer. And I would say 
that, in particular, of the high-quality, high-tech-oriented 
services like the Air Force and the Space Force.
    Do you want to add anything to that?
    Mr. Banks. I want to move on. I do want to applaud you, Mr. 
Secretary, for not weakening your standards. I think that is 
very important. And your commitment to us, I think, not to do 
that, is important.
    The Air Force has reportedly decided to end the Air-
Launched Rapid Response Weapon, or the ARRW, hypersonic 
program, and instead focus on a hypersonic cruise missile, 
which the Air Force won't field until later this decade. Mr. 
Secretary, is the Air Force's requirement for an air-launched 
hypersonic weapon grown less urgent in the past year?
    Secretary Kendall. The Air Force wants hypersonics in its 
inventory, but we are trying to reinforce success here. HACM 
[Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile] has made some progress. And 
out of the two mission capabilities, which are quite different, 
HACM we think offers the most potential to us at this point.
    We haven't stopped on ARRW. We still have funds to complete 
the test program, and we will reserve judgment until we see how 
that does. And we will look at our priorities going forward. 
But at the moment HACM looks like the top priority.
    Mr. Banks. When is the earliest that the committee can 
expect the HACM to be fielded?
    Secretary Kendall. I can get that date for you for the 
record. It is still a few years off and I don't recall what it 
is.
    Mr. Banks. You don't have a good estimate or guess of how 
early that would be?
    Secretary Kendall. I think it is the late 2020s.
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 121.]
    Mr. Banks. And what steps is the Department taking to 
expedite the fielding of the HACM?
    Secretary Kendall. We are trying to move through the test 
program as efficiently as we can at this point.
    Mr. Banks. No steps? Anything specific----
    Secretary Kendall. We don't want to take a lot of risk on 
concurrency----
    Mr. Banks [continuing]. That we can do in the NDAA to speed 
it up?
    Secretary Kendall. Any hypersonic weapon system has a lot 
of risk in it, too. We want to, in any case, demonstrate the 
performance before we commit to production.
    Mr. Banks. Okay. That is all I have.
    Thank you. I yield back.
    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
    Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. 
Carbajal, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Welcome to all of you. Thank you for being here.
    As you all may know, I represent the 24th Congressional 
District, which is home to Vandenberg Space Force Base and our 
Nation's west coast range, not to mention many people call it 
``paradise,'' which I am sure many of you know. Vandenberg is 
uniquely situated on the coast, making it one of the best 
locations in the world to launch into polar orbit. Vandenberg 
is also 118,000 acres larger than all other Space Force bases 
combined and has 16 launch sites currently.
    General Saltzman, how important is it to have an east and 
west coast range, especially from a strategic forces and 
readiness standpoint?
    General Saltzman. I think you know the answer. It is 
critical, of course.
    Mr. Carbajal. I just like to hear it.
    General Saltzman. I know you do, sir. Thank you.
    Yes, sir, having access on both the east and the west coast 
gives us tremendous agility and launch azimuth, as you well 
know, the different kinds of payloads, the different kinds of 
orbits, so we can take advantage of. So, the resiliency that it 
creates by having two different launch ranges, as well as the 
vantage point that looking west across the ocean there does. 
So, it is critical.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. I just wanted to make sure our 
chairman understood that as well.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Carbajal. I was pleased to finally see the spaceport of 
the future legislative proposal, which is important in 
addressing critical infrastructure needs at Vandenberg, and 
particularly, to meet the NSSL [National Security Space Launch] 
Phase 3 requirements. General Saltzman, given the importance of 
a robust west coast range, can you explain your investment 
strategy for the launch infrastructure at Vandenberg and how 
the spaceport of the future legislative proposal complements 
your investment strategy?
    General Saltzman. The legislative proposal is key, because 
what we are seeing is such a dramatic increase in use of the 
launch ranges, that our infrastructure is suffering. And so, we 
could continue to invest and invest, but we have other 
priorities--the counterspace priorities, addressing threats, 
modernization, et cetera. So, we needed a mechanism to allow us 
to properly invest and support the commercial activities, and I 
think the new legislative proposal has found a way for us to 
recoup some of those indirect costs; provide the infrastructure 
that commercial launch providers need; support the emerging 
market and the new entrants to the launch business.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you.
    Hundreds of guardsmen in California operate space missions 
for the Air Force and Army. Vandenberg Space Force Base has Cal 
Guard squadrons with space missions. General Saltzman, General 
Hokanson has said routinely that he assesses that establishing 
a Space National Guard would have no impact to readiness, 
require no new facilities, and incur only minimal costs, such 
as changing nameplates and guidelines. Is this also your 
assessment?
    General Saltzman. Well, first, let me just say that those 
capabilities in the Guard are critical and we have to figure 
out a way to maintain them. So, we are in a little bit of a 
status quo problem, with General Brown still having the 
organize, train, and equip with General Hokanson and General 
Loh on how to organize, train, and equip for those space 
missions, but we have transferred all of the expertise and 
capacity for training and equipping over the Space Force. So, 
status quo doesn't really work for us.
    There are advantages to a Space National--a Space National 
Guard, but there are also advantages to thinking how you can 
incorporate those capabilities in other ways. We are actively 
going through the analysis process to figure out what is the 
best benefit to the government.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. Mr. Chair, I yield back.
    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman from California.
    Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. 
Bergman, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Bergman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And, Secretary Kendall, I was going to start by asking, do 
you want the good news or the bad news first? We will just go 
with the bad news. Okay? Because I have got good news.
    Thirteen years, PFAS [per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances], 
Wurtsmith Air Force Base, Oscoda, Michigan, part of my district 
now, as of a couple of years ago in the redistricting, and we 
are still years away from having a final cleanup plan. The 
reason that has been given is we have got to do more testing. 
We know the PFAS is in the ground. We could test to the point 
of infinite--it is like separating fly manure from pepper--at 
the end, you have got two piles and it is tough to discern 
which is which, and you have still got to take action 
appropriately.
    Will the Air Force commit to stop the flow--stop the flow 
of PFAS into public waterways and contain it within the 
boundaries of the base, as it existed when it was a base, 
without further delay? We have done enough testing. Testing is 
going to be ongoing. But can you commit that the Air Force will 
actually stop whatever flow is still going on? And the rest of 
it is going to happen naturally.
    Secretary Kendall. Congressman Bergman, I think that the 
current posture is that we don't interject any more PFAS into 
the environment. We still have it available, I think, for 
emergencies in some cases, but we are moving away from it 
entirely. I think we have got a recent decision to do that.
    Mr. Bergman. So, you think----
    Secretary Kendall. I will double-check the exact status for 
you. I want to make----
    Mr. Bergman. Because that has been 13 years----
    Secretary Kendall. I understand.
    Mr. Bergman. [continuing]. And the point is, we all agree 
that it is in the system. Nobody is laying blame. You know, it 
happened; it occurred. But the idea is, if we right now--I 
believe there is, as a result, the State and local health 
departments have issued five separate public health warnings in 
the not-too-recent past. So, we need a commitment from the Air 
Force to say, ``We are going to focus on any flow of any 
material that is aboard the confines of the old base.'' That 
would go a long way towards helping the residents and the 
businesses who are in the local area build the confidence.
    Secretary Kendall. And we are committed to addressing this 
problem. We have been waiting primarily--we were doing the 
assessments. We have been waiting----
    Mr. Bergman. We have done----
    Secretary Kendall. And we have been waiting for the----
    Mr. Bergman. It's time. Assessing--it is time. It is time 
to take the plane airborne, if you will, and take it a 
different way, eventually, unless you're [inaudible] refueling 
forever. You are going to eventually run out of gas and, you 
know, you are on a glide path right now, as the Air Force, when 
it comes to action in this.
    Secretary Kendall. Uh-hum.
    Mr. Bergman. Okay.
    Secretary Kendall. Yes, we are--I think EPA [Environmental 
Protection Agency] has a final standard out for review and we 
have been waiting for that for some time. As soon as that 
process----
    Mr. Bergman. I will look forward to an update. I don't want 
to waste my time because I want to give you some good news.
    Secretary Kendall. Okay.
    Mr. Bergman. Okay. General Brown, you know, in last week's 
Air Force hearing on aviation programs, I submitted a question 
for the record on milestones of a pilot's career. Specifically, 
I would like to see how long we have a fully capable, combat-
deployable, trained pilot ready, you know, ready to go to the 
fight. From the time that they get their wings, transition to 
an aircraft, join an operational squadron, how much time do we 
have them before we have to consider retention? Is it 2 years?
    You don't have to answer it now. We did that, I did that 
for the record. I just would like to get an example of that 
timeline, because you know how long it takes the pilot to go 
through all those stages, and then, you know when their initial 
contract ends. That would be helpful.
    The good news--the way the Air Force does its pilot 
training and has it down to a science of when you check in and 
you go through the stages, you have been the most accurate of 
services in setting the expectations for those student pilots. 
And I commend you for that.
    The Army is a close second, and unfortunately, the Navy is 
an extremely distant third. So, I would suggest, potentially, 
that whatever you are doing in the Air Force, if you could 
maybe have a conversation down the hall in the Pentagon, it 
might be helpful for that.
    But I wanted to just, again, if you are doing it right, 
keep doing it. But now, we are looking at, as you already 
talked about here, and other things, with the retention of 
pilots, but we are concerned of how long are they in the hot 
seat ready to go to the fight tonight.
    So, with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
    Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from Texas, Ms. 
Escobar, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And thank you, gentlemen, for your testimony today and for 
your service.
    Secretary Kendall, you and I have had great conversations 
around the work happening in my community, El Paso, Texas, Fort 
Bliss, but also with the University of Texas at El Paso [UTEP]. 
I have long worked to ensure that we are creating not just an 
economic development engine that capitalizes on our advanced 
manufacturing, our 3Di printing, and our aerospace engineering 
programs at UTEP, but have worked to make sure that we are a 
strong supporter of our national defense. And I have long 
spoken about the need for us to further capitalize on the 
brilliance of our research institutions and really enjoyed our 
conversation about that the other day, Secretary Kendall.
    I have a question about personnel management for you. You 
have identified enacting a Space Force personnel management 
authority to offer a new model of service to the Nation, and 
that that is a priority. And it is a priority right now when we 
have seen a decline in public propensity to serve.
    Can you elaborate on this authority, the benefits that this 
effort can provide to ensure that we develop and sustain a 
diverse, dynamic workforce? And can you speak to the ways it 
addresses some of the publicly perceived barriers to service 
that have plagued recruitment across the military services?
    Secretary Kendall. Thank you, Congresswoman Escobar.
    I think you are referring to the initiative from the Space 
Force to create a single component where people can serve 
actively full time or part time and be part of, essentially, 
the same institution.
    General Saltzman spent a lot of time after he came into 
office working on the details of that. We had submitted a 
similar proposal last year, and Congress asked us to go back 
and study it some more.
    I think we have got a fairly well-thought-out, thorough 
proposal now that will be practical and we will be able to 
apply it, and it will confer some big benefits on us. So, it 
will give people a lot more flexibility. They will be able to 
serve their Nation, but also, you know, do other things in 
certain times of their lives when that is what they need to do. 
So, the flexibility I think will help, and it will help us 
retain--both acquire and retain talent. I think it would have a 
very major benefit.
    Ms. Escobar. That is fantastic.
    General Saltzman, anything you would like to add?
    General Saltzman. The Secretary covered the key aspects of 
it. It is about flexibility in a career path. We think that is 
what the modern military member is looking for, right? They 
have this desire to serve, but sometimes full-time service 
isn't exactly what they need. So, having options like a part-
time path, where you could come in and come out, that 
permeability, is also very valuable to retain the talent that 
we need.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you so much.
    And this next question is for Secretary Kendall and General 
Brown. The fiscal year 2024 budget request for the Space Force 
has been identified by the service as one that ``pivots toward 
resilient architectures and embodies an integrated deterrence 
approach'' to enable ``the Space Force's ability to operate in 
a highly contested environment.''
    Does your budget request support digital open architecture 
engineering which the private sector has developed and 
continues to test through the industrial base, both in El Paso 
and nationally? And can you speak to the benefits that digital 
open architecture engineering provides as we prioritize rapid 
system development?
    Secretary Kendall. It is an improvement in engineering 
practice and in program management that allows much more 
efficient development to occur. In particular, in a situation 
where you have--when an organization like the government is a 
customer working with contractors. What started, to some 
degree, with the B-21, but it has been done in other programs--
it is being done on Next Generation Air Dominance now very 
effectively, and we are seeing it in other places.
    And we are picking this up from the commercial world to a 
certain extent. But you have a single environment. People can 
work on it together. You have much more fluid interaction 
between people, which makes you much more efficient, and you 
are allowed to move data back and forth. You share a database. 
You share a computing environment.
    And then, the design approach itself uses digital models, 
which are much more sophisticated than traditionally, so that 
you can move through a lot of design iterations very quickly. 
It is a fairly substantial improvement. I have tried to get a 
quantitative estimate of what kind of improvement it is. People 
have talked about factors. And I think it is more like a 20, 25 
percent kind of an improvement, but that is significant and it 
reduces risk substantially on our programs to be able to do 
this.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you so much, Mr. Secretary.
    General Brown, anything to add?
    General Brown. The one thing I would add is, is I talk to 
our acquisition professionals, is the aspect of the--because 
they are able to work in a digital environment, they don't have 
to wait until a big critical design review to actually sit down 
and pour through paperwork. They can actually kind of do it 
real time, well ahead of the timeline, which saves time and it 
gets us in a better place in the long run.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you so much.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    The Chairman. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from 
Florida, Mr. Waltz, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    General Saltzman, actually it was with General Thompson, 
but discussed with me extensively your need for simulation 
centers; your need to be able to, basically, train like you are 
going to fight and the facilities you need to do that. And that 
is a real need, and we need to get that to you sooner than 
later.
    Mr. Secretary, what is the update that you can give with 
STARCOM [Space Training and Readiness Command] and that basing 
decision?
    Secretary Kendall. It is pending, Senator--Congressman 
Waltz--and it is----
    Mr. Waltz. It has been pending.
    Secretary Kendall. It's pending.
    Mr. Waltz. Yes.
    Secretary Kendall. It should be----
    Mr. Waltz. How long is it going to be pending?
    Secretary Kendall. I hope we will be able to announce that 
fairly soon.
    Mr. Waltz. ``Soon'' as in months or?
    Secretary Kendall. I would hope so.
    Mr. Waltz. Okay. Great. We will look forward to that, and 
obviously, you know, I don't think I need to remind you again, 
and thank you for the conversations on it, that the Orlando 
area has some of the world-class simulation centers, and aside 
from our geography and launch capability, it is the people and 
the generations of space professionals that we have in that 
area. So, I will look forward to that decision.
    General Saltzman, you mentioned a moment ago about 
facilitating and lowering barriers for new entrants into 
launch. And we are on a trajectory now to go from several 
thousand satellites in orbit to nearly 100,000 over the next 
decade. I don't see how we get that many launches up to support 
what we need in the proliferated architecture. I mean, you need 
help.
    And my question is, and I'm trying to figure out, on those 
range services, those day-of-launch services, why is the Space 
Force involved in commercial--not national security--but 
commercial launches and providing those services, and getting 
reimbursed, then, by commercial providers? Why aren't we 
opening that up to other commercial providers that can provide 
those same-day, day-of-launch services?
    General Saltzman. Yes, part of it is the way we built the 
ranges; the way we have built our policies and procedures 
around protecting the ranges, the safety associated with the 
ranges. It probably does warrant us going back and relooking to 
say, now that there are commercial entities that are capable of 
providing complete end-to-end launch services, does there need 
to be a relook at the model?
    Mr. Waltz. The FCC [Federal Communications Commission] has 
60 to 65,000 applications of backlog, right? That is 65,000 
birds waiting to go up. If you figure a Falcon 9 can put up 50, 
like do the math how long that is going to take.
    And I talked to the folks at Boca Chica, and they are 
wondering, why am I reimbursing the Space Force for a 
commercial launch when I could be reimbursing and dealing with 
commercial companies that can help us move faster? So, I would 
encourage you--and the committee I think is happy to work with 
you on how to open that aperture.
    And by the way, it is in law, years ago, when these 
capabilities didn't exist--but now they do--for you to certify 
that those capabilities don't exist before the U.S. Government 
takes on that function. So, I would certainly encourage you to 
take a hard look at that.
    And then, Mr. Secretary, in my time remaining, I'm 
concerned about our plan, or lack thereof, to recap 
[recapitalize] the Air National Guard fleet. And when I say 
that, I mean the A-10s, F-15 Charlies, F-16s. That is a lot of 
capability and ecosystem and infrastructure that is, obviously, 
fixed to that geographic location. Can you talk to me about a 
recap plan for the Air Guard?
    Secretary Kendall. First of all, Congressman Waltz, the Air 
Guard provides a very important part of our overall Department. 
The capabilities that come out of the Guard, and the quality of 
those units, and the cost-effectiveness of them, is quite good. 
I have had a chance to visit a number of those units, and I 
have been really impressed by the professionalism that I have 
seen.
    As we transform the Air Force to the Air Force we are going 
to need in the future, we want to have a healthy Guard and a 
healthy Reserve and a health Active Component which are in 
balance. And as someone else mentioned earlier, to the extent I 
didn't realize when I came into office, that both the Guard and 
the Reserves are part of our operations to a larger extent than 
I thought.
    Mr. Waltz. Thirty percent of the fighter fleet. Right, 30 
percent of the fighter fleet, and at least--not to cut you off, 
Mr. Secretary, but, from the plans I have seen, 18, 19 of the 
25 Air Guard fighter squadrons are going to be, essentially, 
kind of moved out of business, as you modernize.
    So, can you come back and work with me, and work with the 
committee, on a plan there?
    And then, just a final question for the record. Can you 
also come back to me on the obstacles that are preventing 
accelerated delivery of the 66 F-16s to Taiwan? I sit on both 
Foreign Affairs and Armed Services, and I want to work with the 
service on how to accelerate that. [The information provided is 
classified and retained in the committee files.]
    The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Mr. Waltz. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from 
Michigan, Mrs. McClain, for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. McClain. Thank you.
    And thank you all for being here. It is good to see you 
again.
    I want to focus today a little bit about the recruiting and 
the recruiting goals, and really, what I'm seeing in my 
district and I'm hearing from my district. As you know, General 
Brown, I think it was last year you and I had a conversation 
about we are not meeting our recruiting goals and some of our 
positions didn't get filled. So, I took that to heart and I 
went back and did a little research and started talking to some 
of the people in my district.
    How far are we off on the Air Force recruiting goal? How 
far--is it still around 15,000?
    General Brown. No. It is about 10 percent. So, on the 
Active side, it is about 2,500 or so, a little higher on the 
Guard and Reserve. I would say, partly, the challenge with the 
Guard and Reserve is because our retention is really good on 
the Active side. We are now 90 percent, plus or minus, on the 
officer and the enlisted, which means you don't have airmen 
leaving the Active force going into the Guard and Reserve.
    And so, we have made some changes in reducing the barrier 
to entry, but not impacting the standards. And part of the 
other aspect is just the familiarity with military service.
    Mrs. McClain. And can you share and talk a little bit about 
what steps that you all are using to boost the recruiting 
efforts?
    General Brown. Sure. The first thing I will highlight is, I 
often say that young people only inspire to be what they see, 
and if they never see our United States Air Force, they are not 
inclined to grow up to join the United States Air Force. And 
so, part of that is, how do we better engage in our 
communities? I gave a letter to all of our wing commanders 
about 2 months ago to tell them to get into the communities and 
open up their bases and get reengaged.
    I would say the same thing with our recruiters, to get them 
back into the high schools now that we have gotten past COVID. 
And this is where, for Members, as you go back to your 
community, in some cases, encouraging them to open up the high 
schools. We do have good opportunities in some places; some 
places it is a little bit more challenging. But I think we are 
making progress, based on some changes we made, and we are 
seeing some of that happen throughout the course of the past 
several months.
    Mrs. McClain. You are seeing numbers go up?
    General Brown. We are. We did some things to change some 
policies that were a bit more restrictive than the other 
services, and that has helped us to increase our numbers. 
Because, originally, we were about 15 percent, but we are down 
and we are going to be probably less than 10 percent by the 
time we get to the end of the fiscal year.
    Mrs. McClain. Okay. As I talk to the people in my district, 
as I talk to the people in the community, and as I have done 
some research--in fact, Heritage Foundation did a study, and 
nearly 70 percent of the Active Duty service members have 
witnessed really a politicization of the military. And whether 
we think it is a problem, we feel that it is a problem, the 
study and the data that Heritage did--and I can give that to 
you--shows that the military being political is just--it is not 
positive.
    And it hurts. It hurts morale. It hurts pride. And I talk 
to men and women and families in my district, and they feel 
that they lost a sense of pride. They feel like the woke agenda 
isn't helping. We talk too much about diversity, equity, and 
inclusion, when I'm all for diversity, equity, and inclusion, 
but I think the most diverse and equity and inclusive that we 
can be is for the individual. And from what I have heard and 
what I have seen, is we have gone from the individual to a 
small percentage of folks that we focus on.
    And I have in front of me the slides on the diversity 
training and the equity and the inclusion training. How much 
money and time do we really spend on that? Can we get a better 
sense to help educate everyone?
    General Brown. I can provide you exact information for the 
record, but I will tell you, most of our training and most of 
our focus is on the readiness of the force. And part of that 
readiness of the force is to ensure that we are building 
cohesive teams, and part of those cohesive teams is to get to 
know airmen to our left and our right.
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 122.]
    Mrs. McClain. And I appreciate that. And one of the things 
it talks about in one of your slides is not to recognize people 
as moms and dads. I mean, as a mother, I take a little bit of 
offense to that. It also talks about not using the word 
``terrorist.'' Can you explain why we wouldn't use the word 
``terrorist'' and ``mom'' and ``dad''? I think you have got to 
get that message out, because I think a lot of people are 
really frustrated and they feel like we are polarizing, as 
opposed to coming together.
    General Brown. What I would tell you is that what I 
perceive is we are misreading some of the aspects of the things 
we are trying to do, as we move the Air Force forward and we 
look at how we build cohesive teams. And so, part of building 
cohesive teams is getting to know our airmen and----
    The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired--or the 
gentlelady's time has expired.
    Mrs. McClain. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Chair now recognizes the gentleman from North 
Carolina, Mr. Davis.
    Mr. Davis. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair, and to our ranking 
member.
    And to the Secretary, it is so good to see you, Secretary 
Kendall, and General Brown, and General Saltzman. Thank you for 
joining us today.
    Ensuring a ready fighting force in the air is paramount. 
And we have heard comments today with which I align, and that 
is, when it comes down to deterring military aggression, 
especially from the People's Republic of China and other 
belligerent nations. Mr. Secretary, based on procurement 
justification documents, the Air Force has F-15Es and a 
divestment plan that would shrink the F-15E from 218 aircraft 
to about 99. And I want to raise a concern that I have been 
hearing quite a bit these days regarding this divestment plan.
    And I just want to understand, when it comes to Seymour 
Johnson Air Force Base, in particular, my understanding, there 
would not be necessarily the capability of bringing in F-35s 
there. But would there be an intent to eliminate two of the 
squadrons there at all?
    Secretary Kendall. Congressman, I believe that what we are 
trying to do is, there is a mission shift occurring at Seymour 
Johnson, if I remember right. And comments were made earlier 
about some of this and about the fighters. What we are trying 
to acquire is the most combat power that we can acquire, given 
the resources that we have. And part of that is getting fifth-
generation fighters. Part of that is getting on with the sixth-
generation set of capabilities. Part of it is shifting our 
force to stronger capabilities in areas like electronic 
warfare, cyber capabilities, ISR in general, things that are 
going to be very important in a future battle.
    Mr. Davis. Well, let me ask, as we are making that shift, 
would there be necessarily a gap that would exist in terms of 
our current fleet that is retired and this new fleet that may 
come in?
    Secretary Kendall. There can be, but we try to make that a 
manageable gap, depending upon the situation. And my 
conversations with people involved in----
    Mr. Davis. When you say, ``manageable gap,'' what exactly 
would ``manageable'' mean?
    Secretary Kendall. On the order of 1 to 2 years.
    Mr. Davis. I'm sorry?
    Secretary Kendall. On the order of 1 to 2 years, if 
possible. So that you can make a reasonable transition and not 
have, you know, a very negative effect.
    What we are trying to do, overall, particularly with Guard 
bases, is, if there is a fighter mission already, we try to 
replace it with a fighter mission. If we can't do that, then we 
try to replace it with a flying mission. And if we can't do 
that, then we try to find a suitable mission that is a high 
priority to the Air Force which will have a lot of longevity on 
that base and provide a lot of benefits to the community. So, 
that is, essentially, our hierarchy. And generally, so far, we 
have been able to do that.
    And I would be happy to get with you offline and talk to 
you about whatever long-term plans we have for Seymour Johnson.
    Mr. Davis. And let me follow up on this, then. You said 1 
or 2 years in terms of possibility of managing a gap.
    Secretary Kendall. Uh-hum.
    Mr. Davis. Would there be, in your opinion, a possibility 
of not having even that period or----
    Secretary Kendall. It depends on the situation. My personal 
opinion is that, given the severity of the threat that we are 
facing, as time goes on, we are going to be acquiring more 
rather than less, but I have to look at what is within our 
constraints right now when we do our detailed planning.
    Mr. Davis. Yes, and I can share with you the concern of 
reducing that period, if not eliminating the gap period, but I 
would really----
    Secretary Kendall. I understand that.
    Mr. Davis [continuing]. Welcome an opportunity to follow up 
with this.
    Secretary Kendall. We would be happy--we would work with 
you on that.
    Mr. Davis. Yes, and I want to also follow up on another 
topic, too. I spoke briefly about, and I have continued to 
share with all the witnesses that's coming forward to advocate 
for northeast North Carolina, in particular, Elizabeth City 
State University, a historically Black college/university in 
this community. It is isolated, and they are doing amazing work 
with ROTC [Reserved Officers' Training Corps]--or I'm sorry--
with the aerospace studies, aero sciences program. And we 
really would like to see an Air Force ROTC/Space Force ROTC 
program. It is isolated. It is not easy [inaudible] across 
town. And I'm just trying to understand, in cases like this 
where a community has already built synergy, how can we better 
connect to these pipelines?
    Secretary Kendall. That is good question, and I would be 
happy to look at that opportunity with you. We are trying to 
build up our science and engineering capacity, in general. ROTC 
is a big feeder, obviously, for our capabilities there, and we 
are very interested in increasing diversity in that part of the 
force. So, I would be happy to work with you on that, too.
    Mr. Davis. Thank you so much, Mr. Secretary.
    My final comment, I'm really proud of Warren County High 
School. We are one of the few Space Force JROTC [Junior Reserve 
Officers' Training Corps] programs, and I'm proud of that.
    I yield back, Mr. Chair.
    The Chairman. On a great note.
    Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Texas, Dr. Jackson, 
for 5 minutes.
    Dr. Jackson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it.
    Thank you to our witnesses for being here today.
    The Department of the Air Force is in the midst of a 
difficult balancing act, just like everyone else in the 
Department of Defense right now, in maintaining a force that is 
equipped to fight today, while developing a force that will 
fight tomorrow. This is no easy task and difficult decisions 
have to be made, and many are still to come. But one thing is 
clear: we are quickly running out of time.
    Indecision is a luxury we can no longer afford. Both the 
Air and Space Force must field capabilities and capacities now 
that will protect today, while maintaining relevance in the 
future. Superiority in air and space is vital, but we are 
moving in the wrong direction, in my mind, in some cases, and 
this must change. We are going to have to do better if we are 
going to deter and defeat the PRC [People's Republic of China].
    General Brown, I have a question here. I will just start 
off by saying, I have concerns with the massive investments 
being made in the sixth-generation platforms right now, while 
we are simultaneously failing to field a capable trainer that 
meets the needs of our young aviators for fifth-generation 
platforms. Pilots at Sheppard Air Force Base in my district are 
currently training in the T-38, the trainer that is older than 
many members of this committee, including myself.
    Just a few days ago, initial operational capability for the 
T-7 was delayed again until the spring of 2027, which puts us 2 
years behind where we should be and where we were. While the 
timeline for a conflict with China continues to accelerate, we 
need to be training on modern aircraft to ensure our Air Force 
is ready to dominate the adversary.
    General Brown, what is the Air Force doing to overcome 
these delays and help our industry partners get the T-7 to 
bases like Sheppard more quickly? And how are we ensuring that 
we end this never-ending cycle of bad news on our new 
platforms, like the T-7 trainer?
    General Brown. Representative Jackson, you know, one of my 
focus areas is to ensure that not only do we have the combat 
capability, but we also have to build the training pipeline for 
our airmen to get to that combat capability.
    Dr. Jackson. Yes, sir.
    General Brown. And so, my focus has been on areas, to 
include as we look at the T-7 and the longevity of the T-38. I 
sat down with our staff here just this past week, and actually, 
I just met with the civic leaders from Sheppard that were in my 
office here----
    Dr. Jackson. Yes, sir, I did see----
    General Brown [continuing]. Earlier this week. We had this 
very conversation, and it is the aspect of we have had success. 
I personally engage with their industry leaders and sit down 
with them. I just did it this week on another one of our 
platforms. Get us all in the same room, the same level of 
focus, to work through the issues that we know and make sure we 
are not talking past each other. But we, together, have to 
solve these problems to make sure we bring the capability that 
our airmen require--one, to be trained, and then, two, to be 
ready to get to that credible combat capability.
    Dr. Jackson. Right. Yes, sir, I appreciate that, and thank 
you for taking the time to talk to them.
    And they are also concerned because they train most of our 
NATO fighter pilots, and they are worried about that pipeline 
drying up because of the delays and going somewhere else. So, 
that is a big concern for us.
    Second question. On October 31st, 2020, four CV-22s 
completed the longest distance nighttime hostage rescue mission 
in U.S. history. The long range and vertical lift of the CV-22 
made it possible for Air Force crews to fly SEAL [Sea, Air, 
Land] team operators thousands of miles from Rota, Spain, to 
Nigeria to rescue an American hostage. The speed, versatility, 
and range of the CV-22 is unique in the Air Force inventory and 
across the joint force, in fact. This aircraft gives our 
special operators unique capabilities that we have really come 
to rely on.
    A future conflict in INDOPACOM presents unique 
environmental challenges and vast distances that only currently 
in the Air Force the CV-22 will be able to overcome. While the 
program of record for the CV-22 has been fulfilled, I have to 
imagine that future mission sets will need the unique 
capabilities of this platform as well.
    General Brown, has the Air Force given consideration to 
procuring additional CV-22 aircraft to increase the capacity or 
evaluated the aircraft that will be tasked to accomplish these 
missions? And is there any thought as to what might replace 
this aircraft in INDOPACOM, in particular?
    And I would just finish, before you answer your question, 
by saying, I think a great alternative might be the Army's new 
future vertical lift, the V-280. You should look at that as 
well.
    But your thoughts on that?
    General Brown. You actually hit the nail on the head there, 
because I think that is the aspect we--you know, I don't see us 
actually going to additional CV-22s and opening back. Because 
once you shut down a production line, it is very expensive to 
start back up. And, oh, by the way, it is technology that is 
somewhat dated.
    So, looking to the future, at the Army's platform, there's 
other industry partners that are actually going down this path 
as well. These are the kinds of things we are looking at, as an 
Air Force, not only for what the CV-22 is able to do for this 
hostage rescue, but also for personnel recovery and other 
aspects of logistics in the Indo-Pacific.
    Dr. Jackson. Well, thank you, sir.
    And the V-280 is a great platform, and I have spent a lot 
of time looking at it because Bell Helicopter is in my district 
as well. And I think the Army made a great decision on that. I 
would love to talk to you more about getting the Air Force up 
and running on that as well. Because I think, like you said, 
once that pipeline is no longer working, then we lose the 
ability to really catch up, if we need to.
    Thank you, sir.
    I yield back, sir.
    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
    Chair now recognizes the gentleman from New Mexico, Mr. 
Vasquez, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Vasquez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you, Secretary Kendall, Generals Brown and Saltzman, 
for taking the time to speak with us today.
    I represent Holloman Air Force Base in southern New Mexico. 
That is home to the 49th Wing and boasts some of the largest 
protected airspace in the country. Holloman also hosts the 
largest training unit of F-16s and MQ-9s in the country, and we 
proudly produce hundreds of combat-ready pilots every year, 
many of whom I met on a visit to Holloman Air Force Base just 
last month.
    But anxiety continues to loom for places and communities 
that are rural, just like Alamogordo, and in 2010, when we saw 
the deactivation of the two F-22 squadrons, and we were passed 
over for the F-35 mission. There continues to be anxiety about 
the future of Holloman Air Force Base.
    General Brown, I know that Holloman is key to our national 
defense and our local and our rural economy. Do you believe 
Holloman is a critical Air Force Base, and if so, why?
    General Brown. I think you have highlighted some of the key 
aspects--because of the training we do there with the F-16s, 
the MQ-9, but also the airspace in that area. Having flown 
there in my early--well, actually, early in my career when my 
fighter [inaudible] training, but also having flown through 
there and used the airspace in surrounding Alamogordo and 
Holloman Air Force Base. So, I do see that it is vital, and we 
put the F-16s in there as an indication of how important we 
think Holloman is and the surrounding airspace.
    Mr. Vasquez. Great, General. Thank you so much for agreeing 
with me on that.
    So, recognizing how important Holloman is to our national 
security, I want to highlight some of the struggles that our 
service members and their families are dealing with in the 
district.
    During my visit to Holloman, I learned that we are facing a 
shortage of over 70 childcare workers for their child 
development centers. There is a waiting list of over 120 
families who need to get childcare. And, of course, that means 
that their spouse or dependent cannot go to work and cannot 
earn additional income if they don't have the ability to have 
childcare.
    And recently, out of 300 designated military housing areas, 
Holloman was just one amongst the four locations that received 
a decrease in benefits for basic allowance for housing, even 
amidst deteriorating conditions at the barracks there at 
Holloman.
    With the reduction in benefits and proposed cuts to the 
overall defense budget that we just saw, I think we are moving 
in the wrong direction. Service members are struggling to make 
ends meet, and the Department of Defense is facing recruitment 
challenges. It needs to be a top priority for the Department to 
prioritize the quality of life for our great service members. 
Without this prioritization, we can't recruit the pilots that 
we need for all the aircraft that we are talking about today.
    Secretary Kendall, what steps is the Air Force planning to 
take to ensure we provide our airmen with rewarding--not just 
adequate, but rewarding--benefits to help recruitment and a 
good quality of life for their service, especially in rural 
areas like Alamogordo?
    Secretary Kendall. Yes, I think General Brown covered a lot 
of that when he talked about Five and Thrive. The things on 
that list are really important to us.
    First on the list of airmen I talk to is childcare, the 
thing that you mentioned. We are doing a number of things to 
try to improve, and there has been improvement. We have moved 
from a 65 percent or so capacity/utilization up to about 75. 
And that is about staffing.
    And one of the things we did there was the Department put 
out a guidance that we could cover half of a staff member's 
first child for their cost of childcare. We went to 100 
percent, and we added 25 percent in addition for others.
    So, we are doing things to create incentives for people to 
provide staffing to us. We are doing things to provide 
incentives for people to provide more capability to us. And we 
are building some new centers as well. So, we are trying to 
attack that problem across the board. It is very high on the 
list of quality-of-life considerations for us.
    I would saying housing was probably next, but all the 
things that General Brown mentioned are important to our 
families, and we are working on all of them.
    Mr. Vasquez. Well, Secretary, I appreciate that, and I did 
hear of those very generous benefits to our childcare workers 
that they received, but I also heard that they are not good 
enough; that they are still not achieving the results that we 
need, and that we have had a chance to test out those benefits 
and they are still not enough.
    And so, I would like to see us be more innovative in the 
approach to recruitment for these positions, in addition to 
just the benefits, because what we have seen at Holloman is 
that they are not the silver bullet. They haven't had the 
intended effect and impact that I think we would like to have.
    Just to follow up, if we were to fund the defense budget at 
fiscal year 2022 levels, what impact would that have on the 
lives of airmen and their families?
    Secretary Kendall. It would put them at risk. I mean, the 
first obligation we have to our airmen and their families is to 
provide them with the weapons that they need to do their jobs 
successfully. And I had mentioned earlier, delaying our 
modernization programs puts our airmen at risk and our 
Guardians.
    There are also obvious impacts on things like quality of 
life and housing and education, and all sorts of other things. 
But, fundamentally, we want them to be in a position where, if 
we ask them to go into combat, that they are going to win. And 
if we don't move forward with modernization, we are not going 
to be able to do that.
    Mr. Vasquez. Secretary, thank you.
    With that, I yield back my time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
    Chair now recognizes the gentleman from the great State of 
Alabama----
    Mr. Strong. Thank you, Chairman Rogers.
    The Chairman [continuing]. Mr. Strong, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Strong. I thank our witnesses. Thank you for being here 
today.
    ``Air Force Secretary selects Huntsville, Alabama, as 
preferred location to host U.S. Space Command.'' This press 
release was published by the Air Force 2 years, 3 months, and 
14 days ago. After a strategic basing process that dates back 
to December 2018, the Air Force selected Redstone Arsenal in 
Huntsville, Alabama, as the preferred location for the United 
States Space Command Headquarters.
    The Air Force made this selection following assessments of 
site visits, factors related to mission, infrastructure, 
capacity, community support, and the cost to the Department of 
Defense.
    It is also going up on the screen--I want to highlight a 
specific line, and I quote--have we got this? And I quote, 
``Huntsville compared favorably across more of these factors 
than any other community, providing a large, qualified 
workforce, quality schools, superior infrastructure capacity, 
and low initial and recurring cost.'' End quote.
    Secretary Kendall, out of six candidate locations, do you 
know which location had the highest final score for the set 
factors and criteria?
    Secretary Kendall. Are you talking about the previous 
analysis, Congressman?
    Mr. Strong. Yes.
    Secretary Kendall. I believe I do.
    Mr. Strong. It was Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, 
Alabama--with nine criteria in the top third ranking. Based on 
those same criteria, do you know how Peterson Space Force Base 
fared?
    Secretary Kendall. I do not recall how Peterson fared.
    Mr. Strong. Well, let me help you. Peterson had five 
criteria in the top third, six in the middle, and 10 in the 
bottom criteria.
    Immediately following the Air Force's announcement on 
January the 13th of 2021, our friends out west sent a letter to 
the President-Elect asking him, and I quote, ``Reverse the 
decision.''
    And then, again, on January the 26th, requesting President 
Biden to conduct, I quote, ``a thorough review,'' close quote, 
of the decision, and again, quote, ``suspend any action to 
relocated headquarters,'' close quote, until the review was 
completed. They did not say, what is best for national 
security? They said, ``Reverse the decision.''
    On February the 19th, 2021, the Department of Defense 
Inspector General's office opened an investigation on the Space 
Command basing decision. The Government Accountability Office 
followed suit exactly 1 month later. The GAO report included 
the following statement regarding the evaluation phase, and I 
quote, ``There was a sizable break''--a sizable break--
``between the top two scoring locations and the third-place 
location.''
    Mr. Secretary, I know you are familiar with these rankings. 
They are going up on the screen again. Just for the record, 
which sites were the Air Force's top two locations during this 
evaluation phase?
    Secretary Kendall. I think you have it on the screen, 
Congressman.
    Mr. Strong. Thank you. It is correct. Redstone Arsenal, 
Huntsville, Alabama. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
    Again, just for the record, what was Colorado's rank during 
the evaluation phase?
    Secretary Kendall. I think you have that on the screen 
also.
    Mr. Strong. That is right. They were fourth. Thank you, Mr. 
Secretary.
    I know you are also familiar with the selection phase. I 
want to put these rankings on the screen as well.
    For the record, which site was the Air Force's top 
preference during the selection phase?
    Secretary Kendall. That is on the screen, Congressman.
    Mr. Strong. Thank you. Redstone Arsenal, Huntsville, 
Alabama.
    The DOD Inspector General report, which was published on 
May 10th, 2021, stated that the Air Force's basing process for 
Space Command headquarters, and I quote, ``complied with law 
and policy and was reasonable in identifying Huntsville, 
Alabama, as the preferred location.''
    And just to make it clear, that same report also was quoted 
saying, ``Therefore, the ranking of Colorado as the preferred 
permanent location was not supportable.''
    Redstone Arsenal was the top site for the U.S. Space 
Command headquarters throughout the entire process. That is a 
fact. The report attempting to overturn the decision requested 
by the Colorado delegation proved that the Air Force's process 
was unbiased and reasonable. That is another fact.
    Mr. Secretary, in May of 2022, you testified that you were 
hoping to move forward with a final decision as quickly as you 
could. Last month, you testified you are expecting a decision 
fairly soon. Why on earth have we not received a final decision 
regarding U.S. Space Command headquarters?
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 123.]
    The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired. As much as 
I would love to allow him to go on, I must move on to the 
gentleman from Texas, Mr. Veasey.
    Mr. Strong. Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman, I have got a series 
of unanimous consent requests for the record.
    First, is a copy of the Air Force's----
    The Chairman. Well, the gentleman's time is expired. 
Without objection, so ordered.
    Mr. Strong. Thank you.
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
beginning on page 91.]
    [The complete DOD Inspector General report, DODIG-2022-096, 
is retained in the committee files and can be viewed upon 
request]
    Mr. Veasey. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
    Secretary Kendall, I wanted to ask you, you know, Congress 
just sent a very clear congressional intent that we would like 
the Department to ramp up towards total rate production. More 
specifically, the Air Force needs to make investments necessary 
to ramp F-35 production to 60, on a path to 80 per year. And 
yet, the Air Force is only planning for 48 F-35s a year for the 
next 5 years. And we are just not buying enough F-35s in 
adequate, necessary numbers to recapitalize the aging fighter 
fleet. The F-35 is not only the most advanced fighter in the 
world, but also the most cost-effective to buy and maintain, as 
our allies are concluding.
    Do you believe that the Air Force should be buying more F-
35s?
    Secretary Kendall. Congressman, I think we have a sound 
balance in our budget between acquisition of new capabilities 
like the F-35, and investment in development of the next 
generation of capabilities like the Next Generation Air 
Dominance, and sustainment of the current fleet.
    You know, we try very hard to get the balance right between 
the current force, the force we can have within the next few 
years, and the longer term force. What we see, overall, is the 
threat increasing over time. And so, we have to do a 
combination of things to try to balance out the risk over time, 
as we make our investments.
    So, we have accepted some risk in the current force. We 
have tried to move forward modernization, like we did increase 
the F-35 this year. We also increased and extended the F-15EX 
buy. And we are also investing heavily in the next generation 
beyond that.
    So, we have tried to get a trajectory, if you will, which 
accounts for the levels of risk in each of those timeframes and 
response to them appropriately.
    Mr. Veasey. Do you think that is----
    Secretary Kendall. We think the balance is about right.
    Mr. Veasey. So, do you think--okay. Okay.
    General Brown, I wanted to ask you, the recent funding 
announcement for the initial Collaborative Combat Aircraft 
[CCA] fleet seems to be a step in the right direction for 
modernization. The technology to develop and field CCAs is 
obviously maturing rapidly and they will likely be in service 
prior to the Next Gen Air Dominance fighters.
    In the interim, do you intend to pair the initial tranche 
of CCAs with your most capable fighter, which is the F-35? And 
are there investments we need to make in F-35s now, so they 
will be ready to team with CCAs when they come online?
    General Brown. We do intend to not only put it with the 
Next Generation Air Dominance, but also with the F-35. I think, 
since we are early in the process for CCAs, it may be too early 
to actually determine, you know, what we would put into the F-
35 to allow that capability. But in the big scheme of things, 
what we want to be able to do is make whatever we do with CCAs 
transportable to many platforms, not just the F-35, Next 
Generation Air Dominance, but there may be other capabilities 
and other platforms we could put it on to increase our overall 
capability.
    Mr. Veasey. Okay. Good.
    And with the advent of large CCAs that will soon join the 
U.S. Air Force fleet, it further highlights the need for modern 
ABMS [Advanced Battle Management System] network architecture 
that can leverage commercial innovation, such as 5G technology. 
And do you think the Air Force will be far enough along in 
building the new data networks to leverage the CCAs when they 
come online, perhaps before the end of the decade?
    General Brown. I do. And this is one of the areas where 
Secretary Kendall, for our C3 [command, control, and 
communications] battle management, put General Cropsey in 
charge to bring together our architecture and move forward to 
bring us that capability, which will support not only 
Collaborative Combat Aircraft, but many of the other 
capabilities in our command-and-control systems for the Air 
Force and also in support of the joint team as well.
    Mr. Veasey. Yes. Well, thank you very much.
    Secretary Kendall, I want to ask you something more 
personnel-related. You know, with all of the talk now around 
recruitment levels being low and so many of the branches 
struggling, how is the Air Force addressing issues related to 
diversity and inclusion in its recruiting and retention 
efforts? And what steps are they taking to promote a culture of 
respect and professionalism within the ranks, especially now 
with so many of these types of programs under attack, which is 
unfortunate because the military in many regards has been the 
model for people being able to seek promotions and be able to 
have some sort of advancement in their career?
    Secretary Kendall. Yes, thanks, Congressman Veasey.
    It is all about readiness. It is all about the 
effectiveness of the force. We want a force that represents 
America. It is a diverse country. We are going to have a 
diverse force. So, we want our people to be as capable as 
possible at building teams of diverse people. So, we do 
training to help people with that exercise.
    We are trying to bring in the human capital from the U.S. 
wherever it may be, including traditionally less represented 
groups. The operational field--something that General Brown and 
I have talked about a lot--is severely underrepresented in some 
areas----
    The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Fallon.
    Mr. Fallon. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    You know, I felt compelled to make an editorial comment 
because it was mentioned about the vote yesterday. And, you 
know, we need to get a handle on our fiscal--we need to have 
fiscal discipline in this country, or we are going to end up 
being a third-world nation in our lifetime.
    And when I asked my staff--because I wasn't sure what the 
number was because it floats so much--what our interest 
payments were on the debt itself, and found it was nearly $400 
billion--General, Mr. Secretary, I suspect that you could do a 
whole lot with $400 billion, and I know we could have a whole 
lot of social programs with $400 billion. And we could support 
meritocracies. And that number is only growing, and it seems 
like so many Members in this Chamber don't seem to notice that. 
It boggles my mind. So, I just felt that I needed to just, 
respectfully, mention that on the record.
    Secretary Kendall, and General Brown, particularly, I am, 
and as my colleague just mentioned, partially agreed with, the 
statement about recruiting. I think we are in a crisis. And I 
would really like to know what--and I don't give a hoot what an 
airman looks like. I just want qualified airmen. And we are in 
a crisis right now.
    And I would really like to know, General Brown--I'm an Air 
Force veteran, so I'm partial to the uniform, and I'm going to 
admit my bias a little bit here. And we love the Marines and we 
love our sailors and we love our soldiers as well.
    But, General Brown, in all seriousness, what can we do? And 
please let us know now because, you know, we have the NDAA 
coming up.
    General Brown. You know, one of the key areas that I have 
highlighted earlier in this particular hearing, that young 
people only aspire to be what they see and they want to have 
opportunity. And the things we have to do is talk about what 
serving in the military, or service at large, and the 
opportunities it provides, and the positive comments that we 
make about serving and being part of the military is what is 
going to help us bring those young people in.
    At the same time, it is how we engage with their 
influencers, whether it is their parents, whether it is their 
coaches, whether it is their guidance counselors, whether it is 
their Scout leaders, and with the communities. And as you can 
go back to each of your districts and talk about, you know, not 
only what you are doing here in Congress, but also talking 
about the aspect of the positive value of service in our 
military, and how each one of us have been----
    Mr. Fallon. And, General, I very much apologize, and we 
probably should talk about this offline because I only have a 
few minutes left.
    But we are 535 Members up here. What can we do as far as 
marketing goes? We have to be innovative. I mean, the Marines, 
since I was a kid, had great commercials and marketing and 
outreach, and they are the only branch that hits their goals. 
Granted, they are smaller. But what we can functionally do, and 
do we need to entice with more bonuses?
    And it ebbs and flows, right? Sometimes, we're chock full 
of people that want to sign up and other times we are starving. 
We are starving for pilots right now, too. And I can remember 
that we were starving--you know, we had a surplus of pilots in 
the seventies, and then, we were starving. And then, you know, 
I graduated in 1990; there were too many, and then, my colonel 
told me, ``Pat, watch. In 3 years, they will have too few.'' 
And that is exactly what happened.
    So, what can we functionally, specifically, do? And what 
can you do?
    General Brown. Yes, you know, there are enlistment bonuses, 
quick ship bonuses, college loan repayment-type programs. We 
are also looking at the aspect of additional recruiters. We 
have the smallest ratio of recruiters for the United States Air 
Force and we need to increase that.
    But it is also how we engage. You talked about the 
marketing, and there are many more ways to get information to 
young people and influencers than just traditional TV 
commercials that we have done in the past.
    But it is also the personal engagement that is required. 
That is the aspect I get when I talk to our----
    Mr. Fallon. And, General, if there's also any problems with 
certain States, because, you know, there's some of the school 
districts--I'm hearing from other flag officers that they do 
the bare minimum. You know, I think maybe it is like an hour a 
month, or something like that, for recruiting access to the 
high schools.
    Let us know. Because we, I think, can pass--I hope we could 
pass it in a bipartisan way. States get a whole bunch of 
Federal monies, and if they don't want to play ball and help us 
out--this is a national crisis and it is really scaring me 
because year over year it seems to be getting worse, and it is 
a trend. And I just want to do everything we can to affect it.
    General Brown. That would be very helpful.
    Mr. Fallon. And please let us know what we need to do while 
we are writing this up.
    And I think I'm just going to have to ask this question for 
the record. In this year's budget request, the Air Force 
included a roadmap to spending nothing in fiscal year 2023 on 
Collaborative Combat Aircraft, and then it goes to $400 million 
in a year, and then eventually to $3 billion in fiscal year 
2028, and that is rapid growth. And generally, I'm encouraged 
by that, but I believe we need to also think about autonomy 
with AI [artificial intelligence]-piloted aircraft as well. And 
I just wanted to--and I will submit a couple of questions for 
the record on that.
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 123.]
    Mr. Fallon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman from Texas.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Nevada, Mr. 
Horsford, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Horsford. I thank the chairman and the ranking member 
for this important hearing.
    Secretary Kendall and General Brown, it is good to see you 
again. I thank you, General Saltzman, for your service.
    As you know, my district is home to Nellis and Creech Air 
Force Bases and the National Test and Training Range.
    General Brown, I have had the opportunity to ask this 
question of Secretary Kendall. And as a 1991 graduate of the 
Air Force Weapons School at Nellis Air Force Base yourself, I 
wanted to ask, what role you see Nellis Air Force Base and 
Creech Air Force Base playing as a part of our National Defense 
Strategy?
    General Brown. Well, it plays an excellent role. And not 
only was I there as a student in 1991, I was back as an 
instructor in 1992 and 1994 and back as the [commander] of the 
weapons school from 2005 to 2007.
    Nellis and Creech and the Nellis Test and Training Range is 
a national treasure to help with our national defense, and it 
is one of the key areas that we do some of our highest end 
training for the United States Air Force and our joint team. 
And so there is great value in not only the base itself, but 
the range space that we are able to operate in, and we have 
been operating in for decades. And so, we appreciate the great 
support from the community, from the State, and from the 
congressional delegation to support that training.
    Mr. Horsford. Thank you for your insight. It is a national 
treasure. We look forward to continuing to work with you.
    Now, focusing on the mental health of the UAV [unmanned 
aerial vehicle] pilots, I was glad to see the fiscal year 2024 
Air Force budget made significant investments in our airmen. 
However, I continue to be concerned about the mental health of 
our remotely piloted aircraft crews and pilots.
    A Military Health System study from 2019 found that 
remotely piloted aircraft pilots have 32 percent higher risk of 
sleep disorders compared to those of all other Air Force 
occupations. When I was at Creech Air Force Base recently, it 
was shared with me that there is only one mental health 
provider who was only able to address acute concerns, which 
means, for more serious concerns, airmen actually have to 
travel to Nellis, which is almost an hour away. And really, it 
takes months to get an appointment.
    So, what is the Air Force doing to assure that remotely 
piloted aircraft pilots and their non-pilot crews receive 
adequate mental health screenings and recovery?
    General Brown. Representative Horsford, a couple of things 
we are doing associated with this. As you described, for 
certain career fields they are higher stress than others. And 
we are really looking at how we take the shortage of mental 
health providers that we have across the Air Force and put them 
in the right areas where there is greater need. Creech is one 
of those, and as you highlighted, driving to Nellis is probably 
not the answer on some of these.
    We are also trying to do an aspect of what we call targeted 
care to make sure we are putting--you know, those that need the 
most acute support are getting to mental health providers, but 
we also look at the aspect of how we engage with our airmen on 
a regular basis to ensure their mental health, just like their 
physical health, from that aspect. And it requires leadership 
for us to be able to do that as well, and this is where our 
leadership training and working with our leaders.
    But greater focus on the areas where we have higher 
stresses is where we are headed to support not only Creech, but 
other parts of our Air Force.
    Mr. Horsford. Thank you.
    So, just during my last district work period, I was at 
Nellis Air Force Base with the Chief of Staff looking at the 
need around our dorm shortage, which is about a 575-bed 
deficit. Airmen are being released into off-base community 
housing after 11 months, short of the Air Force's requirement 
of 36-month time in service. And Creech Air Force Base does not 
even have on-base housing, making it so that service members 
stationed at Creech have to drive, again, almost an hour for 
housing at Nellis.
    So, I know this issue is not unique to my district, but 
based on us being central to the operations of the Air Force 
and a national treasure--in your testimony you state that the 
military housing is another important way that the Air Force 
has focused on retention in the fiscal year 2024 budget. So, 
can you tell the committee what the Air Force is specifically 
doing to address these critical housing needs?
    General Brown. There's a couple of things we are doing. One 
of the areas that we tend to focus on in our military housing 
is it is mostly on single family homes. We are looking at 
options to provide one- and two-bedroom apartments from our 
project owners that do our privatized housing.
    The other part is how we engage with our communities to 
highlight the housing need in some aspects. When I was at 
Nellis most recently, back in January, I had a chance to talk 
to the leadership there is how do we identify apartment 
complexes that we can in some cases lease, but we need to take 
a look at how we also build one- and two-bedroom apartments.
    Edwards is another location that has a dearth of housing 
for either single airmen or small families that don't need a 
full single family home. And we are working with OMB [Office of 
Management and Budget] to actually start that process. So, we 
do have some work to do, but we do have a way ahead.
    Mr. Horsford. Thank you.
    Well, I know, with the leadership of the chairman and the 
ranking member, and the appropriators, we are going to get 
there.
    So, thank you for your service.
    Thank you and I yield back.
    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
    Chair now recognizes the gentleman from New York, Mr. 
LaLota, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. LaLota. Mr. Secretary, Generals, thanks so much for 
being with us here today.
    I wanted to discuss a local Air Force issue in my district 
that has a national impact. And I first mentioned this issue 
last week at a hearing with some of the Army and Navy brass, 
but given the audience today, I think it may be a little more 
appropriate. You may be able to provide me some insight into 
this issue.
    My Long Island district is home to the 106th Rescue Wing 
with the Air National Guard. As you gentleman I'm sure know, 
the 106th provides personnel recovery, combat search and 
rescue, expeditionary combat support, civil search and rescue 
support to Federal and State authorities.
    And it has recently come out that the Air Combat Command is 
considering cutting the total number of Air National Guard HH-
60s from 18 to 16 total aircraft and will require the 106th to 
go from 6 to 5. If this decision is confirmed--and I hope that 
it doesn't get confirmed--this would directly affect negatively 
the operational effectiveness of the 106th Rescue Wing.
    So, Mr. Secretary, General Brown, are you aware of this 
decision? Are you aware of any logic or insight into it?
    General Brown. I know we are working through the aspect of, 
as we make the transition from the HH-60 Golf to the HH-60 
Whiskey, based on their procurement, will determine how we best 
lay out the balance across the force.
    I don't have the specifics on your particular unit there in 
your district, but I will get back to you with additional 
details.
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 123.]
    Secretary Kendall. Yes, I don't think a final decision has 
been made.
    Mr. LaLota. And I hope that before that decision is made, 
one would reflect upon the impact of going from six to five. A 
17 percent reduction is much more harmful than a unit that may 
be going from 25 to 24 aircraft. That loss can be absorbed more 
by a larger number, as you know. These aircraft spend a lot of 
time in maintenance being offline. When you have six, you 
really don't have six; you probably have more like four or 
three. And when you have five, you probably have more like 
three or two. So, that impact of that reduction of that size 
from six to five is tremendously harmful to the 106th that 
provides a lot of great operations where it is. So, I hope that 
you'll look into it.
    What do you need from us in order to make the best decision 
there possible, gentlemen?
    Secretary Kendall. I'm not aware of anything, but if there 
is anything, we will let you know.
    Mr. LaLota. You want to add anything, General?
    General Brown. No. Same. Same.
    Mr. LaLota. I would ask, Mr. Secretary, can you commit to 
discussing this situation with General Mark Kelly and reporting 
back to my office about it, sir?
    Secretary Kendall. Yes, I will.
    Mr. LaLota. Awesome. Thanks a bunch, gentlemen.
    I yield back my time, sir.
    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
    Chair now recognizes an outstanding member from the great 
State of Alabama, Ms. Sewell, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Sewell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And good afternoon, gentlemen.
    The district I represent, proudly represent, is home to 
Maxwell Air Force Base, the 117th Air Refueling Wing, and the 
187th Fighter Wing. Our airmen and women are pillars of our 
community. So, ensuring that they have the resources and 
support they need remain my top priority.
    Moreover, while we focus on increasing the readiness of our 
Air Force, we must also ensure that America maintains our space 
superiority. Last year, the GAO report to Congress confirmed 
that Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Alabama is the best place 
for the U.S. Space Command headquarters.
    Also, the IG [Inspector General] report said, quote, ``we 
determined that the 2020 Basing Action process directed by the 
Secretary of Defense complied with Federal Law and DOD policy 
and that the [Basing Action] process was reasonable.'' End 
quote.
    I'm grateful to the Pentagon IG and the GAO for conducting 
these reviews which show that, throughout the Air Force's 
evaluation process, Redstone Arsenal was always considered the 
most qualified location for the U.S. Space Command 
headquarters. The GAO and the Pentagon IG confirmed what we had 
already known--we in Alabama--that there is no better home for 
Space Command than the Rocket City.
    This decision has been in limbo for far too long, Mr. 
Secretary. So, I hope that a final decision will be coming 
soon. I believe that our military readiness in space depends 
upon that. Enough is enough, as my chairman would say.
    So, my first question is to you. As you know, the 187th 
Fighter Wing has a rich tradition and a rich history. The 
legacy of the Tuskegee Airmen began in Montgomery, Alabama, and 
a number of the current F-16 fighter jet tail wings are painted 
bright red to honor the Tuskegee Airmen. The 187th is proud to 
continue that legacy by becoming home to the F-35A Lightning 
fighter jet. However, the delivery of the F-35 has been delayed 
due to technical issues that I understand have been figured 
out, and I understand that Lockheed Martin has resumed delivery 
of the F-35.
    Mr. Secretary, I was hoping that you can provide an update 
for when we in Alabama can expect our delivery for the 187th.
    Secretary Kendall. I'm going to have to take that for the 
record, but I will get back to you on that and let you know.
    Ms. Sewell. Great.
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 123.]
    Ms. Sewell. My next question is to General Saltzman. The 
National Security Space Launch program, which includes the 
United Launch Alliance and SpaceX, has successfully executed 97 
launches, while also reducing cost. Could you elaborate on the 
importance of the program and the need to continue investment 
to increase our launch cadence to improve the resilience of our 
satellite architecture?
    General Saltzman. I have often compared the National Space 
Launch infrastructure is to space operations as runways are to 
air operations. It is vital; it is critical; it is 
foundational. We are looking at every possible way to take 
advantage of the tremendous growth in commercial space launch 
providers. And we are investing in the infrastructure, and we 
are looking at changing policies and procedures to make sure 
that we can maximize those opportunities. So, it is vital.
    Ms. Sewell. General Brown, in my remaining time, as the Air 
Force continues to wrestle with the pilot shortfall, while also 
striving to improve Air Force readiness, can you elaborate on 
the important role that Air University at Maxwell Air Force 
Base has in educating our airmen and women?
    General Brown. It plays a distinct role. Matter of fact, I 
was at Maxwell just last week and had a chance to spend time 
there at Maxwell, and then, also, over at Auburn to talk to 
their aviation program. And the connection between the rich 
heritage of Maxwell and the education it provides our airmen as 
they come--not only our airmen, but also our joint teammates 
and our allies and partners--it brings us some foundational--
all the way from our NCOs [non-commissioned officers], but also 
our officer training, but also as we do our developmental 
education. It plays a very distinct role in helping shape our 
Air Force and our doctrine as well.
    Ms. Sewell. Thank you, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
    The Chairman. I thank the gentlelady.
    Chair now recognizes the vice chairman of the committee, 
the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Wittman, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Wittman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I would like to thank our witnesses for joining us today. 
Secretary Kendall, General Brown, General Saltzman, thank you 
so much for your service and for all that you do for our 
Nation.
    Secretary Kendall and General Brown, I wanted to set the 
stage. The Air Force's fiscal year 2023 to 2028 FYDP request is 
to retire 801 fighter aircraft and build 345. And I can go down 
through the list. Essentially, the new aircraft coming onboard 
are F-35As and F-15EXs.
    And I'm not opposed to retiring aircraft and I'm not a 
mathematician, but I have a hard time figuring out how we are 
doing addition by subtraction. And my question is this: in your 
professional military judgment, is the 801 divestment versus 
the 345 aircraft investment, is that the proper alignment of 
procurement versus divestment necessary to counter the Chinese 
threat, necessary to deter the Chinese, in the face of what I 
believe is probably the most challenging time strategically 
this Nation has faced in our lifetimes?
    Secretary Kendall. In this case, it is, and the math is 
really about combat capability and exchange ratios. We are 
buying--we accelerated or increased the buy of the F-35 this 
year. When we do exercises, we put fifth-generation aircraft 
against fourth-generation. There is no comparison.
    And if you look at an aircraft that we are retiring, like 
the A-10, it is much less than a fully capable fourth-
generation aircraft. It just wasn't equipped to do that kind of 
job. So, we are buying much more combat power with the things 
we are adding to the inventory than we have with the things we 
are taking out.
    I will let General Brown add to that, if he wants to.
    General Brown. Yes, Representative Wittman, what I would 
also add is, in order to keep these additional aircraft that, 
you know, we talk about divesting--they don't provide the 
capability. And so, what we are doing is we are buying, what I 
would say, aircraft that are not going to be in a place to 
actually provide us the combat power we are going to need. 
Ideally, over time, we would have laid this out to balance this 
out, but this is going to give us the best mix of capability 
vis-a-vis the threat, and it is not just the airplanes. It is 
also the munitions. It is the sensors. It is the command and 
control that goes all with this to give us the combat 
credibility and capability that we need.
    Mr. Wittman. Listen, I don't disagree with your assessment 
of the capability of some of the legacy aircraft that we are 
retiring. No two ways about it, A-10s, F-15Cs, and Ds, 
understand it. But there is still some capability there. Now, 
whether it is directly translatable to the threat in the 
INDOPACOM, we can have a debate back and forth with that.
    So, taking that as the case, taking that as the case that 
we are going to retire those 801 aircraft, and we are going to 
look at F-35As and F-15EXs, to me, there ought to be in the Air 
Force's plan as part of that a bridge, and that bridge, in my 
mind, should be the unmanned component, the CCA component, 
where you could build quickly with existing platforms that are 
already out there today, that a whole cadre of companies are 
manufacturing.
    Those platforms roughly $8 or $9 million a platform. And 
let's say you add $10 million additional for weapons to go on 
those platforms. That is something that could be purchased 
today. You don't have to do a program of record. It could be 
purchased today as a bridge to F-35 additional capability, to 
whatever comes next in the next-generation air defense system.
    Tell me, are there plans for the Air Force to bridge that 
gap where we are going down through this trough? Even though 
the aircraft we are bringing on are more capable, they are 
still not there yet. So, there is still a gap that we are 
facing. Tell me that you all have at least considered the CCA 
component of what we need to do.
    Secretary Kendall. You are raising a good point, 
Congressman. The guidance we have given for all of our programs 
is to move them forward so that we get meaningful combat 
capability as fast as possible. CCAs are a good example of 
that.
    Mr. Wittman. Yes.
    Secretary Kendall. We have a pretty aggressive schedule for 
CCAs, but we want to introduce them to the force as soon as we 
can.
    The technologies that were developed over the last few 
years, in particular, and a lot of work I have had done by 
boards of experts, and so on, and my Scientific Advisory Board, 
tells us that we can move forward with development of that 
platform. Then, it will get to a place where its capabilities 
are going to be very cost-effective for us.
    In parallel with that, though, we have got to work out a 
lot of things about organizational structures; tactics, 
techniques, and procedures; maintenance approaches; logistics; 
how we organize the force; and then how it all fights together 
and is sustained.
    So, we are buying a few platforms to do that, to have 
experimentation along those lines, and we are buying some----
    The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. 
McCormick, for 5 minutes.
    Dr. McCormick. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
    First of all, I just want to point out that I'm a third-
generation military pilot from an Air Force family. I'm the 
black sheep of the family, and although I may have my bias 
about which service does aviation best, I'm also an aircraft 
controller, a forward aircraft controller. So, a lot of my 
focus will be on that and how you guys are still in a support 
mission for ground forces.
    I will say that it worries me because, when I first came in 
the Marine Corps, I noticed one thing about the Air Force--your 
motto. It really stood out to me because, as a forward aircraft 
controller who had to put bombs on target, I understood a model 
like ``Aim high.'' And then, you guys spent millions of dollars 
coming up with a new one, ``Nothing Comes Close.'' So, as an 
aircraft controller, I was a little concerned about that.
    When you guys talked about your reorganization into the 
future with your Tactical Air Control Party [TACP], I noticed 
there was about a 44 percent cut in the amount you are spending 
on it. And my concern, along with how we are reorganizing 
diverging from the A-10s to the F-35s and ground support and 
knowing how critical the A-10s have been in ground support, 
that, once again, we are in that command-and-staff kind of idea 
where we are moving away from ground support towards just 
dominating the skies. And I'm worried that the F-35 can't do 
the mission as well as the A-10 can, and that we are having 
fewer tactical aircraft parties in the field being able to do 
their job. Basically, I'm worried about the ground support. And 
could you address that, please?
    General Brown. Sure. As we make the transition to the 
future, and as we have done our war games and analysis, we will 
still do close air support, but the ratio of close air support, 
what we have done, particularly over the course of the past 20 
years in the Middle East, I would say 30 years going back to 
Desert Shield/Desert Storm, that ratio of close air support, or 
close air support-like missions, is different.
    And so, as you look at the TACP career field, but also the 
aspect of the platforms we bring in, we all--all the services 
are transitioning. Okay? Think about the Marine Corps. They are 
going away from the F/A-18 to a full F-35 fleet to do the exact 
same thing we are asking the United States Air Force to do. It 
is to provide support to our service members on the ground and 
our allies and partners on the ground.
    And so, we are just as committed to supporting them, no 
matter what platform we fly, to provide the airpower anytime 
anywhere in support of what is going on the ground, air 
superiority, global strike. All these together, we are very 
focused on to be able to get there.
    But the TACP career field, as we make that transition, we 
also have to transition the aspect and the makeup of the Air 
Force to get there. We will still have TACPs. We will still 
have the expertise. But the number will shift a bit, as you 
described.
    Dr. McCormick. Yes. Hopefully, we don't suffer as a 
consequence just on our ground support. Like I said, I 
understand we always evolve, but we always come back to the 
ground has to be owned, and you are a big part of helping us do 
that.
    Have we done a side-by-side comparison to the F-35 compared 
to the A-10 in its anti-armor mission?
    General Brown. Not so much on the anti-armor, but there was 
testing to compare the mission sets between the A-10 and F-35. 
And so, that was done.
    One thing I would also highlight to you is that a good 
majority of those that are going to be flying the F-35, really, 
most of the A-10 pilots are going to go into F-35. Matter of 
fact, the wing commander at Luke, where we do our F-35 
training, is an A-10 weapons school graduate. The previous wing 
commander who was at Hill flying F-35s was an A-10 weapons 
school graduate.
    And so, that expertise, you know, they will be in a 
different airplane, but you will still have that same expertise 
going forward. And you will see a number of A-10 pilots flying 
F-35s.
    Dr. McCormick. And I appreciate that we did the same thing 
in the Osprey when we transitioned, but the difference in 
capabilities [is] what I'm more worried about. As you know 
better than I do, the A-10 was designed around a gun, a very 
effective gun----
    General Brown. Sure.
    Dr. McCormick [continuing]. That when we did war games, or 
when we had the turkey shoot, it destroyed armor in a very real 
way very quickly. It changed the face of the battlefield. And I 
just wondered if you had any comparison side-by-side about the 
effectiveness of an F-35 taking out a tank one after another 
and another, and if we are going to lose--we are going to 
degrade our capabilities in supporting our ground----
    General Brown. Yes, what I would highlight is, when you 
were just using the gun, the gun was much more effective than a 
dumb Mark 82.
    Dr. McCormick. Yes.
    General Brown. But a laser-guided munition or a GPS [Global 
Positioning System]-guided munition is much more effective now 
than a gun. And so, that is a part I think about, as a Chief of 
Staff of the Air Force, is the effectiveness of the 
capabilities we have, and not get stuck in a paradigm, but 
thinking more broadly about the capabilities that we provide.
    Dr. McCormick. Okay. And with my final 15 seconds, I will 
just suggest maybe a new motto of ``On Target.''
    General Brown. Got it.
    Dr. McCormick. Semper Fi. Thanks.
    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
    Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Missouri, Mr. 
Alford, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Alford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member.
    And thank you to our distinguished witnesses today. I 
appreciate you being here.
    I'm honored to represent the home of the B-2 bomber, 
Whiteman Air Force Base just outside of Sedalia, Missouri.
    I recently visited Palmdale, California, with Chairman 
Kelly to see the B-21 firsthand. Very impressed with that 
platform. It is going to be exciting to see the power that it 
projects for America.
    I also want to make sure, and as I know you do, to keep the 
B-2 as lethal, as capable, as possible until the B-21 is 
operational and fielded in sufficient numbers. As you know, we 
have been talking about today that we are facing a difficult 
balancing act of keeping some of our older aircraft around; in 
particular, the A-10, which I'm concerned about today.
    Secretary Kendall, let me ask you, first, what factors go 
into your decision making when deciding what follow-on missions 
will replace the remaining A-10s?
    Secretary Kendall. Generally, I look at the entire suite of 
missions we are trying to perform, but we are driven by the 
pacing challenge and what it is confronting us with. And 
essentially, I would love to give you the classified briefing 
on that. I don't know if you have had it or not----
    Mr. Alford. Yes.
    Secretary Kendall [continuing]. But we give it to a lot of 
people.
    But, basically, China has been trying to field the 
capability to deny us and circumvent some of the systems that 
we have fielded and depended upon for quite some time. So, they 
are being creative about their use of sensors of various types. 
They are being aggressive about their air-to-air weapons. And 
they are integrating other capabilities together with their air 
platforms and they are integrating their air platforms 
themselves in a way which is very effective. So, we have got a 
very serious challenge for control of the sky.
    We also have a very serious challenge on the basis of 
affordability. The aircraft that we currently have in 
production, both the EX and the F-35, are costing on the order 
of $85 million to $100 million apiece. The NGAD platform, the 
Next Generation Air Dominance manned platform, is going to cost 
multiple times those numbers.
    So, we are introducing the CCAs that we were talking about 
earlier, the Collaborative Combat Aircraft, to get a unit-cost 
item into the fleet that is very cost-effective and improves 
our ratio of capability on an affordability and a cost-
effectiveness basis. So, that is the mix that we are looking 
at.
    We want to ensure, as General Brown mentioned, that we 
continue to perform all the missions that we have traditionally 
had to perform. So, China is not the only problem we have to 
solve. We also have to worry about possible conflict in a 
number of other places, and we were talking about killing 
armor. We are interested in acts of aggression, whether it is 
ground forces or a maritime act of aggression, and we want to 
be able to take on both of those types of threats. But we have 
got to control the air first. So, that is mission number one.
    And we still have to, obviously, have capability against 
terrorisms and other groups like that. So, we try to ensure 
that we are covering the waterfront, all those things that we 
have to do, but focused primarily on the pacing challenge. That 
is why we call it the pacing challenge.
    Mr. Alford. Thank you, sir.
    General Brown, I appreciate our conversation several weeks 
ago, look forward to getting to know you better.
    We did talk about the 442nd Fighter Wing at Whiteman Air 
Force Base. Critical, I think, to the mission there. It is a 
great complement to the Black Hawk, MQ-9, the stealth bomber.
    And I was encouraged to hear you say that most of the A-10 
program will be going to the F-35. Can you commit that the F-35 
is a possibility to coming to Whiteman Air Force Base, so that 
the 442nd can remain a fighter wing?
    General Brown. Well, I will tell you that--I mean, I can't 
commit to you what exactly is going to happen, but I will 
commit that I will work with you. But I will also tell you that 
we are going to work through the various options of mission 
sets that we will support there at Whiteman.
    Mr. Alford. What are those other options, sir?
    General Brown. Well, some of those are, as Secretary 
Kendall--another flying mission, whether it is in the B-21--is 
an example; other operational-type missions or [inaudible]-type 
missions. It really depends on our F-35 procurement and 
opportunities, as we look across the force, of where we are 
going to be able to put those and how we bed down the aircraft 
over time.
    Mr. Alford. I do understand there is going to be some 
differences we can't talk about in this setting with the B-21 
bedding down than the B-2. I know there is going to be 
operational differences. I have visited personally with the 
442nd, these proud men and women who want to remain a fighter 
wing.
    We have been talking today about this gap period. That 
concerns me, that the A-10 is going to go away in 2028, and we 
are going to have this gap with hundreds of fine warriors who 
really won't have a mission. That concerns me.
    General Brown. Well, that is our effort, is to, I mean, to 
the best of our ability, to minimize that gap and ensure we 
retain that experience, particularly, from our Guard and 
Reserve, in addition to our Active Duty.
    Mr. Alford. I look forward to working with you on that, 
sir.
    General Brown. Thank you.
    Mr. Alford. Thank you very much.
    General Brown. Thank you.
    Mr. Alford. I yield back.
    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Florida, Mr. 
Gaetz, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Gaetz. Mr. Secretary, it is always an honor to have you 
in our district. The folks at Air Force Special Operations 
Command at Hurlburt Field were particularly honored and 
grateful to be able to share the work they do with you.
    I have got a niche issue there that I hope I can draw your 
attention to. The 919th is the Reserve Component at Duke Field 
that supports a lot of what Air Force Special Operations 
Command [AFSOC] does. Got a lot of pilots there. Got a lot of 
special tactics folks there with a lot of experience; live in 
the community; have come out of, oftentimes, AFSOC.
    And right now, there seems to be some confusion about what 
the future of the 919th is and the 711th they are in, because 
AFRC [Air Force Reserve Command] sees that they have got a 
price tag and AFSOC sees that they have got a price tag. And 
because they nestle between those two, there is going to be 
hundreds of billets, come October, that are fully funded, but 
with no real mission because the Dornier that was there is not 
going to be there.
    So, I don't expect you to have all the answers to that in 
this hearing, but at least wanted to use our time to highlight 
the concerns those folks have. And to every extent we can 
encourage General Healy to get an answer to those folks 
regarding what their future is, I think it will help. Because a 
whole lot of experience, at times decades of experience, and we 
don't want to lose that at AFSOC or out of the Reserve.
    I will give you a chance to make any comments, if you would 
like.
    Secretary Kendall. We will take a look at that and get back 
to you. I don't have details on that for you right now.
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 117.]
    Secretary Kendall. If I could take a moment of your time, 
my visit, first district visit I made to your district I think 
was one of the most memorable moments of my tenure in office, 
and probably of my life, which was the Doolittle Raider last 
toast. And that was quite a moment. Going to Hurlburt was 
enjoyable and interesting, but nothing like the significance of 
that last toast.
    Mr. Gaetz. Yes, and we were also grateful to have General 
Brown there for that, for that as well.
    General Brown, I do have to ask you a question that sort of 
stems from what Mrs. McClain was asking about. She showed you 
this curriculum from the Air Force Academy and she asked you 
why the terms ``mom'' and ``dad'' were disfavored. And you said 
that you are working to build cohesive teams.
    So, I was just wondering, how do the terms ``mom'' and 
``dad'' impair cohesive team-building?
    General Brown. You know, part of leadership is 
understanding the people you are privileged to lead, and as you 
have that opportunity, you get to know them. And every one of 
us grows up differently and has different experiences, 
different backgrounds, and we can't assume when we engage with 
them.
    And so, from that perspective, you have got to build that 
team and to build that trust with our airmen. In part, because 
that trust is part of the cohesion, it gives you the strong 
team to be able to go execute what the Nation asks us to do.
    Mr. Gaetz. I understand better than most that families at 
times aren't defined by blood or even paperwork, and I know you 
have to recruit folks from different family environments into 
the Air Force. But do you think maybe it puts downward pressure 
on recruiting some of the people who do have moms and dads and 
do use the term ``mom'' and ``dad,'' if in the curriculum of 
the academy it seems to disfavor those terms?
    General Brown. No, I don't.
    Mr. Gaetz. And what is your basis for that belief?
    General Brown. Because I think part of leadership is 
gaining the respect of those you are privileged to lead.
    Mr. Gaetz. You don't think it disrespects people to----
    General Brown. I do not. I do not.
    Mr. Gaetz. You don't think this disrespects moms and dads 
when they send their young children, I guess becoming adults, 
into the academy, and then, they see that ``mom'' and ``dad'' 
are disfavored terms? Do you agree that ``mom'' and ``dad'' 
should be disfavored terms?
    General Brown. I think we need to respect the fact that 
they have either parents, grandparents, aunts, and uncles that 
sometimes raise young people.
    Mr. Gaetz. Sure, but, I mean, I know folks who have been 
raised by aunts and uncles and none of them have ever told me 
that, when they hear someone else call their parent ``mom'' or 
``dad,'' that that upsets them. Do you know of people who feel 
excluded when others refer to their parents as ``mom'' or 
``dad''?
    General Brown. I don't--or either way, whether it is aunts, 
uncles, moms, and dads, I have not come across anyone that----
    Secretary Kendall. Congressman, if I could?
    Mr. Gaetz. Sure.
    Secretary Kendall. The point of that slide--I'm familiar 
with it, came out of the Air Force Academy--it was actually 
created by cadets for training, and it is not very artful. But 
the point was that you shouldn't--it was not to diminish moms 
and dads. It was to just make people aware that that particular 
family configuration is not the----
    Mr. Gaetz. I don't know, Mr. Secretary. It says that you 
want to use ``parents, caregivers, or guardians'' instead of 
``mom'' and ``dad.'' So, when you say, ``instead of,'' it kind 
of does seem to disfavor it. And I appreciate not every slide 
is perfect, and if you are saying this is inartful and we are 
not going to try to disfavor mom or dad, or make people feel 
bad, I think that would be progress.
    Secretary Kendall. You are correct----
    Mr. Gaetz. Okay.
    Secretary Kendall [continuing]. It wasn't artful, and I 
don't think they are using that slide anymore.
    Mr. Gaetz. And one thing the chairman and I, certainly, 
would not take exception with is that you seem to favor the 
term ``y'all.'' So, no--no objection there.
    The Chairman. Chair now recognizes the gentleman from 
Florida, Mr. Mills.
    Mr. Mills. General Brown, I just--thank you so much, Mr. 
Chairman.
    I want to follow up on something you just stated. Because I 
have got to be honest, I took a bit of a personal offense to 
this. You are saying that your belief is that it is more 
cohesive to not use the term ``mom'' and ``dad'' with regards 
to leadership, is that correct?
    General Brown. No, what I'm saying, Congressman, is that be 
respectful and get to know your airmen before you just assume. 
And that is the aspect that I'm talking about, is part of 
leadership is getting to know the people you are privileged to 
lead. And the better you understand them, the better you can 
build trust. And the better you build that trust, the more 
cohesive team you have to do what the Nation has asked to do as 
military members.
    Mr. Mills. So, I guess, then, by that logic, throughout my 
time in the military as a non-commissioned officer, where I 
allowed every one of our team members, whether it was 
operational or back home, that when they would say, ``mom and 
dad,'' I should have in some way corrected them in this because 
I wasn't building a cohesive unit. Very interesting, I must 
say, especially with my military and government time, spending 
over 7 years in Iraq, 3 years in Afghanistan, Kosovo, Pakistan, 
Northern Somalia. Thank you for correcting me in my remiss way 
of leadership.
    I want to switch to something which is actually very 
important to the ongoing finance discussion, which is we keep 
looking at everything from a hardware perspective with regards 
to military aircraft or a gun-to-gun, bomb-to-bomb, bullet-to-
bullet-type kinetic element of warfare. I want to know how much 
of the budget is going towards things like the research of 
quantum entanglement, which I think is going to be 
exceptionally important, as we look into AI autonomous drone 
capabilities and assets.
    I also think that, in recognition that China, Russia, Iran, 
and North Korea have a geopolitical alignment that is really 
economic-resource and innovation-based warfare, I would love to 
know how we are utilizing our budget to help us to advance in 
the quantum war space that I think could be detrimental to 
China's advancement.
    Secretary Kendall. Well, it is one of the areas we are 
investing in. There is a lot of concern about quantum 
capability from the point of view of quantum computing, in 
particular, and its potential for decryption of a lot of our 
current sets of encryption capabilities.
    There are advanced communications possibilities, secure 
communications possibilities as well. So, it is one of the 
things that I believe the Under Secretary for Research and 
Engineering has on her list of technologies to emphasize. It is 
also one of the technologies included under the AUKUS program, 
where we are working closely with Australia and the U.K. 
[United Kingdom].
    There is a lot of potential there. There is a lot of 
uncertainty as to when that technology is going to mature. But 
it is very important for us to invest in, and I agree with you 
on that.
    Mr. Mills. Would you like to add to that at all, General?
    General Saltzman. I was just going to add that software-
defined anything is better. When I talk about deploying my 
capabilities, they don't come home. A lot of them stay on orbit 
forever, quite frankly. And so, the ability to upgrade, to 
redefine, based on software upgrades, and along the lines that 
you are talking about, is a tremendous advantage, and we are 
investing in that.
    Mr. Mills. I absolutely agree, and especially with the idea 
or mindset that we can utilize those satellites that you send 
above, or this quantum technology, to help to essentially turn 
our enemy into being blind, dumb, and deaf, right? And that is 
ultimately the capability to try and control the battle space 
in warfare.
    Moving on to recruitment, I noted in the DOD IG report that 
they said that the pandemic can no longer be utilized as an 
excuse for our failures in recruitment efforts. What do you 
think is contributing the most significantly outside of our 
need to increase the quality of life, which I agree with--
things like adding childcare; things like ensuring that our 
military soldiers' pay is comparable to the rate of inflation, 
to make sure we are not invisibly defunding them; but also, 
looking at MILCON that is needed to help upgrade the barracks 
and provide more housing availability and affordability, off-
post housing? What do you think is the most significant reason 
why we are, Armed Forces-wide, over 25,000 in deficit, and even 
in the Air Force, looking at shortages within the pilots?
    Secretary Kendall. The thing that is affecting young people 
mostly is lack of awareness of the military, lack of an 
understanding of what the military has to offer. They are a 
long way away from thinking about housing and child development 
centers. They are thinking about, what am I going to get out of 
this? And a lot of them, from the surveys that have been done, 
are worried about their safety; that if they go in, that they 
won't be safe.
    So, we really need to educate people. The number of people 
who have had parents serve in the military used to be something 
like 40 percent. It is down to less than 15 now.
    So, all of this we need to do--and it was mentioned earlier 
by General Brown and myself, and I think General Saltzman, 
too--we all need to reach out to people where we have the 
opportunity to try to communicate about what the military has 
to offer.
    Again, retention is fine. We are keeping people. We are 
addressing all those other problems, but we are still keeping 
people.
    We need to get through to young people----
    The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Secretary Kendall [continuing]. And let them know what we 
have to offer. And I think we will prevail.
    I don't think we have a recruiting crisis, in response to 
the earlier comment. I think we have a problem that we can 
manage our way through, and what we are doing is having an 
effect. So, we are----
    The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Mr. Mills. Thank you.
    The Chairman. I want to thank the witnesses. You did a 
great job today. It has been very helpful to us.
    The ranking member is recognized for any comments he may 
have.
    Mr. Smith. No, I don't have any.
    The Chairman. All right. Unfortunately, I don't have any 
more members of the Alabama delegation to talk about Space 
Command.
    But, with that, we are adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 3:32 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]

?

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



 
                            A P P E N D I X

                             April 27, 2023

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

      

?

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


              PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                             April 27, 2023

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

      

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.050
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.002
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.003
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.004
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.005
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.006
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.007
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.008
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.009
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.010
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.011
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.012
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.013
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.014
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.015
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.016
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.017
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.018
    

.eps?

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


                   DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                             April 27, 2023

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

      

      
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.019
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.020
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.021
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.022
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.023
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.024
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.025
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.026
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.027
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.028
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.029
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.030
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.032
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.033
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.034
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.035
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.036
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.037
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.038
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.039
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.040
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.041
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.042
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.047
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.048
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.049
    
    .eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3337.046
    

.eps?

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


              WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING

                              THE HEARING

                             April 27, 2023

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

      

              RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. TURNER

    General Saltzman. Well, I won't pretend that we are not rapidly 
learning lessons that we need to learn as a brand-new Service. But I 
think we have come a long way in our first three years, starting our 
fourth year now. I think we have the processes, the procedures. I 
believe Mr. Calvelli, after he has been installed as the Under 
Secretary for--the Assistant Secretary for Space Acquisition--has done 
a tremendous job laying out a new set of tenets for how we acquire 
space capabilities. I think, in the last 15 months, we have shown a 
demonstrated way to put capabilities on orbit faster. And from a 
personnel management and hiring standpoint.
    As the smallest of the U.S. military services, the Space Force must 
manage our personnel, equipment, and missions as efficiently as 
possible. Enactment of the Space Force Personnel Management Act (SFPMA) 
is critical to mission execution as it allows Guardians the flexibility 
to move between full- and part-time status, allowing for more efficient 
management of our military force, improving quality of life and 
retention, and capitalizing on skill sets developed outside the 
military.
    The length of time it can take to recruit and hire civilian 
personnel is concerning and the United States Space Force is actively 
taking steps to fill positions more quickly. We are evaluating and 
assessing the future of work and the steps we must take to attract and 
retain the right personnel in our acquisition community. USSF assumed 
responsibility for recruiting our acquisition workforce with the goal 
of significantly reducing our time to hire. This will be accomplished 
by streamlining operations and automating aspects of the hiring process 
and by ensuring that we are effectively using direct and other non-
competitive hiring authorities to quickly fill our positions.
    Over the last 12 months, direct hire authority accounted for almost 
70 percent of our civilian hires, and its streamlined requirements have 
helped reduce our end-to-end hiring timelines to better compete for 
talent. We must also leverage existing incentives and offerings to 
compete with private industry to offer competitive starting salaries in 
all career fields, particularly during a time of a tight national labor 
market.   [See page 15.]
                                 ______
                                 
              RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. BACON
    Secretary Kendall. (F-15EX) The current budget proposal is 
procuring the maximum 24 F-15EX that Boeing can produce per year, as 
informed by Boeing. Boeing has indicated they are capable of increasing 
F-15EX production from 24 to 36 aircraft a year if they are resourced 
$40 million for additional staff and tooling. However maximum 
procurement of aircraft would not begin until FY25 if funding for 
staff, tooling, and Advanced Procurement (AP) were added in FY24.
    (F-35A) Currently, the Lockheed-Martin calendar year production 
limit is 156 F-35s of all three variants. The F-35A production limit is 
currently 110 of the 156 and the total (US, partner, and Foreign 
Military Sales (FMS)) F-35A buy profile for FY24 is 99 aircraft, 
leaving space for acquisition of up to 11 additional F-35As. There is 
capacity to produce additional F-35As and funding provided by Congress 
can be applied in the current year or to follow-on procurement years if 
required. The Air Force will work with the Joint Program Office on 
adjustment of aircraft procurement and contracts.   [See page 27.]
                                 ______
                                 
              RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. BANKS
    Secretary Kendall. HACM, a rapid prototyping, Middle Tier 
Acquisition (MTA) program, awarded the development contract in 
September 2022, which initiated the program. The FY24 budget request is 
to mature the preliminary design, execute a critical design review, 
procure long lead hardware for integration and flight test assets, and 
prepare for flight test. The HACM MTA concludes in FY27 and will 
provide Early Operational Capability. HACM meets future capability 
requirements and is part of the AF weapons mix determination.   [See 
page 32.]
                                 ______
                                 
             RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MRS. McCLAIN
    General Brown. The Department of the Air Force has implemented 
training at various stages of members' careers and developmental paths 
to increase unit cohesion, promote readiness, and emphasize respectful 
treatment of all military and civilian members. Without this foundation 
of respectful treatment, unit cohesion suffers and problematic 
behaviors are more likely to occur which impact military readiness.
    The attached spreadsheet identifies training implemented by Air 
Force Instruction 36-7001, Diversity, and Inclusion, dated 19 Feb 2019 
(currently in re-write), and executed IAW DAF Instruction 36-7001. Time 
spent for each training requirement is included on the attached 
spreadsheet. The training in the attached spreadsheet does not require 
additional taxpayer funds as the Department leverages existing forums 
at different touchpoints throughout members' careers.

                      Diversity & Inclusion Training Courses (IAW DAF Instruction 36-7001)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Targeted Trainee                                        D&I Module Duration
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basic Military Training (BMT) trainee                                     3 hours total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enlisted member on his or her first permanent duty assignment             1 hour
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airman Leadership School (ALS) student                                    2 hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Commissioned Officer Academy (NCOA) student                           2 hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senior Non-Commissioned Officer Academy (SNCOA)                           1.5 hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enlisted Professional Enhancement (PE) Course (NCO/SNCOPE) student        1 hour
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Sergeant Academy student                                            2 hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chief Master Sergeant                                                     2 hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Installation/Center Commander(s) (director), Group Commander(s),      1 hour
 Squadron Commander(s), Detachment Commander(s), Section Commander(s),
 Command Chief Master Sergeant(s)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Officer Training School (OTS) trainee                                     3 hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) cadet                               16 hours over 4 years
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) Preparatory School cadet          2 hours total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
USAFA cadet                                                               16 hours over 4 years
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Squadron Officer School (SOS) student                                     2 hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Command and Staff College (ACSC) student                              1 hour
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air War College (AWC) student                                             1 hour
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Flag or General Officer (F/GO) and SES personnel                      1 hour
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recruiter as defined in DoDI 1304.33                                      2 hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military Training Instructor (MTI)--when selected to become a training    2 hours
 instructor)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Employee Orientation                                                  1 hour
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Supervisor Orientation                                                1 hour
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Experienced Supervisor Training                                           1 hour
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Manager Course                                                        1 hour
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Experienced Manager Course                                                1 hour
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senior Manager Course                                                     1 hour
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D&I Program Manager or Chief Diversity & Inclusion Officer                On-going
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[See page 40.]
                                 ______
                                 
              RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. FALLON
    ecretary Kendall and General Brown. The CCA is an autonomous 
platform that will include AI technology. The CCA program leverages the 
technology and expertise from the AFRL Skyborg Vanguard program and is 
also executing $51.7M in FY23 funding to lay the foundation for CCA 
development. The FY24 President's Budget request includes a speed-to-
ramp funding profile that aligns with the program's acquisition 
strategy and warfighter requirement to deliver capacity at a rapid pace 
and in a threat-relevant timeline.   [See page 52.]
                                 ______
                                 
              RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. STRONG
    Secretary Kendall. We have been addressing all the concerns and 
recommendations from both the GAO and Inspector General reports as well 
as conducting additional analysis. Recently, Commander of Space Command 
provided some new information that we are currently evaluating. We 
cannot provide a final decision timeline until we have discussed that 
new information.   [See page 48.]
                                 ______
                                 
              RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MS. SEWELL
    Secretary Kendall. The current beddown plan for the 187FW at 
Dannelly Field shows the following delivery timeline:
    --Three (3) Technical Refresh (TR)-2 F-35As are scheduled to 
deliver from Dec 2023--Jan 2024,
    --Fifteen (15) TR-3 Lot 15 F-35As are scheduled to deliver from Feb 
2024- Feb 2025, and
    --Two (2) TR-3 Lot 16 F-35As scheduled to deliver in May 2025.
    The current Air Force position is that we will not accept Lot 15 F-
35As until TR-3 issues have been resolved. The expected TR3 delays 
could impact Lot 15 deliveries until December 2023 (Lockheed Martin 
(LM) estimate) or as late as April 2024 (Joint Program Office (JPO) 
estimate).
    The April 2024 worse case TR-3 delay could impact five (5) aircraft 
scheduled for delivery to Dannelly Field between February and April 
2024. The AF is working plans to share aircraft in order to mitigate 
the impact of these possible aircraft delivery delays.
    When TR-3 development issues are resolved, aircraft deliveries will 
resume. The AF is working with the JPO and LM to develop a plan to 
maximize delivery capacity from that point forward.   [See page 56.]
                                 ______
                                 
              RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. LaLOTA
    Secretary Kendall and General Brown. The final disposition of HH-
60W aircraft has not been decided. The Department of the Air Force is 
taking into consideration the 10 additional airframes authorized in the 
2023 NDAA and appropriated above the request in the FY23 President's 
Budget submission. Headquarters Air Force and Air Combat Command are 
finalizing the plan for a fleet size of 85 aircraft, in close 
coordination with the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserves, to be 
considered for resourcing in the FY25 budget.
    The Air Force remains committed to supporting the Joint Force by 
maintaining the Department of Defense's only dedicated Combat Search 
and Rescue force and will look to utilize a combination of Air Force 
and Joint Force capacity for Personnel Recovery. However, the 
capability limitations of the HH-60W against current and future threats 
cannot be mitigated with additional capacity.   [See page 54.]
     
=======================================================================


              QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING

                             April 27, 2023

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

      

                   QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. ROGERS

    Mr. Rogers. When does the Air Force target date for completion of 
the Analysis of the Alternatives (AoA) for Air and Cruise Missile 
Defense of the Homeland (AMCD-H) architecture?
    Secretary Kendall. The Air Force is coordinating on a draft plan of 
action for the Air and Cruise Missile Defense of the Homeland (ACMD-H) 
Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) with key stakeholders, including the 
Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE), NORAD & 
USNORTHCOM (N&NC), INDOPACOM, Joint Staff, the Military Services, and 
the Missile Defense Agency. CAPE recently issued draft AoA guidance, 
and after initial review, the Air Force is recommending a multi-phased 
approach due to the comprehensive, joint nature of the ACMD-H mission. 
Once the joint plan is formalized with CAPE and other stakeholders, we 
will have a better assessment of target dates for completion of this 
phased AoA.
    Mr. Rogers. What direction have you provided to guide the USAF as 
it works to complete the AoA?
    Secretary Kendall. In line with our direction from the Deputy 
Secretary of Defense, the Air Force will focus on the initial 
priorities of domain awareness at range, early warning enhancements, 
and interagency air and space integration. With that in mind, we will 
consider both fielded and future capabilities, starting with the 
Department of the Air Force (USAF & USSF) inventory, and coordinating 
with counterpart Acquisition Executives in the Army, the Navy, and the 
MDA. The Air Force will take full advantage of the recent ACMD-H 
analyses shared by MDA and N&NC, as well as opportunities to share 
lessons learned and best practices with teams working related systems 
of systems acquisitions, such as the Defense of Ramstein Air Base, the 
island of Guam, and other related efforts.
    Mr. Rogers. Is it your position that the Sentinel ICBM should be 
MIRV-able?
    Secretary Kendall. [The information provided is classified and 
retained in the committee files.]
    Mr. Rogers. Given the growing Chinese and Russian nuclear arsenals, 
what is your best military advice as to whether the Sentinel ICBM 
should be MIRV-able?
    General Brown. [The information provided is classified and retained 
in the committee files.]
    Mr. Rogers. Can you please describe any direction that you've given 
to help keep the Sentinel ICBM program IOC date on schedule?
    General Brown. On 27 March 2023, Dr. LaPlante, Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment (USD(A&S)), issued an 
Acquisition Decision Memorandum (ADM) authorizing the Sentinel program 
to begin the process of ICBM Launch Facility and Launch Center 
conversion at a small scale in FY24 with the objective of reducing 
deployment risk. This conversion process also enables the program 
office and the Sentinel ICBM Site Activation Task Force to practice at 
a small scale before moving to large scale production. Additionally, 
acquisition strategy changes approved in the ADM will provide a more 
efficient flow to production by addressing both long lead times and 
ramp rate by procuring items when they meet technical maturity 
requirements.
    Mr. Rogers. For all indications, the LRSO program is on-time and 
on-budget. Is there a military utility in developing a conventional 
variant of the LRSO?
    General Brown. The Air Force is studying options for long range 
strike, including whether a conventional LRSO or similar next-gen 
standoff weapon investments are warranted. A conventional LRSO will be 
considered as part of the Stand-Off Attack Weapon Analysis of 
Alternatives, which will begin in 2023 and is expected to reach 
conclusion in 2024
    Mr. Rogers. Can you confirm that the Sentinel Weapon System will 
not have lesser requirements than the MMIII ICBM for direct attack 
survivability, silo EMP hardness, and flight vehicle in-flight 
survivability with respect to nuclear hardness?
    General Brown. [The information provided is classified and retained 
in the committee files.]
                                 ______
                                 
                   QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. TURNER
    Mr. Turner. In my visits to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, which 
as you know, is in my district, I have been made aware of a significant 
shortage in classified administrative space to meet current and future 
mission requirements on the Base, particularly for the acquisition 
workforce. It is my understanding that some of these requirements are 
driven by the ``seven operational imperatives'' which you established 
for the Department of the Air Force. There is an immediate and urgent 
need for off-base leased space that can be reconfigured for classified 
work as well as longer term needs that might be met with new on-base 
construction. It is my understanding that administrative processes and 
existing authorities for off-base leasing make it difficult to move 
quickly to meet urgent Air Force needs. Would you be willing to work 
with me in addressing the administrative hurdles, as well as looking at 
potential new authorities to deal with this challenge?
    Secretary Kendall. Yes, the DAF is more than willing to work with 
your office to address the shortage of classified working space on-base 
and off-base at Wright Patterson AFB.
    Mr. Turner. My understanding is the Air Force civilian acquisition 
workforce is facing significant shortfalls that will require hiring 
additional civilian personnel. What steps is the Air Force taking to 
speed up recruitment and hiring to ensure the necessary positions are 
quickly filled? Are you taking advantage of all existing hiring 
authorities and are there additional hiring authorities--perhaps on a 
pilot basis--that you would recommend meeting this challenge?
    Secretary Kendall. The DAF is actively taking steps to fill 
positions more quickly. We are evaluating and assessing the future of 
work and the activities required to attract and retain the right 
personnel in our Air and Space Force acquisition communities. In 
response to program growth, our acquisition workforce has seen a sharp 
increase in manpower requirements. This growth has resulted in the need 
for an immediate hiring surge.
    The Air Force has postured itself over the last 5-6 years to 
respond to a hiring surge by shaping and staffing a Talent Acquisition 
Team at the Air Force Personnel Center with one segment solely focused 
on Acquisition Workforce Hiring. This team is focused on taking 
advantage of unique acquisition expedited and direct hiring authorities 
combined with modern recruiting tools and techniques to identify and 
attract talent. One unique aspect of this team is the ability to fund 
and accomplish virtual and in-person hiring events, which have proven 
to be highly successful. The acquisition specific team is funded using 
the Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Account.
    Mr. Turner. The primary runway at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, 
Ohio, serves a critical national security need by fulfilling multiple 
Air Force and national defense mission requirements. However, the 
condition of the airfield pavement has continued to deteriorate, 
threatening the imperative to keep the airfield pavements safe and 
mission ready at all times. Can you provide me with a schedule for when 
repairs will be made?
    Secretary Kendall. Yes, once the assessment of options is complete 
(approximately Feb 2024) and the scope of repairs identified, we can 
then share timeline information. There is still a significant amount of 
work to identify the optimal scope of work for repairs and there is 
uncertainty as to when the repairs will be made based on limited 
Facilities Sustainment, Restoration and Modernization (FSRM) funding.
                                 ______
                                 
                  QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. GARAMENDI
    Mr. Garamendi. Please confirm the importance of Beale Air Force 
Base in supporting the Air Forces' 7 imperatives, especially with the 
growing threat of the CCP.
    Secretary Kendall and General Brown. The Air Force plans to keep 
Beale Air Force Base as a central location for execution of Operational 
Imperatives and deterring near-peer competitors. It has been and will 
continue to be a hub for Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance 
(ISR) and other vital missions. In addition to the U-2 Dragon Lady, 
Beale hosts the Common Mission Control Center (CMCC) and Perimeter 
Acquisition Vehicle Entry Phased Array Weapon System (PAVE PAWS). These 
assets ensure continued world-class intelligence, space surveillance, 
and satellite tracking, contributing to the Space Order of Battle 
imperative. The Distributed Common Ground System (DCGS) weapons system 
is a cornerstone of current and future Air Force sense-making 
capabilities. It provides ISR forces with the high-definition analysis 
to conduct data-driven, problem-centric ISR operations delivering the 
deep threat understanding necessary to succeed in deterring or 
defeating our adversaries. This includes sense making to enable Moving 
Target Engagement, Operationally Focused Air Battle Management System 
(ABMS), and Resilient Communications. Furthermore, the Air Force Combat 
Ammunition Center (AFCOMAC) is the service's sole ammunition training 
center, delivering cutting-edge Airmen to deliver the tip of the spear 
for Tactical Air Dominance and Global Strike. Finally, the members of 
940th Air Refueling Wing at Beale provide the fuel and airlift capacity 
to enable Resilient Basing and Readiness to Deploy and Fight.
    While the units and equipment provide obvious connections to the 
DAF's operational imperatives, the Airmen who comprise those units 
truly set the base apart. The men and women of Beale AFB continue to 
evolve Air Force Generation (AFFORGEN) and Agile Combat Employment 
(ACE) techniques, ensuring their ability to meet the challenge of 
Resilient Basing and Readiness to deploy and fight.
                                 ______
                                 
                   QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. LAMBORN
    Mr. Lamborn. There was a recent report by the Government 
Accountability Office on the Department's space situational awareness 
capabilities which found that the Space Force is facing challenges 
implementing the Unified Data Library. This is surprising to learn 
given the prioritization the Space Force placed on the Unified Data 
Library in its FY2024 budget request, and general guidance that has 
been sent out regarding prioritization of the UDL. Can you share 
whether you agree with this conclusion from the GAO report, and commit 
to resolve these challenges to expedite full implementation of the 
Unified Data Library? Will you also commit to ensuring that the Unified 
Data Library is fully implemented and any issues with this are 
resolved?
    Secretary Kendall and General Saltzman. The Space Force agrees with 
the UDL-related conclusions in the GAO report and concurs with the 
recommendation to create a plan for programs (C2 and Sensors) to 
determine how to use the UDL to access and manage all data for Space 
Force Space Situational Awareness systems. Efforts to address these 
challenges are well underway, and the Space Force is committed to 
transitioning the UDL from a prototype to a program of record as 
quickly as possible to realize the Chief of Space Operations' mandate 
to implement UDL as the single authoritative data source for Space 
Force operational systems.
    Mr. Lamborn. General Saltzman, in your testimony to SASC last week 
regarding creating a reserve component for the Space Force, you 
recommended choosing the option that ``. . . minimizes the operational 
impact in any kind of transition . . . '' and ``. . . maintains the 
operational capabilities that are currently there. . .'' Regarding the 
establishment of a Space Force reserve component, what would the actual 
real world consequences be to national security if the current space 
capabilities provided by the Air National Guard were to be lost and it 
were to take 7-10 years to rebuild them in another component? Can you 
walk us through what such a loss would mean to America's ability to 
both defend the homeland and fight and win wars?
    General Saltzman. The ANG performs space missions that are 
absolutely essential for our national defense. These missions include 
the nation's only survivable strategic missile warning capability and 
approximately 60% of the space electromagnetic warfare capability in 
direct support of combatant commanders around the globe. Without the 
capabilities that reside in the ANG today, the US Space Force would be 
unable to perform these missions within its current size and structure, 
potentially leading to degradation in multiple mission areas. This is 
why my strongest possible recommendation is to enact the Space Force 
Personnel Management Act, while transferring the ANG missions to the 
Space Force, without establishing a Space National Guard. This ensures 
unity of command over all Department of the Air Force space forces, 
maximizes flexibility for organize, train, and equip (OT&E) and 
operational responsibilities, and ensures access to part-time forces 
for surge capacity. The total transfer is modest and would include 734 
positions (of which only 242 are full time) across 6 states and 11 
units. The transfer would also include the resources associated with 
the ANG space missions (funding, billets, equipment, and facilities).
                                 ______
                                 
                   QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. WITTMAN
    Mr. Wittman. General Saltzman, I understand the Space Force is 
exploring how the Defense Department might build a Commercial 
Augmentation Space Reserve, similar to the air and maritime civil 
reserve fleets that exist to be called upon by the government to 
support the military in times of crisis or conflict. I think this is 
something that we must seriously pursue. It is critically important 
that we have redundancy in space and that the Department of Defense is 
able to leverage commercial satellites in extremis--and that a 
framework is established so that it is mutually beneficial. Can you 
elaborate on your view of this issue and the actions the Space Force is 
pursuing along these lines?
    General Saltzman. Our allies and partners provide an enduring 
strength and asymmetric advantage that our competitors cannot match. 
Further, the innovation and speed of our commercial space industry is a 
critical differentiator with China. The Russian war in Ukraine further 
highlighted the value of commercial space capabilities to the fight. In 
recognition of the importance of commercial space capabilities, the 
Space Force is establishing a Commercial Augmentation Space Reserve 
(CASR) framework. The framework will include a steady-state peacetime 
architecture that can quickly scale during times of crisis or conflict. 
The Space Force established a Task Force, with subject matter experts 
from across the DOD, to investigate recommendations and efforts needed 
to implement the framework, to include adjustments to Space Policy, 
statute changes, operational concepts, contract structures, governance, 
and funding requirements. To address and counter our pacing challenge, 
we are assessing implementation of this framework in peacetime, with 
the ability to execute during conflict as needed.
                                 ______
                                 
                    QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. SCOTT
    Mr. Scott. John Konrad V, CEO of@gCaptain, tweeted on April 28, 
2023, ``If I was SecDef for 1 min and could do one thing to help 
national security it would be to make every USAF general spend one day 
in a jet fuel refinery or marine loading terminal because there is a 
reason the only non-oil company that owns an oil refinery and charters 
avgas ships is Delta Airlines. Delta does because the amount of fuel 
jets uses is truly massive. AF generals can look up the consumption 
figures but I don't think they fully understand how massive the 
quantities are they consume. If they did, then refining and Tanker 
Sealift would be their number one priority.'' What are your thoughts of 
Konrad's suggestion for USAF generals to spend one day in a jet fuel 
refinery or marine loading terminal?
    Secretary Kendall. I agree that a better understanding of our fuel 
production requirements, fuel consumption statistics, and fuel 
logistics capabilities are a necessary prerequisite for the leaders of 
our fighting force. The DAF recognizes the challenges of fueling the 
fight, especially in the Indo-Pacific. As such, we are in the process 
of improving logistic capabilities and prepositioning, increasing the 
fuel efficiency of our legacy aircraft fleet, investing in software for 
more efficient scheduling, adopting best practices from commercial 
flying efficiency, and working with industry on ultra-efficient 
airframe and engine designs to increase our combat capability and 
achieve more ``lethality per gallon.''
    Mr. Scott. The current demand signal of the COCOMs, especially 
CENTCOM, has indicated the need for effective countermeasures against 
drone and drone swarms. The number and sophistication of the drone 
attacks in accelerating. What is your assessment of the current and 
future drone and drone swarm threat? What solutions is the Air Force 
currently working in the near and far term? What is the timeline for 
the Air Force to field a viable solution that can be deployed across 
the COCOMs and utilized to protect multiple fixed assets? What is the 
Air Force's plan to accelerate technology maturation of C-UAS 
technology, to include lasers and high-power microwave systems? Is the 
Air Force working rapid acquisition plans to field solutions quicker 
and get them into the hands of the COCOMs?
    Secretary Kendall. Current conflicts have shown the growth and 
evolution of the drone threat and it will continue to remain a concern 
to the DAF. The Joint C-sUAS Office (JCO) is the DOD lead for 
standardizing counter-small UAS doctrine, requirements, materiel, and 
training to establish joint solutions to address current and future 
small UAS threats. High-power microwaves and high-energy lasers are 
promising technologies to defeat drone and drone swarm threats and are 
funded through Air Force and JCO. The Air Force programs of record for 
C-sUAS are the Medusa System of Systems and the RF defeat NINJA system 
executed by Air Force Life Cycle Management Center. The Air Force is 
engaging with the COCOMs to provide a prototype High Energy Laser 
Weapon System in order to accelerate transition of these technologies. 
There are 17 Medusa sites and 99 locations with a NINJA.
    Mr. Scott. Over the past five years, the Air Force has invested 
considerable resources to research and develop laser and high-power 
microwave solutions for the critical asset and base defense mission 
against UAS threats to include HiJENKS, Thor, and Mjolnir. Are these 
systems currently fielded within the Air Force? What is the current 
timeline to mature and integrate these projects into the Air Force 
force structure? Are there any barriers to integrating these systems 
into the force structure? If yes, what are the plans to overcome those 
barriers? What is your assessment of the current and future drone and 
drone swarm threat? What solutions is the Air Force currently working 
in the near and far term? What is the timeline for the Air Force to 
field a viable solution that can be deployed across the COCOMs and 
utilized to protect multiple fixed assets? Is the Air Force working 
with other services to develop capable Counter-UAS solutions that could 
be rapidly acquired and fielded to meet the growing UAS threat?
    Secretary Kendall. No, HiJENKS, THOR, and Mjolnir are prototype 
systems and are not planned for deployment by the Air Force. THOR, the 
first high-power microwave (HPM) counter-small UAS (c-sUAS) system, has 
undergone risk reduction and system characterization efforts and was 
deployed OCONUS on a 1-year operational evaluation, allowing users to 
provide operational feedback and enable improvement to future systems. 
Although THOR has shown promise as an effective system, it requires 
additional prototyping to address specific requirements, 
sustainability, operability, and maintainability. Mjolnir is a proposed 
suitability upgrade to the THOR prototype system that offers increased 
range, single operator use, and reduced size, weight, and power (SWaP). 
Available funding has enabled development up to Preliminary Design 
Review.
    These projects need additional prototyping to address key 
sustainability, operability, and maintainability areas for operations. 
The current systems are available to COCOMs and operators for 
additional user evaluation and feedback. The lessons learned from the 
experimentation campaign are shared with the Air Force Life Cycle 
Management Center (AFLCMC), the DOD Joint Counter-small Unmanned 
Aircraft Systems Office (JCO) and Air Force Futures to inform 
requirements for future force capabilities.
    The Air Force is working with the DOD Joint Counter-small UAS 
Office (JCO) to identify potential barriers to force integration, 
including sustainability, operability, and maintainability 
considerations critical to operational effectiveness.
    Current conflicts have identified growth and evolution of the drone 
threat and this will remain a concern of the DOD. As outlined in the 
Counter-Small UAS Strategy, the Department must protect and defend 
personnel, facilities, and assets in an environment where increasing 
numbers of sUAS will share the skies with DOD aircraft, operate in the 
airspace over DOD installations, and be employed by our Nation's 
adversaries. The DOD Joint Counter-small UAS Office (JCO) is focal 
point for these assessments.
    HPM and high-energy laser (HEL) are promising technologies to 
defeat drone and drone swarm threats and are funded through the Air 
Force and JCO. The Air Force programs of record for c-sUAS are the 
Medusa System of Systems and the RF defeat NINJA system executed by 
AFLCMC. The Air Force is engaging with the COCOMs to provide a 
prototype HEL Weapon System (HELWS) in order to accelerate transition 
of these technologies. There are 17 Medusa sites and 99 locations with 
a NINJA. The Air Force also leads the DOD JCO low collateral effects 
kinetic interceptor evaluations.
    The lessons learned from the experimentation campaign were shared 
with AFLCMC, the Joint c-sUAS office and Air Force Futures. AFLCMC is 
working with industry to procure additional HEL c-sUAS prototypes from 
three separate vendors which were delivered in CY2022, allowing for 
further warfighter evaluation, and informing requirements for future 
force capabilities. These additional efforts transition the knowledge 
gained from S&T research and inform operational concept evaluation and 
tech transition opportunities.
    Yes, the Air Force is working with the Joint c-sUAS Office, the DOD 
lead for standardizing c-sUAS doctrine, requirement, materiel, and 15 
training to establish joint solutions to address current and future 
small UAS threats. The Air Force also leads the JCO low collateral 
effects kinetic interceptor evaluations
    Mr. Scott. What progress has been made by the multiple efforts to 
rapidly fill the maritime strike gap with advanced weapons guided by a 
variety of joint systems that will ensure target destruction as well as 
platform survivability? What more needs to be done?
    Secretary Kendall. The Air Force is making several investments that 
will deliver a stockpile of maritime strike weapons to provide an 
advantage over the pacing challenge. In the near term, the maritime 
strike ``gap'' has been addressed by increasing our limited stockpile 
of maritime weapons. In FY24, the Air Force is pursuing a multi-year 
procurement strategy for the Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) and 
the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM), ensuring funding for 
fully maximized production. Additionally, the FY24 budget request 
includes procurement of the Joint Strike Missile, adding maritime 
strike capacity and capability that enables the US to hold maritime 
targets at risk in contested environments. Finally, LRASM and JASSM 
upgrades are underway to improve joint force maritime capabilities and 
integration. Platform survivability and future capabilities can be 
further discussed in a classified setting
    Mr. Scott. Last year in response to one of my questions for the 
record, you wrote, ``The Air Force remains committed to helping our 
Navy partners in the sea mine mission. However, this mission 
doctrinally belongs to the US Navy. The USAF helps with development and 
delivery, in accordance with the desires of the US Navy. The USAF, as 
always, remains open to all conversations with our sister services 
about burden sharing all mission areas across the services.'' What 
additional help can the Air Force provide to the U.S. Navy in regards 
to the sea mine mission?
    Secretary Kendall. The Air Force continues to work with all 
Services to field the most effective cross-domain solutions, including 
working with the Navy to ensure future sea mine capability is extant in 
the Joint Force. While the Navy leads the investigative efforts on 
advanced technology and materiel capabilities for sea mine solutions, 
the Air Force supports the Joint Force through mission enablers, such 
as: bomber maritime mine delivery, intelligence, surveillance, and 
reconnaissance, targeting, cyber, electromagnetic attack, and intra- 
and inter-theater mobility and logistics
    Mr. Scott. Are you satisfied with the number of Air Force and Space 
Force personnel publishing papers in military and space journals? What 
can be done to encourage more Air Force and Space Personnel to read, 
write, and think Air & Space Power?
    Secretary Kendall. While we are satisfied with both the quality and 
volume of material Air Force and Space Force personnel are publishing, 
we continuously encourage our personnel to contribute to the published 
body of knowledge on a broad range of national security issues. Both 
our military and civilian personnel leverage the Air University Press, 
DOD military journals, defense blogs, think tanks, and other academic 
presses to publish journals, books, papers, articles, and thought 
pieces on the full spectrum of national security challenges across the 
global commons. Air University Press has shifted to a digital-first 
distribution model which enables a wider reach than our paper 
distribution, with readers downloading our journals, books, and papers 
4.3 million times in 2021-2022. To give a sense of the Air University 
Press activity alone, from January 2021 to May 2023, 257 Air and Space 
Force authors published 13 books, 30 monographs, and 174 journal 
articles. We have also posted 122 short articles on our Wild Blue 
Yonder blog in the past two years.
    In the spirit of the National Defense Strategy's focus on strategic 
competition, we also stimulate critical thinking through writing 
competitions. Our LeMay Center for Doctrine Development and Education 
has received 27 entrants to date from Air Force and Space Force authors 
for this year's annual essay competition. We believe continued 
collaboration with academia and industry to sponsor writing 
competitions will help foster interest in air and space power and help 
our nation build a deep bench of experts across the national security 
enterprise.
    Similarly, faculty and staff at the US Air Force Academy are 
encouraged to publish across a broad range of academic and national 
security issues. In fact, publishing is essential to academic promotion 
and obtaining tenure. Since January 2021, we are tracking the following 
publications specifically related to Air and Space Power:
    Books: 2
    Book Chapters: 13
    Journal Articles: 69 (14 authored by cadets)
    Noteworthy examples:
      2d Lt Brandon LaFayette (C1C at time of submission). 
``Implications of Hypersonic Weapons on Future Defensive Counter Air 
Operations'' Published in Wild Blue Yonder, Cadet Perspectives Section
      Dr. Brian J. Fry (USAFA Faculty, DFPM). ``Mobilizing 
Uniformed Scientists & Engineers'' Published in Air and Space Power 
Journal
      Col Matt Dietz (USAFA Faculty, DFH). Eagles Overhead: The 
History of US Air Force Forward Air Controllers, from the Meuse-Argonne 
to Mosul, University of North Texas Press, 2023
      Col Joel A. Sloan, et al (USAFA Faculty, DFCE). 
``Infrastructure Truths for Air, Space, and Cyberspace'' Air and Space 
Power Journal
    We are heartened to see our Airmen and Guardians thinking and 
writing about challenging, contemporary issues in the global security 
environment
    Mr. Scott. As the Air Force moves to develop additional tools that 
will carry our 5th generation aircraft into the 6th generation era, no 
one program has become more important than the Collaborative Combat 
Aircraft Program. By connecting manned F35s with unmanned Valkyrie 
drones, we can ensure that our warfighters maintain their advantage 
over our adversaries. How important is the development, testing, and 
eventual deployment of this unmanned, autonomous drone to the future 
force?
    General Brown. The DAF has invested in low-cost attainable aircraft 
and has matured this capability over multiple years with the support of 
Congress. USAF experimentation with unscrewed combat aircraft indicates 
these systems will provide critical risk-tolerant combat capability and 
capacity that complements existing crewed platforms--and can do so at 
affordable acquisition costs. As the first instantiations of low-cost 
attainable aircraft, the Kratos XQ-58A Valkyrie along with General 
Atomics MQ-20 have been instrumental in proof-of-concept demonstrations 
as the DAF continues to explore numerous options that will rapidly 
mature and deliver low cost, high capability, attritable aircraft 
technologies as a means to achieve affordable mass along a threat-
relevant timeline.
    Mr. Scott. Last year, the Air Force unveiled the B-21 Raider. As we 
know, this platform's intended purpose is to gain access to areas which 
are denied to 4th generation technology. Additionally, the Raider is 
being built to operate both as a manned and unmanned platform. Given 
concerns of tightening budgets, have you engaged with the private 
sector and startups to use commercially available technology to model 
and simulate some of these autonomous functions?
    General Brown. Yes, the DAF Rapids Capabilities Office manages 
industry partnerships focused on autonomy through direct relationships 
with multiple programs, engagements at technical reviews, industry 
conferences, and data calls. The Department continues to ensure that 
the B-21 Raider prime contractor, Northrop Grumman, seeks opportunities 
to help manage small business contracts for future technological 
opportunities.
    Mr. Scott. As the Air Force continues to invest in next generation 
autonomous platforms, it is critical that our next generation leaders 
at the Air Force Academy receive training on these systems. Can you 
talk about the national security importance of training future airmen 
on autonomy as a critical advanced technology, and how we can leverage 
public, private partnerships to provide cadets with top notch hands-on 
learning?
    General Brown. We agree that autonomous platforms and other advance 
technologies are vital to our national defense and attest that the 
Department of the Air Force is focused on preparing our current and 
future forces for the high-end fight. The Air Force Academy already 
includes, in their core curriculum, information on the technical, 
strategic, ethical, and legal implications regarding the advancement of 
AI and Autonomy. In addition to the many undergraduate majors that 
develop advanced knowledge and skills in AI and Autonomy, USAFA offers 
a warfighting minor in Robotics and Autonomous systems which is 
available to all cadets regardless of major. Moreover, USAFA stood up a 
Multi-Domain Laboratory which simulates autonomous systems including 
platforms such as combat collaborative aircraft, hyper-sonics, and 
unmanned systems. Finally, the Academy has in place, robust public/
private partnerships where cadets are afforded 3-9 weeks summer 
research opportunities often with educational institutions and industry 
partners, many of which, are at the forefront of autonomous system 
development.
    Mr. Scott. The Air Force has been a leader in innovation through 
adoption of commercially proven technologies through its AFWERX 
program. Yet I believe USAF can do more to elevate and accelerate the 
work of AFWERX. How will AFWERX more actionably aid in the transition 
of technology out of phase 2 into the PEO? What responsibility does 
AFWERX have to ensure the PEO (customer) has a viable acquisition 
strategy to truly facilitate the transition of critical technologies? 
How does AFWERX work directly with PEOS and Senior Leaders to 
incentivize and support risk taking at the lowest level to make the 
best use of the SBIR program as a rapid development capability?
    General Brown. AFWERX has very strong engagement with DAF corporate 
leadership, PEOs and major commands to ensure awareness of SBIR program 
activities and determine alignment with DAF opportunities for 
transition. To facilitate transition, AFWERX requires a project-
specific agreement with a PEO customer or end-user for all Phase II 
SBIR awards. AFWERX provides the SBIR Phase II awardee with access to 
PEO support and information, a PEO representative participating in 
technology demonstrations and a PEO representative investigating the 
transition of the technology solution into operational use. SBIR 
authorities allow PEOs to directly contract for advanced technologies 
with SBIR/STTR companies through Phase III contracts. AFWERX 
facilitates communication between SBIR/STTR companies, PEOs and DAF 
senior leaders through a variety of mechanisms including all-calls with 
government staffs for transition support and training, quarterly PEO 
Roundtables, and community forums such as South by Southwest, Fed 
Supernova, and Air Force Association, where companies can interact with 
AFWERX, members from PEO organizations, and DAF senior leadership.
    Mr. Scott. Congratulations on fashioning a National Security Space 
Launch Phase 3 strategy which allows for the participation of both new 
and experienced launch providers. It's my understanding the missions in 
Lane 1 of Phase 3 allow for new entrants to bid for less complicated 
missions while Lane 2 of Phase 3 represents the most difficult missions 
and are therefore reserved for experienced launch providers. Because 
the mission in Lane 2 represents some of our nation's most critical 
capabilities, can you comment on why it is important to allow only 
experienced providers to launch these payloads?
    General Saltzman. NSSL missions require assured access to space, so 
Lane 2 providers are incentivized to meet all unique gov't 
requirements, to include Western Range capabilities and vertical 
integration. They have more challenging mission requirements, 
necessitating full mission assurance (e.g., Space Based Infrared 
System, USSF classified missions, NRO missions). To bid on Lane 2 does 
not require historical performance/experience but does require fully-
certified launch vehicles in accordance with the New Entrant 
Certification Guide prior to launching an NSSL Phase 3 Lane 2 mission. 
This strategy avoids the possibility of providers optimizing to meet 
some, but not all requirements, resulting in potential gaps in DOD 
launch capabilities.
    Mr. Scott. What are the Space Force's plans for developing and 
using high-frequency, high-powered radar and taking advantage of 
existing and planned ground-based facilities to support current and 
future Space Situational Awareness (SSA) needs, particularly for 
observations deep into the Cis-lunar space region?
    General Saltzman. Space Situational Awareness capabilities help 
ensure a safe, sustainable, and secure space domain and maintaining 
Space Situational Awareness is a core mission of the Space Force in 
every orbital regime, including the cis-lunar space region. The Space 
Force is working closely with NASA, US Space Command, Space Warfighting 
Analysis Center, Air Force Research Lab, and other stakeholders to 
determine the needed SSA architecture.The Space Force's cis-lunar SSA 
architecture will include terrestrial and space-based sensors and 
incorporate multiple methods of observation, such as electro-optical, 
passive radio frequency, and radar. It will also take maximum advantage 
of existing and planned capabilities, including terrestrial high-
frequency, high-powered radars such as NASA's Deep Space Network, when 
appropriate and available for the SSA mission.
    Mr. Scott. What manpower limitations must be remedied in order for 
the USSF to have additional Space Force Chairs at the Army, Navy, and 
USMC War Colleges in order to meet the intent of J7 Joint Professional 
Military Education (JPME) requirements within Service resourcing 
priorities?
    General Saltzman. No limitations need to be remedied. Today, the 
Space Force has one Guardian on the US Navy War College faculty, one 
Space Chair at National Defense University, and two Guardians on the 
Air University faculty. Space Force will continue to work with sister 
services for the assignment of Guardians as military faculty at senior 
service level colleges in order to meet the intent of J7 Joint 
Professional Military Education (JPME) requirements.
    Mr. Scott. When do you expect the USSF to have the capability to 
conduct in-space search and rescue operations?
    General Saltzman. The Space Force has a close partnership with 
NASA, and supports the preparation for the terrestrial rescue, 
recovery, and retrieval of astronauts and spacecraft. The Space Force 
has not been assigned the responsibility to conduct in-space search and 
rescue operations and does not expect to be any time soon; therefore, 
the Space Force has not devoted resources to develop this capability.
                                 ______
                                 
                  QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. STEFANIK
    Ms. Stefanik. Future Flag is a series of Limited Objective 
Experiments led by the Air Force Research Laboratory Rome's Information 
Directorate which focuses on answering key questions to support the 
development of various capabilities that guide research, development, 
test, and evaluation efforts within the laboratory system to meet 
immediate and near-term needs of the operational community.
    I was troubled to learn recently that AFRL Rome is not planning to 
conduct a Future Flag in FY 2023.
    Given the broad interest from the Joint Force in the Future Flag's 
work in multidomain operations and Joint All Domain Command and Control 
(JADC2), why is the Air Force failing to continue this exercise that 
has already delivered tangible benefits to our partners in Ukraine?
    Do you commit to working with this Committee to ensure the Air 
Force Research Labs continue to prioritize exercises like Future Flag 
that provide near-immediate tangible return on investment to the 
warfighter?
    Secretary Kendall and General Brown. The inaugural Future Flag 22 
event hosted by AFRL included participants from over 25 government 
organizations and over 20 industry and academia partners. The event was 
accomplished leveraging resources from OSD and resulted in a number of 
successes, including first field tests of OSD(R&E) 5G technology and 
object detection algorithms for Air Force Special Operations Command. 
The focus was on technology demonstrations and experimentation and 
allowed partner organizations to leverage the operationally 
representative environment.
    The resources leveraged from OSD did not extend through FY23, so 
there is not sufficient funding at this time to support a Future Flag 
23. You have my commitment to work with the congressional defense 
committees and AFRL to identify opportunities to test experimental and 
emerging technology in operational settings.
                                 ______
                                 
                  QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. GALLAGHER
    Mr. Gallagher. The Department of Defense has emphasized the need to 
acquire and integrate long range anti-ship strike weapons into USAF and 
USN aircraft. For the USAF and the Long Range Anti-ship Missile (LRASM) 
the only current operational platform is the B-52. As early as 2019 the 
USAF said it was beginning the engineering on integration of the LRASM 
on the B-52. In the USN, the timeline for announcement to integration 
of the LRASM on the P-8A is expected to be about two years. What is the 
USAF plan to integrate LRASM into the B-52 and what is the timeline for 
initial operational capability and the planned rates of installation on 
follow-on aircraft?
    Secretary Kendall. With a $10M Congressional add in FY19, the B-52 
program completed a LRASM integration study in April 2021 which 
informed the initial technical baseline to integrate the B-52H and 
LRASM weapon system. The B-52 LRASM integration study provided details 
on the functional and interface requirements to develop initial 
technical data. Additional funding is required to complete follow-on 
integration efforts. The B-52 program office requires an additional 36-
48 months to complete B-52 LRASM integration. The schedule assumes 
generating an appropriate cost estimate, requesting, and receiving 
RDT&E funds, establishing a contract, completing weapon software 
integration efforts, and conducting flight test events. The B-52 
program's plan is to leverage the Universal Armament Interface (UAI) 
upgrade being developed for B-52's software block 9 fielding FY28 to 
integrate LRASM on B-52H.
    Mr. Gallagher. In FY22, the House Appropriations Committee for 
Defense added $20M to Program Element 0603211F, BPAC: 634920. The 
intent of the Committee, was to accelerate groundbreaking digital 
engineering for military aviation, beginning with the digital 
certification of a SOCOM logistics drone. The Committee was impressed 
with the ``design, certify, then build'' paradigm used for Formula 1 
racing and sought to enable a pathfinding small business project whose 
lessons could be later applied across the Defense Industrial Base to 
more complex systems. Taking the next step after past Air Force digital 
engineering successes, the vision of this pathfinder, called ``Flyer 
One,'' has been fascinating as a means to change acquisition and U.S. 
competitiveness vis-a-vis China. However, the Air Force Research 
Laboratory (AFRL) is now proposing to pursue a shadow of the Flyer One 
program--only $8.2 million of the total $20 million needed, and 
Congressionally appropriated, to digitally certify a new aircraft and 
then physically verify the validity of this approach. Not only is this 
contrary to Congressional intent for the funding, it is contrary to the 
updated spend plan submitted to Congress, which Congress had to correct 
previously when AFRL tried to redirect funding to other efforts. Can 
you provide an update on the project, why it is underfunded from 
intent, and the plans to complete it?
    Secretary Kendall. Congress appropriated $20M in FY22 intended for 
small unit re-supply; however, the company intended to complete the 
work is no longer in business. Congressional direction was provided by 
House Defense Committee on Appropriations Professional Staffer Members 
to revector the funding to AFWERX for execution by the Agility Prime 
program to rapidly demonstrate and field resupply UAS as well as 
integrate modern digital engineering techniques. In January 2023, 
AFWERX identified execution issues with the planned contractor that 
prevented additional obligations for the FY22 funding. As a result, the 
full amount of the Congressional add will be utilized by an AFRL 
Aerospace Systems Directorate contract. The contract focuses on high 
fidelity modeling and simulation for trade space analysis for cargo 
unscrewed aerial vehicles, design, and testing, and building an UAS 24 
re-supply prototype for US SOCOM. A revised spend plan was submitted to 
and approved by the House Defense Committee on Appropriations on 6 
February 2023. Funding was made available on 01 April 2023 and an AFRL 
Request for Proposal has been issued via the HERMES Broad Agency 
Announcement. The anticipated contract award date is September 2023.
    Mr. Gallagher. The Department of Defense has emphasized the need to 
acquire and integrate long range anti-ship strike weapons into USAF and 
USN aircraft. For the USAF and the Long Range Anti-ship Missile (LRASM) 
the only current operational platform is the B-52. As early as 2019 the 
USAF said it was beginning the engineering on integration of the LRASM 
on the B-52. In the USN, the timeline for announcement to integration 
of the LRASM on the P-8A is expected to be about two years. What is the 
USAF plan to integrate LRASM into the B-52 and what is the timeline for 
initial operational capability and the planned rates of installation on 
follow-on aircraft?
    General Brown. With a $10M Congressional add in FY19, the B-52 
program completed a LRASM integration study in April 2021 which 
informed the initial technical baseline to integrate the B-52H and 
LRASM weapon system. The B-52 LRASM integration study provided details 
on the functional and interface requirements to develop initial 
technical data. Additional funding is required to complete follow-on 
integration efforts. The B-52 program office requires an additional 36-
48 months to complete B-52 LRASM integration. The schedule assumes 
generating an appropriate cost estimate, requesting, and receiving 
RDT&E funds, establishing a contract, completing weapon software 
integration efforts, and conducting flight test events. The B-52 
program's plan is to leverage the Universal Armament Interface (UAI) 
upgrade being developed for B-52's software block 9 fielding FY28 to 
integrate LRASM on B-52H
                                 ______
                                 
                    QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. GAETZ
    Mr. Gaetz. Can you outline the Air Force's plan to increase 
investment in the Gulf Training Range with respect to hypersonic 
testing and what range enhancements will the Air Force seek through FY-
26?
    Secretary Kendall. The lead for Open Air Range investments and 
development is the Office of the Secretary of Defense Test Resource 
Management Center. The Air Force's planned investment in the Eglin Gulf 
Test and Training Range through FY26 includes the Gulf Range 
Enhancements for a secure network, a Multispectral tracking system, and 
a Modular Mission Control Room upgrade totaling $22.7M in support of 
limited hypersonic weapon testing.
    Question for: General Charles Brown 36) Mr. Gaetz. Can you outline 
the Air Force's plan to increase investment in the Gulf Training Range 
with respect to hypersonic testing and what range enhancements will the 
Air Force seek through FY-26?
    General Brown. The lead for Open Air Range investments and 
development is the Office of the Secretary of Defense Test Resource 
Management Center. The Air Force's planned investment in the Eglin Gulf 
Test and Training Range through FY26 includes the Gulf Range 
Enhancements for a secure network, a Multispectral tracking system, and 
a Modular Mission Control Room upgrade totaling $22.7M in support of 
limited hypersonic weapon testing.
                                 ______
                                 
                  QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. SHERRILL
    Ms. Sherrill. Please provide an update on your service's 
implementation and a current status of the FY2022 NDAA changes to MST 
policies.
    Secretary Kendall, General Brown, and General Saltzman. The FY22 
NDAA made historic policy changes that benefit our service members and 
their families, including a package of bold reforms that will deliver 
accountability, independence, and results for survivors of sexual 
assault in the U.S. military.
    The DAF is implementing the following requirements concerning 
survivors of MST: 1) establishing an Office of Special Trial Counsel to 
prosecute sexual assault cases and related crimes, along with a Lead 
Special Trial Counsel who reports directly to the Secretary without 
intervening authority; 2) preserve the independence of judges, juries, 
and proceedings in military sexual assault cases; 3) ensure that 
prosecutors are trained, equipped, and qualified to handle sexual 
assault cases; 4) and ensuring that we have independent investigations 
of complaints of sexual harassment with specified timelines and are 
tracking allegations by survivors of sexual assault or sexual 
harassment of retaliation.
    The DAF also published DAF Instruction 36-3211: Military 
Separations, which outlines increased support to sexual assault 
survivors, strengthens sexual assault prevention and accountability 
efforts, and combines several discharge instructions. Under the 
previous policy, Airmen and Guardians who committed sexual assault 
offenses were subject to mandatory initiation of discharge proceedings; 
the updated policy strengthens the criteria that may be considered for 
discharge.
    Additionally, we initiated the Integrated Response Co-Location 
Pilot program at seven installations on 1 Aug 2022 to evaluate the 
effectiveness of a new, more holistic approach for responding and 
assisting survivors of sexual assault, sexual harassment, domestic 
violence, stalking, and cyber harassment. The pilot ended and we are 
evaluating the results to determine the way ahead.
    Ms. Sherrill. What concrete steps does your service take to reduce 
retaliation and reprisal of witnesses?
    Secretary Kendall, General Brown, and General Saltzman. The DAF is 
committed to ensuring all Airmen and Guardians work in an environment 
free from retaliation and reprisal. Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-
2909, ``Air Force Professional Relationships and Conduct,'' Chapter 5, 
addresses prohibitions against retaliation and reprisal. The AFI 
provides guidance and further information on how commanders and 
supervisors should handle allegations of retaliation. Like Article 132, 
Retaliation, Uniform Code of Military Justice, DAF policy contemplates 
protections for all military members, not just victims and witnesses.
    As with all offenses, DAF commanders are educated and trained on 
how to hold an accused accountable for committing retaliation and/or 
reprisal. In these cases, commanders receive advice from their local 
legal office and Staff Judge Advocate, and have the full range of 
available accountability options, including administrative paperwork, 
nonjudicial punishment, and courts-martial, depending on the severity 
of the misconduct.
    Specifically, regarding victims of sexual assault, on August 25, 
2022, I released a memorandum implementing the Safe-to Report policy. 
The policy encourages reporting by victims who may be hesitant to 
report a sexual assault for fear of being disciplined for collateral 
misconduct, negative career impact, or retaliation. The policy protects 
victims from being punished for minor misconduct, collateral to a 
sexual assault incident, and applies whether the investigation and/or 
prosecution is handled by military or civilian authorities.
    Ms. Sherrill. How are your service's sexual assault and sexual 
harassment victim advocates chosen? What information between them and a 
victim is considered privileged? What happens if privileged information 
is wrongly shared with command teams and leadership?
    Secretary Kendall, General Brown, and General Saltzman. SAPR Victim 
Advocates (VA) are full-time, and the DAF follows the Office of 
Personnel Management's guidelines in hiring these positions.
    Candidates must obtain a favorably adjudicated DOD Initial 
prescreening (FBI and criminal history checks) and Tier 3 background 
investigations before appointment into this critical role.
    Hiring officials would address adverse information from pre-
screening before hiring, which include sexual, domestic violence, 
violent crime convictions, or adverse information determined 
inconsistent with the duties of a SAPR VA and would prohibit selection. 
SAPR personnel are continually evaluated and must renew their DOD 
certification every two (2) years.
    All communications with SAPR VAs remain privileged, except the 
minimum necessary to make an Unrestricted report if an exception to 
Restricted reporting applies or if the victim has provided consent to 
share. Unauthorized disclosures of confidential communication, improper 
release of information, or other violations may result in punitive 
action.
    Ms. Sherrill. What is the process for your command climate survey? 
What percentage of personnel are required to complete it? How are 
irregular results flagged and reviewed? What actions are taken based on 
perceived negative command climate survey results?
    Secretary Kendall, General Brown, and General Saltzman. The 
Department of the Air Force (DAF) continues to utilize the DOD's 
Defense Organizational Climate Survey (DEOCS), which is an online 
survey that provides commanders and leaders with important feedback 
about the current climate within their unit or organization. The DOD's 
Office of People Analytics (OPA) provides oversight of the DEOCS, 
including management of the DEOCS Portal. This portal is a 
comprehensive website where commanders can register for a DEOCS, 
monitor response rates, and use the interactive dashboard to review 
DEOCS results. Once a DEOCS is registered and approved, the DEOCS 
system provides survey invitation e-mails to all military members and 
civilian employees within the unit that includes a link to the survey.
    DEOCS participation is voluntary and as such, the DAF does not 
require completion, but encourages unit members to express their 
opinions by completing the survey. Moreover, OPA does not recommend a 
specific number of responses for a unit or organization. However, OPA 
does note that a higher the completion rate yields greater confidence 
in unit or organization results.
    After receiving DEOCS results, commanders are required to brief 
their next higher commander within 30 calendar days and to their unit 
members within 60 calendar days. Currently, the DAF requires commanders 
to create Command Action Plans (CAP) on any command climate factors 
with unfavorable ratings above 49% identified on their DEOCS results on 
topics related to fairness, inclusion, leadership support, 
connectedness, cohesion, racially harassing behaviors, sexist 
behaviors, sexually harassing behavior, and workplace hostility. The 
CAPs include issues identified to be addressed, the action planned to 
address each issue, the status of the actions taken to date, and the 
party responsible for accomplishing the remedial actions. Commanders 
are required to provide a six-month status update to their next higher 
commander on CAP progress
    Ms. Sherrill. How many women are currently serving as aviators? How 
many women are currently in your pilot pipeline? How many women 
typically enter flight school? How many women typically graduate from 
flight school? How many female aviators are O5 and above? How many 
women are general officers? How many female generals are serving in 
joint roles?
    Secretary Kendal, General Brown, and General Saltzman. The DAF is 
dedicated to attracting and retaining the most suitable talent to 
fulfill its mission requirements. Embracing talented female aviators 
presents an opportunity to enhance diversity of strengths, enabling DAF 
to effectively tackle the challenges posed by our strategic 
competitors.
    For manned platforms, (11X), there are 433 female Undergraduate 
Pilot Training (UPT) students (92T0), 43 female Formal Training Unit 
(FTU) students (11X1), and 1396 female qualified pilots (11X2/3/4). For 
unmanned platforms (18X), there are 24 female Undergraduate Remote 
Pilot Training (URT) students (92T3), 5 female Formal Training Unit 
(FTU) students (18X1), and 200 female qualified pilots (18X3/4).
    There are currently 248 women aviators in the pipeline. This number 
includes students in Initial Flight Training (IFT), UPT, and graduate 
level initial qualification for AETC FTU only. This does not include 
ACC, AFSOC, or AFGSC FTU numbers.
    On average, 136 women enter flight school per year (average taken 
over the last 5 years).
    AETC graduates on average, 108 women from flight school per year 
(average taken over the last 5 years).
    There are 180 active-duty female aviators who are 0-5 and above.
    Currently 24 active-duty women are general officers, and six (6) 
female generals are serving in Joint roles.
                                 ______
                                 
                   QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. BERGMAN
    Mr. Bergman. In my district, at the former Wurtsmith Air Force Base 
in Oscoda, Michigan, the Air Force has been collecting data on PFAS 
contamination for more than 13 years, and the Air Force is still years 
away from having a final clean-up plan. In the meantime, PFAS continues 
to flow largely unchecked into miles of public waterways in the 
community, contaminating drinking water, fish, deer and other wildlife. 
As a result, the State of Michigan has issued five separate public 
health warnings for fish, venison, small game, foam and drinking water. 
While the investigation is ongoing, will the Air Force commit to stop 
the flow of PFAS into public waterways, and contain it within the 
boundaries of the Base, without further delay?
    Secretary Kendall. The Department of the Air Force (DAF) will 
continue to comply with federal cleanup laws designed to reduce risk to 
human health and the environment consistent with the best scientific, 
and engineering practices. Our goal is to prevent PFAS from entering 
public waterways; we have installed several pump and treat systems 
designed to intercept and treat PFAS-impacted groundwater before it 
reaches nearby lakes and rivers. We also removed soils from a former 
fire training area north of Clark's Marsh and continue to investigate 
other source areas that may require additional response actions (i.e., 
interim remedial actions).
    Mr. Bergman. At the former Wurtsmith Air Force Base, the State of 
Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy requested 
that the Air Force implement interim remedial actions at the following 
four locations: (1) Wastewater Lagoons and Seepage Beds (WWTP) near 
Clark's Marsh, (2) Three Pipes Drain, (3) the area designated as 
``DRMO,'' and (4) Landfills 30 and 31. Will the Air Force commit to 
implement these four interim remedial actions without delay?
    Secretary Kendall. DAF responded to the Michigan Department of 
Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy(EGLE) request to implement interim 
remedial actions. We are now collecting data in these areas to 
determine if action is warranted. EGLE responded favorably to this 
approach. DAF has not ruled out implementing interim remedial actions 
at these locations and will work with EGLE to determine the path 
forward.
    Mr. Bergman. PFAS contamination has been detected in groundwater on 
the east side of Van Etten Lake in Oscoda, across from the former 
Wurtsmith Air Force Base. The groundwater on the east side of Van Etten 
contains PFAS with the same signature as PFAS firefighting foam along 
with jet fuel contaminants. The Air Force has denied responsibility for 
the contamination and has refused to investigate it. Will the Air Force 
investigate the groundwater contamination on the east side of Van Etten 
Lake to determine if contamination is linked to the former base?
    Secretary Kendall. Yes. DAF will investigate the east side of Van 
Etten Lake to determine the source of the contamination.
                                 ______
                                 
                    QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. WALTZ
    Mr. Waltz. Weapons System Sustainment requirements continue to grow 
due to aging platforms and the acquisition of new, highly technical, 
and complex weapons systems.
    How is the Air Force factoring in reliable maintenance and 
sustainment lifecycle costs for the Next Generation Air Dominance 
(NGAD) fighter?
    General Brown. The NGAD strategy provides for competition by 
ensuring compliance with the Government reference architecture and 
enables the Government to maximize competition and on-board/off-board 
industry partners based on contractor performance. The NGAD strategy 
also takes full advantage of the benefits of digital engineering, agile 
software development, and an open systems architecture from the design 
of the weapon system through sustainment. The NGAD strategy drives 
robust competition at the major subsystem level throughout the life 
cycle of the system and provides a larger, more responsive industry 
base, both of which help to drastically reduce maintenance and 
sustainment costs.
    Mr. Waltz. How does the Space Force define and measure readiness?
    General Saltzman. The Space Force defines readiness as the ability 
to fight and meet the demands of assigned missions to address the 2022 
National Defense Strategy problem sets. A ready Space Force has the 
trained personnel, equipment, and sustainment capacity to accomplish 
those assigned missions and tasks in a high-intensity operational 
environment. The Space Force measures and reports readiness along two 
complementary categories standardized across the joint force: resource 
readiness and mission capability readiness. Resource readiness measures 
whether each unit is resourced and trained to execute the full-spectrum 
mission(s) for which each unit was designed and organized (Core 
mission). Resource readiness reports are comprised of five measured 
areas: (1) personnel, (2) equipment and supplies on-hand, (3) equipment 
condition, (4) training, and (5) the overall resource readiness rating 
(C-rating). Mission capability readiness measures each unit's 
capability to accomplish tasks based on the full-spectrum Core 
mission(s) for which each unit is designed. Additionally, it measures 
the unit's ability to perform assigned missions such as named 
operations and war plans. Mission capability readiness is measured 
against a set of standards called the Mission Essential Tasks (METs), 
which define the unit's capability in a contested, degraded, and 
operationally limited environment. Commanders must ensure the 
capability can be accomplished to the appropriate capacity, informed by 
the resources available, and reported in the resource readiness report. 
The Space Force will enhance readiness by incrementally instituting 
Operational Test and Training Infrastructure (OTTI). FY24's OTTI 
investments will continue progress in delivering more realistic testing 
and training against a thinking adversary, readying Guardians for the 
high-end fight our Nation may face in a future contingency.
    Mr. Waltz. In 2020, Taiwan's Air Force scrambled 2,972 times 
against Chinese aircraft. According to the Washington Post, PLA 
aircraft flew into Taiwan's air defense identification zone at least 
1,732 times last year. As China continues to ramp up their military 
exercises around the island, I am concerned of that wear and tear on 
Taiwan's aerial platforms could threaten their readiness for a 
potential attack.
    Taiwan is trying to accelerate delivery of 66 F-16 fighter jets for 
their defense. The aircraft are currently slated to be delivered by the 
end of 2026.
    What obstacles are preventing accelerated delivery of these 
platforms, is it manufacturing or bureaucratic, and what is the Air 
Force doing to ensure Taiwan has these aircraft, which their government 
has paid $6 billion for?
    General Saltzman. This response contains controlled information. 
The office can contact HASC Staff to view.
    Mr. Waltz. The Air National Guard currently fields 5 rapidly 
deployable Electromagnetic Warfare Squadrons that can provide Combatant 
Commands with a variety of offensive space control options at a time of 
crisis. These units currently employ Counter Communications Systems and 
must maintain a high level of readiness. The active force has just 2.
    Would standing up a Space National Guard enable you to better man, 
train, & equip these units and maintain this crucial capability? And if 
not, what is the impact to this unique and critical capability in the 
interim?
    General Saltzman. The status quo--wherein the Air National Guard as 
an air component fields space forces, including the electromagnetic 
warfare squadrons -is inefficient and operationally risky, and cannot 
continue in the long term. However, acting precipitously also can 
create risk. The preferred options for aligning the space missions 
performed by the ANG today within the USSF is to first enact the Space 
Force Personnel Management Act (SFPMA). The SFPMA is critical to 
mission execution as it allows Guardians to move between full- and 
part-time status, allowing for more efficient management of our 
military force, improving quality of life and retention, and 
capitalizing on skill sets developed outside the military. It is also 
critical that we maintain access to the force structure currently 
resident in the Air National Guard (ANG) that contributes to USSF 
missions. And that we deliberately transfer the ANG missions to the 
Space Force over time, to avoid disruptions, without establishing a 
Space National Guard. This ensures unity of command over all Department 
of the Air Force (DAF) space forces, maximizes flexibility for 
organize, train, and equip (OT&E) and operational responsibilities, and 
ensures access to part-time forces for surge capacity. The total 
transfer is modest and would include 734 positions (of which only 242 
are full time) across 6 states and 11 units. The transfer would also 
include the resources associated with the ANG space missions (funding, 
billets, equipment, and facilities).
    Mr. Waltz. In your testimony to the Senate testimony last week, you 
described Air National Guard space capabilities as critical and must 
haves and you recommended choosing the option that ``. . . minimizes 
the operational impact in any kind of transition . . .'' and ``. . . 
maintains the operational capabilities that are currently there. . .''. 
You stated that the department is costing out two options: to establish 
a Space National Guard; or dissolve the established ANG space 
professionals and rebuild the missions into the Space Force.
    Do you have any preliminary estimates on those costs? When can this 
committee expect to receive those costs?
    General Saltzman. As the smallest of the U.S. military services, 
the Space Force must manage our personnel, equipment, and missions as 
efficiently as possible. Enactment of the Space Force Personnel 
Management Act (SFPMA) is critical to mission execution as it allows 
Guardians to move between full- and part-time status, allowing for more 
efficient management of our military force, improving quality of life 
and retention, and capitalizing on skill sets developed outside the 
military. The status quo, however, which limits USSF personnel to 
active duty only and misaligns space missions in the ANG, is untenable 
and must be changed. The negative impacts to mission and people are 
real. Therefore, my strongest possible recommendation is to enact the 
SFPMA, while transferring the ANG missions to the Space Force, without 
establishing a Space National Guard. This ensures unity of command over 
all Department of the Air Force (DAF) space forces, maximizes 
flexibility for organize, train, and equip (OT&E) and operational 
responsibilities, and ensures access to part-time forces for surge 
capacity. The total transfer is modest and would include 734 positions 
(of which only 242 are full time) across 6 states and 11 units. The 
transfer would also include the resources associated with the ANG space 
missions (funding, billets, equipment, and facilities). This transfer 
should take place over time to avoid disruptions during this critical 
time. The Department of the Air Force is studying the cost to move Air 
National Guard space missions to the Space Force. While we have 
preliminary estimates, they vary significantly based on assumptions. 
For example, Congressional consideration of the SFPMA will influence 
costing factors and our ability to have part-time billets in the USSF. 
The DAF continues to work with the Office of the Secretary of Defense 
to evaluate the potential costs to USSF missions and readiness.
    Mr. Waltz. General Saltzman, in this year's budget request, you are 
seeking $30 million dollars in RDT&E for tactically responsive space--
launch from anywhere at any time. I believe this capability is critical 
to our nation's overall defense readiness.
    Can you explain what this money buys, how quickly can we build and 
field this capability?
    General Saltzman. With the $30M and additional funds from a 
classified source, we will deliver one end-to-end mission that provides 
the capability to rapidly respond to adversary actions at USSPACECOM's 
direction. The funds will support activities that include launch 
service acquisition, processing, and operations; further developing 
tactics, techniques, and procedures; satellite development, ground 
development, and support to on-orbit operations. This mission will be 
ready for call-up in CY2025. This mission will provide an operational 
Tactically Responsive Space concept demonstration and will be ready for 
a call-up launch in CY2025. It will also inform the potential 
development of an operational call-up capability to rapidly respond to 
emergent orbit threats
                                 ______
                                 
                 QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. STRICKLAND
    Ms. Strickland. Secretary Kendall, last year's Defense 
Appropriations bill directed the Air Force to provide a plan to the 
Committee on the transfer of KC-135s to Air National Guard units like 
the 141st Air Refueling Wing in Washington state. We are still awaiting 
this plan.
    Do you have a timeline for when I can expect to see a final plan?
    Has there been any coordination with the Washington Air National 
Guard on the transfers?
    Secretary Kendall. The Congressional Report, as required in the 
Fiscal Year 2023 Defense Appropriations bill, Covered KC-135s Transfer 
to Air National Guard Classic Association Plan, was delivered to the 
House Armed Services Committee on May 1, 2023. The report was submitted 
to all the Congressional Defense Committees on May 2, 2023. The Air 
Force coordinated the response with the National Guard Bureau and the 
Air National Guard. The Air Force is available to answer questions 
about the report or schedule a meeting to discuss the tanker 
recapitalization plan.
    Ms. Strickland. Last year, during the Valiant Shield 22 exercises, 
US INDOPACOM utilized JADC2 networking and connectivity capabilities 
via the Intelligent Gateway which bridges multiple networks by 
leveraging the capabilities of Air Mobility Command's KC-135 Real-Time 
Information Cockpit (RTIC) program of record. The Intelligent Gateway 
can enhance the KC-135 beyond its traditional refueling mission and 
enables the creation of cross-service and cross-agency end to end 
targeting process and procedures for combatant commanders. An upgraded 
version of the gateway has also been chosen by USINDOPACOM to fly in 
exercise Northern Edge 2023, where its capabilities will be used to 
uniquely integrate and connect coalition 5th gen F-35 and E-7A air 
battle management aircraft across a multi-classification level network 
with US Joint participants. Washington State is home to the 141st Air 
Refueling Wing. Can you explain how outfitting all PACAF/UASFE KC-135s 
with Intelligent Gateway and utilizing open architecture solutions can 
support the open system needs for the joint force?
    Secretary Kendall. The Air Force continues to analyze technologies 
to deliver broader connectivity across the Joint Force. In recent 
exercise settings, Intelligent Gateway enabled a more robust operating 
picture and flow of information across all components of the Joint 
Force. When combined with the Real-Time Information Cockpit, 
Intelligent Gateway may contribute to better situational awareness of 
Air Force aircraft, enabling improved command and control of the 
battlespace. The open systems architecture attribute opens the 
possibility to add and relay more types of joint data links, both line-
of-sight and beyond line-of-sight.
    Ms. Strickland. Last year, during the Valiant Shield 22 exercises, 
US INDOPACOM utilized JADC2 networking and connectivity capabilities 
via the Intelligent Gateway which bridges multiple networks by 
leveraging the capabilities of Air Mobility Command's KC-135 Real-Time 
Information Cockpit (RTIC) program of record. The Intelligent Gateway 
can enhance the KC-135 beyond its traditional refueling mission and 
enables the creation of cross-service and cross-agency end to end 
targeting process and procedures for combatant commanders. An upgraded 
version of the gateway has also been chosen by USINDOPACOM to fly in 
exercise Northern Edge 2023, where its capabilities will be used to 
uniquely integrate and connect coalition 5th gen F-35 and E-7A air 
battle management aircraft across a multi-classification level network 
with US Joint participants. Washington State is home to the 141st Air 
Refueling Wing. Can you explain how outfitting all PACAF/UASFE KC-135s 
with Intelligent Gateway and utilizing open architecture solutions can 
support the open system needs for the joint force?
    General Brown. The Air Force continues to analyze technologies to 
deliver broader connectivity across the Joint Force. In recent exercise 
settings, Intelligent Gateway enabled a more robust operating picture 
and flow of information across all components of the Joint Force. When 
combined with the Real-Time Information Cockpit, Intelligent Gateway 
may contribute to better situational awareness of Air Force aircraft, 
enabling improved command and control of the battlespace. The open 
systems architecture attribute opens the possibility to add and relay 
more types of joint data links, both line-of-sight and beyond line-of-
sight.
                                 ______
                                 
                  QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MRS. McCLAIN
    Mrs. McClain. Secretary Kendall, there is currently a fully-
supported DOD Program of Record called the P6 Combat Training System 
established to provide advanced training for the near-peer, high-end 
fight that improves training realism to ``train like you fight,'' in an 
NSA approved environment. This technology will protect our warfighting 
Tactics, Techniques and Procedures (TTPs) and will enable scalable 
training scenarios to include LVC. While the this system is moving to 
full rate production and a key piece in your Operational Test and 
Training Initiative, incorporating the P6 Combat Training System 
remains elusive for many reasons I'm concerned about, specifically on 
accelerated fielding given the broad DOD support.
    Can you provide the committee with the Air Force's roadmap, 
complete with dates, funding plan and capabilities achieved, to 
incorporate 4th and 5th Gen aircraft training?
    Will this roadmap also discuss a plan for a Navy and Air Force 
`Super Range' and CVN-based untethered ranges?
    Secretary Kendall.--Congress has acknowledged USAF readiness gaps 
and a critical lag in combat training range infrastructure.
    --USAF, USN, and F-35 JPO, are aligned on Tactical Combat Training 
System-II (TCTII) to deliver P6 Combat Training System (P6CTS/TCTS II) 
as the next-generation Air Combat Training System (ACTS).
    --A common USAF/USN/USMC ACTS capability enables 4th and 5th Gen 
combat forces to train as they fight--jointly
    --P6CTS/TCTS II provides USAF and USN F-35s with an interoperable 
ACTS system and corresponding ground infrastructure enables use of the 
F-35s separately funded integrated P6CTS/TCTS II internal airborne 
subsystems to meet National Defense Strategy objectives.
    --USN has begun procurement of P6CTS/TCTS II and recently 
established Initial Operational Capability (IOC) of the system in Fall 
2022 at Fallon, Nevada
    --USAF is funded for (FY23-28) and projected to procure up to 745 
P6CTS pods (for 4th Gen) and ground support infrastructure (for 4th/5th 
Gen) off USN's contract for up to $400M at 10+ USAF sites/ranges
    --F-35 JPO has committed to the TCTS II/P6CTS as their next 
generation ACTS and are currently scheduled to begin procuring/
integrating internal capability into the F-35 in the 2028 timeframe
    --In FY23-28 USAF is funded for and projected to procure up to 745 
P6CTS pods (for 4th Gen) and ground support infrastructure (for 4th/5th 
Gen) off USN's contract for up to $400M at 10+ USAF sites/ranges. In 
addition, the F-35 JPO has committed to the P6CTS/TCTS II as their next 
generation ACTS and are currently scheduled to begin procuring/
integrating an internal capability into the F-35 in the 2028 timeframe.
    --Although the USAF plan does not specifically include reference to 
a ``super range'' or USN CVN-based untethered ranges, a primary benefit 
of P6CTS/TCTS II interoperability between USAF and USN is being able to 
use the system for training in the same ranges and airspace. The 
program will also leverage current/future initiatives such as expanding 
the RF network infrastructure capabilities to extend P6CTS/TCTS II 
coverage to noncontiguous land ranges (multi-theater scenarios) as well 
as deployable sea ranges to support future Joint Training exercises and 
Operational Test events. The ``super range'' exploratory concept is 
currently being discussed by AFOTEC, USN, and Collins (TCTS II/P6CTS 
prime contractor) to potentially connect/network P6CTS/TCTS II ground 
stations at 2+ ranges (i.e., connecting AF western ranges--and possibly 
USN Pacific ranges to support future Joint Training and Operational 
Test events). The ``CVN-based untethered range'' is a USN initiative 
that would allow use of a shipboard TCTS II (P6CTS) ground system using 
either Starlink or P-3 airborne connectivity to establish a TCTS II 
range (deployable) network. At this point, neither concept/initiative 
is established as a requirement in our USAF P6CTS plan.
    --USAF acknowledges but does not specifically reference ``super 
range'' or USN CVN-based untethered ranges, but USAF does address a 
primary benefit of P6CTS/TCTS II interoperability between USAF and USN 
is both services being able to use the system for training in the same 
ranges and airspace.
    --Additional benefits include capitalizing on current/future 
initiatives, such as expanding the RF network infrastructure 
capabilities to extend P6CTS/TCTS II coverage to noncontiguous land 
ranges (multi-theater scenarios) and deployable sea ranges to support 
future Joint Training exercises and Operational Test events.
    ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND: In December 2019, COMACC concurred with 
AFLCMC/EB (System Program Office) that rejoining the Tactical Combat 
Training System-II (TCTS-II) was the smart strategy to deliver P6CTS 
capability to the USAF; saving $300M-$500M in RDTE versus a new 
development solution. Currently, USAF is leveraging the USN's TCTS II 
program to procure the P6CTS, a modern NSA-encrypted system that can 
pass platform-level weapon, countermeasures, and maneuvering data 
required for current and future live training while integrating with 
the complete Air Combat Training Systems (ACTS) family of systems and 
providing a growth path to a future blended capability. P6CTS will be 
suitable for employment in operational training environments in both 
CONUS and OCONUS (USAFE, PACAF, and AFCENT) to include spectrum 
suitability for these locations and the ability to operate in a GPS 
denied/jamming environment without loss of accuracy. P6CTS will also 
enable a single USAF solution for both AFOperational Test and Training.
    Mrs. McClain. Background: The FY24 request seeks $428M to support 
development of 4 Over the Horizon Radars (in the Northeast, Northwest, 
Alaska and Southeast) to provide long range coverage of air and cruise 
missile threats to the United States homeland. In addition to 
developing the sensor, there are significant integration requirements 
associated with distributing this classified data into existing air, 
missile and maritime defense warning networks. The NORTCOM UPL also 
seeks an additional $55M to procure a testbed and integrate the radar 
with space-based sensors. NORTHCOM and the Air Force are looking at 
both US and international vendors to support the development of this 
radar; connecting an international vendor's system to US crown jewel 
missile warning networks may present significant complexities to timely 
execution of this program.
    The Air Force FY24 justification notes an intent to award the OTHR 
contract in January 2024. The HLD OTHR Industry Day hosted at Mitre in 
Dec 2022 had 24 US companies and over two hundred people in attendance. 
With such significant US interest, both integrators and component 
providers, including those with OTHR experience, please affirm the Air 
Force intends to provide a formal solicitation to industry prior to 
contract award. When does the Air Force intend to issue the 
solicitation to industry to support such an RFP?
    Secretary Kendall. The Air Force Service Acquisition Executive 
(SAE) agreed to move forward with an Expression of Interest to the 
Government of Australia for the procurement of Australian Advanced Over 
the-Horizon Radar (OTHR) Technology for the US Homeland Defense (HLD) 
OTHR Program. Australia's system provides the required performance in 
the timeframe that NORAD/NORTHCOM requires the capability. The Program 
Office is working towards an approved Acquisition Strategy in August, 
which is required before funds are obligated to acquire the system. We 
won't have a firm solicitation date until the acquisition strategy is 
approved.
    The initial procurement will cover two OTHR systems and the 
associated Sensor Management and Command and Control system required to 
operate them. The Air Force will evaluate pursuing the remaining radars 
via an additional Government to-Government agreement at a later stage. 
The Air Force will examine the potential for US Industry participation 
at each stage of the acquisition process for OTHR.
                                 ______
                                 
                   QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. FALLON
    Mr. Fallon. How is the Air Force thinking about resourcing for the 
autonomy/AI Pilot on an aircraft platform, as part of a program budget? 
For instance, in the FY24 budget proposal, we see $3B in FY28 for 
Collaborative Combat Aircraft, so what percentage of that $3B is 
intended for the autonomous software capabilities? Does that percentage 
for CCA's match the percentage of funding for autonomy capability needs 
in other programs?
    Secretary Kendall. The Department of the Air Force (DAF) is 
investing heavily in Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) Research, 
Development, Technology, and Evaluation (RDT&E) as a critical step in 
delivering effective combat mass in highly contested environments, 
focusing on three key lines of effort. The FY24 President's Budget 
requests $394M for autonomous platform development, $68M for autonomy 
development through Project VENOM, and $72M to solve Doctrine, 
Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership and Education, Personnel, 
Facilities and Policy solutions by standing up an Experimental 
Operations Unit. CCA RDT&E comprises the largest investment in the 
Operational Imperative portfolio for FY24, reflecting the DAF's sense 
of urgency to outpace our competitors in pursuing these technologies. 
We expect a number of significantly unique bidders for CCA and cost for 
the percentage of software in each concept is likely to also be unique 
to that concept.
    Mr. Fallon. How is the Air Force thinking about resourcing for the 
autonomy/AI Pilot on an aircraft platform, as part of a program budget? 
For instance, in the FY24 budget proposal, we see $3B in FY28 for 
Collaborative Combat Aircraft, so what percentage of that $3B is 
intended for the autonomous software capabilities? Does that percentage 
for CCA's match the percentage of funding for autonomy capability needs 
in other programs?
    General Brown. The Department of the Air Force (DAF) is investing 
heavily in Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) Research, Development, 
Technology, and Evaluation (RDT&E) as a critical step in delivering 
effective combat mass in highly contested environments, focusing on 
three key lines of effort. The FY24 President's Budget requests $394M 
for autonomous platform development, $68M for autonomy development 
through Project VENOM, and $72M to solve Doctrine, Organization, 
Training, Materiel, Leadership and Education, Personnel, Facilities and 
Policy solutions by standing up an Experimental Operations Unit. CCA 
RDT&E comprises the largest investment in the Operational Imperative 
portfolio for FY24, reflecting the DAF's sense of urgency to outpace 
our competitors in pursuing these technologies. We expect a number of 
significantly unique bidders for CCA and cost for the percentage of 
software in each concept is likely to also be unique to that concept.
                                 ______
                                 
                    QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. MACE
    Ms. Mace. Secretary Kendall, FY 2021 the Department of the Air 
Force (DAF) had a shortage of 1,650 pilots. What is your plan to retain 
these highly specialized and costly aviators?
    Is it working? What data are you basing this plan of action on? Has 
there been any attempt at reaching out to those who have left the 
service in order to ask why?
    Secretary Kendall. --Addressing the pilot shortage involves fixing 
pilot production, absorption, retention, and affiliation with the Air 
Reserve Component. At this point, the situation is still manageable, 
but we must take immediate and decisive action to fix the shortage.
    --Our current FGO manning allows us to mitigate the CGO shortage by 
returning FGOs to the cockpit and accepting risk on the staffs.
    --This year, the undersized CGO year groups start becoming FGOs 
creating a ``double bathtub'' where we anticipate both CGO and FGO 
pilot shortages.
    --To retain these highly trained and costly aviators the Air Force 
rated retention efforts have evolved from crisis response to deliberate 
planning through data-driven modeling designed to create an 
understanding of changes in retention sentiment over the course of 
members' careers from winging though their separation.
    --As we come out of COVID we are seeing a return to pre-pandemic 
retention rates that are below our retention requirements.
    --The new Aircrew Engagement Survey will allow us to track 
sentiment over time and analyze if our actions have the desired effect 
on retention.
    --This data combined with previous exit surveys will provide the 
needed insight to measure our success and shape new initiatives.
    --The Aircrew Engagement Survey that closed in March 2023 showed 
the top reasons pilots separated are lack of location stability, lack 
of resources to accomplish the mission, and compensation.
    --The Air Force is addressing each of these top reasons:
    --Location Stability:
        --Reduced number of overseas deployments
        -- Increased ``second assignment in place,'' decreasing move 
        requirements
        -- Increased assignment transparency through our Air Force 
        Talent Marketplace model
    --Resource Initiatives:
        --Increased contractor administrative support in squadrons
        --Cut, consolidated, or reassigned 29 administrative duties
        -- Increased GS Civilian Simulator Instructors to reduce burden 
        on military pilots
    --Compensation:
        -- Increased Reg AF Aviation Bonus, Critical Skill Incentive 
        Pay, and Special Duty assignment Pays to reduce gap between 
        military and civilian pay.
        -- The FY23 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) directed 
        the Air Force to execute a Rated Officer Retention 
        Demonstration Program with a monetary cap of $50,000.
        -- Increased ARC Aviation Bonus and ARC Aviation Initiatives
    -- We have not attempted to reach out to members that have already 
separated; however, legacy exit surveys given after a member decided to 
separate, and the new annual engagement surveys capture members' 
reasons for both staying in and leaving the Air Force.
    Ms. Mace. General Brown, I fully believe we need to support the C-
17 and their crews, and it appears funding is stable for the C-17 but 
is it enough?
    What is the C-17s' strategic importance to our National Defense 
Strategy?
    General Brown. The C-17 has garnered favorable funding lines from 
the Department and Congress over the last several years.
    --Major viability programs to include Replacement Heads Up display 
and the flight deck upgrade are fully funded
    --As we look ahead, we will continue to balance and prioritize 
additional funding for tactical datalink and communication upgrades on 
the fleet with the rest of the needs for the mobility fleet and the 
greater AF.
    --C-17s are vital to the NDS by providing both strategic deterrence 
and warfighting advantage in the event of conflict.
    --C-17 is the foundational strategic rapid deployment airlift 
platform for US and allied forces globally.
    --USAF Rapid Global Mobility, powered by the C-17, provides, 
projects, and sustains a combat-credible Joint Force capable of 
responding anywhere, anytime, at speed and scale
    --C-17 is the key platform for rapid sustainment of US forces
    --C-17 is the Primary Global Aero-medical evacuation platform
    --C-17 is a key multiplier for aerial delivery/airdrop of materials 
in contested/denied environments.
    Ms. Mace. General Brown, The Air Force's Unfunded Prioroity List 
(UPL) #1 is to accelerate the E-7 delivery. What capabilities does this 
aircraft give us in terms of a conflict with our pacing threat?
    What Aircraft are we using to fill this role currently?
    General Brown. --The E-7 provides next-generation improvement of 
Battle Management Command and Control (BMC2) over the legacy E-3 AWACS 
and allows joint forces to maintain decision superiority over 
adversaries throughout the competition continuum with our pacing threat
    --The E-7 sensor is much more advanced with greater capability than 
the E-3 AWACS sensor.
    --The E-7's Multi-role Electronically Scanned Array (MESA) 
surveillance radar is more agile, resilient, and produces higher 
fidelity data for the battle management end-user
    --The E-7 is a significantly more reliable aircraft than the E-3 in 
terms of increased aircraft availability and mission capable rates well 
above legacy E-3 rates.
    --Legacy E-3 AWACS will continue to increasingly suffer from 
diminishing manufacturing sources for parts availability, decreasing 
and limiting E-3 availability and capacity for employment.
    --The E-3 AWACS is the USAF's only Airborne Early Warning and 
Control aircraft
    --The USAF Unfunded Priority List #1 is to accelerate the E-7 
delivery to rapidly replace legacy E-3s and to advance joint force 
warfighting capabilities supporting the NDS.
                                 ______
                                 
                   QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. FINSTAD
    Mr. Finstad. Can you speak to the critical need to modernize the 
Air National Guard C-130 fleet to C-130J aircraft and the importance of 
continuing to modernize the fleet by simultaneously upgrading some C-
130H aircraft with modern technology?
    Secretary Kendall and General Brown. The Air Force will have a C-
130 mobility fleet of 271 aircraft by the end of FY23 and intends to 
maintain this fleet size through the Future Years Defense Program. We 
project this fleet will be comprised of 70 C-130Hs and 201 C-130Js by 
the end of FY28. Based on the current schedule, the C-130H AMP 
Increment 2 modernization program will be completed by FY28, providing 
the Air Force with a modern and capable mixed fleet to execute Joint 
Force tactical airlift.
                                 ______
                                 
                    QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. DAVIS
    Mr. Davis. JROTC programs are the life blood of our military 
communities. It is our responsibility as public servants to lift up 
JROTCs, which can only be done if we attract the best and brightest 
instructors. Your joint testimony singles out recruitment challenges as 
a critical priority that is lagging behind.
    Secretary Kendall, would you support legislation that requires the 
Department of Defense, pursuant to the Transition Assistance Program, 
to notify eligible retired personnel that becoming a JROTC instructor 
or administrator is a viable future career path?
    Secretary Kendall. To reach service members preparing to leave 
service, DAF has already included materials on JROTC career 
opportunities in the Pre-Separation Briefing of the Transition 
Assistance Program (TAP) since Oct 2021 and will continue to do so. 
Material provided to the separates/retirees specifies eligibility 
criteria, that there are over 900 JROTC locations, and provides 
prospective candidates with links to additional information available 
from JRTOC through the Air University's Holm Center.
    Yes, the DAF would support legislation making JROTC opportunities a 
part of the standardized DOD TAP curriculum.
                                 ______
                                 
                  QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY DR. McCORMICK
    Dr. McCormick. Since coming to Congress, I've become aware of 
serious issues in the medical separation process, the Integrated 
Disability Evaluation System (IDES), administered by the Defense Health 
Agency due to wounded warriors' lack of access to their branch chain of 
command. At the Medical Evaluation Board phase and elsewhere, wounded 
warriors are unable to seek relief after instances of negligence and 
malfeasance nor can they meaningfully appeal questionable or erroneous 
decisions through their chain of command. Given all of that, would you 
support returning authority for the morale, welfare, and determinations 
of fitness for active duty for servicemembers going through the medical 
separation process back to the service branches?
    Secretary Kendall, General Brown, and General Saltzman. The 
Services have always maintained the authority for determination of 
fitness for duty. This authority did not transfer to DHA during the 
Military Health System (MHS) transition.

                                  [all]