Hearing of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee

Federal News Service

HEADLINE: HEARING OF THE STRATEGIC FORCES SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE

SUBJECT: SPACE ACQUISITION POLICIES AND PROCESSES

CHAIRED BY: SENATOR WAYNE ALLARD (R-CO)

LOCATION: 232-A RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING, WASHINGTON, D.C.

WITNESSES:

PETER B. TEETS, UNDER SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE AND DIRECTOR, NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE;

LIEUTENANT GENERAL BRIAN A. ARNOLD, USAF, COMMANDER, SPACE AND MISSILE SYSTEMS CENTER, AIR FORCE SPACE COMMAND;

A. THOMAS YOUNG, CHAIRMAN, DEFENSE SCIENCE BOARD/AIR FORCE SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD, JOINT TASK FORCE ON ACQUISITION OF NATIONAL SECURITY SPACE PROGRAMS;

ROBERT E. LEVIN, DIRECTOR, ACQUISITION AND SOURCING MANAGEMENT, GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE

BODY:
SEN. JACK REED (D-RI): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Senator Nelson. You're gracious.

Secretary Teets, you've been given unprecedented responsibility in terms of not only making all milestone decisions but effectively being an executive agent for space, merging your programmatic and oversight responsibilities. In your testimony, you say that OSD will continue to provide oversight of the process even though you've been delegated that. Can you elaborate on how OSD is going to do this within the secretary's office? Is there a regular formal process to ensure that everything is on schedule, within budget and that requirements are being established properly and met?

MR. TEETS: Yes, Senator Reed. OSD will continue oversight of the acquisition process through the undersecretary for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, formerly Pete Aldridge. I believe Mike Wynne's nomination hearing is yet today. And so that office and that individual will be performing oversight of the acquisition process. And in that regard, for example, we plan to have, at Secretary Aldridge's request, a review with him of the SBIRS High program sometime early on in December when we emerge from the Nunn-McCurdy violation. Secretary Aldridge asked that we provide a year-end review of status on the SBIRS program. We will certainly do that.

In addition to that, I meet periodically with Pete and now with Mike Wynne in his acting role and kind of review with them the important status and progress on space programs. Similarly, Steve Cambone, in his new role as undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, has some oversight activity ongoing as well. And I review, for example, with him the programs in the National Reconnaissance Office. Other elements of the DOD Office of Secretary of Defense have oversight functions as well. As you know, Dov Zakheim, the comptroller, oversees the financial activity of all Air Force programs, including Air Force space programs.

So, in essence, it is the Office of Secretary of Defense, John Stenbit, in the former C4I role, was providing oversight for C4I programs. Now he's very much involved in our transformational com program in his network information and integration role. So those OSD offices do provide an oversight function.

SEN. REED: Thank you, Mr. Secretary.

SEN. NELSON: Would the senator yield?

SEN. REED: I would yield.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
SEN. REED: Thank you, Senator Nelson.

Mr. Secretary and General Arnold, China recently launched a man into space which was a great public relations coup at least for the People's Republic but it has raised questions about their long-term intentions and our long-term intentions with respect to space and obviously the question of weaponization. What is your policy regarding space weaponization by the United States?

MR. TEETS: Our policy is to make certain that our country has the ability to be aware of exactly what is happening in space, be able, if necessary, to defend our space assets and, if necessary, our policy would be to be able to enforce space control activity. We need to protect and defend our assets.

Brian, you may want to add to that.

SEN. REED: General Arnold?

GEN. ARNOLD: Yes, sir. Granted the policy is dictated from on top, but clearly the space commission's single clear message to us in the acquisition was that to be careful that we avoid a Pearl Harbor in space, meaning that you have an infrastructure in space that is a center of gravity and typically enemies come after centers of gravity. And we rely heavily on everything from global positioning satellites to our com network to the daily weather that we provide so well to everybody in this country. So it's incumbent upon us to develop the capability to surveil-in other words have good situation awareness of what's up there and we do that through both ground and notional space-based systems, to being able to gain and maintain space superiority should we be required to do that. And so as good military planners it's exactly what we're often looking at.

SEN. REED: I note my time has expired, Mr. Chairman. Could I have an additional minute for one more question, or two minutes if possible?

SEN. ALLARD: Yeah. Maybe Senator Nelson took some of your time, maybe he'll yield some of his-I'm going to call him next, so that would be fine.

SEN. NELSON: Absolutely.

SEN. REED: Can I-let me just follow up. I mean, the real question is, is there a preference to a weaponized space within your policy? Whether there is a-you're leaving all options open, but is there a preference to put weapons in space to prevent this Pearl Harbor? Can you state there's a such a preference, or there's no preference to weaponize space, or there's a preference not to weaponize space, to do it without? What's the preference?

MR. TEETS: Our preference is to be able to exercise space control with reversible effects, and for certain that is the preference.

SEN. REED: Well, I'll try to determine what that means in terms of placing weapons in space, but let me just-because I'm-the senator is very kind to yield time. One additional question. I just heard the Missile Defense Agency has planned to launch a space-based test bed in 2008 consisting of two to three satellite-based interceptors, which I don't think would be adequate to defend against missiles but it would be in effect an anti-satellite system. That seems to mean that there's active planning to put weapons in space. Are you aware of this proposal for 2008? Have you been consulted about it? Have you have opined about whether it is appropriate?

MR. TEETS: No, I haven't, Senator Reed. Now, I do sit on what we call a board of directors for the Missile Defense Agency because ultimately the systems that the Missile Defense Agency is building for space will be transferred to the Air Force and become part of the Air Force inventory. I have not had a briefing on the subject of a space- based test bed. I'd be glad to take that question for the record and it interests me but I've not heard of it.

SEN. REED: Well, Mr. Secretary, you are the chief space executive charged with those policy decisions, oversight, programmatic view and you haven't heard about it which is-that says, I think that speaks volumes.

General Arnold, are you aware of this program?

GEN. ARNOLD: Sir, only that I work for General Kadish on space- based or space tracking surveillance system as a part of an adjunct of the old SBIRS-Low. And my understanding is that this would be-we're looking at both terrestrial based interceptors, as you're aware of, sea-based, air-based eventually, perhaps something like an ABL and then eventually perhaps something, a space-based system. Other than that, my programs do not work on that.

SEN. REED: Thank you, gentleman.

Thank you, Mr. Secretary.

Thank you, Senator Nelson.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.