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

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

HEARING

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

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]