Page 1       TOP OF DOC
[H.A.S.C. No. 108–40]








JULY 22, 2004

 Page 2       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC



TERRY EVERETT, Alabama, Chairman
CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania

JOHN SPRATT, South Carolina

Bill Ostendorff, Professional Staff Member
Hugh Brady, Professional Staff Member
Katherine Croft, Staff Assistant
 Page 3       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC



    Thursday, July 22, 2004, Space Cadre/Space Professionals

    Thursday, July 22, 2004



    Everett, Hon. Terry, a Representative from Alabama, Chairman, Strategic Forces Subcommittee

    Reyes, Hon. Silvestre, a Representative from Texas, Ranking Member, Strategic Forces Subcommittee


 Page 4       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Bursch, Captain Dan, USN, Associate Dean of Graduate School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Naval Postgraduate School
    Calico, Dr. Robert, Dean, Graduate School of Engineering and Management, Air Force Institute of Technology
    Coverstone, Dr. Victoria, Professor of Aerospace, University of Illinois
    Dodgen Lt. Gen. Larry J., Comman
    Douglas, John, President and CEO, Aerospace Industries Association
    Lord, Gen. Lance, Commander, AF Space Command
    McArthur, Vice Adm. James, USN, Commander, Navy Network Warfare Command
    Shockley-Zalabak, Dr. Pam, Chancellor, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs
    Teets, Hon. Peter B., Under Secretary of Air Force, Space
    Thomas, Brig. Gen John, USMC, Director, Command, Control, Communications, and Computers (C4)


[The Prepared Statements can be viewed in the hard copy.]
Bursch, Captain Dan
Calico, Dr. Robert
Coverstone, Dr. Victoria and Rodney L. Burton
Dodgen Lt. Gen. Larry J.
Douglas, John
Everett, Hon. Terry
 Page 5       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
Lord, Gen. Lance
McArthur, Vice Adm. James
Reyes, Hon. Silvestre
Shockley-Zalabak, Dr. Pam
Teets, Hon. Peter B.
Thomas, Brig. Gen John

[The Documents can be viewed in the hard copy.]

[The Questions and Answers can be viewed in the hard copy.]
Mr. Everett
Mr. Turner (Ohio)


House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Strategic Forces Subcommittee,
Washington, DC, Thursday, July 22, 2004.

    The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:02 p.m., in room 2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Terry Everett (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

 Page 6       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. EVERETT. The hearing will come to order.

    The subcommittee meets today to receive testimony on the development of a space cadre—a group of space professionals from all areas: military, industry and academia.

    I want to welcome all the witnesses who have agreed to share their expertise with us today on this important subject to the subcommittee.

    For our first panel today, I want to welcome Under Secretary Teets, who is testifying today as the head of National Security Space Programs.

    I also want to welcome the service-based program heads: representing the Air Force, General Lance Lord, Commander, Air Force Space Command; for the Army, Lieutenant General Larry Dodgen, Commander of Space and Missile Defense Command; for the Navy, Rear Admiral James McArthur, Commander, of the Navy Network Warfare Command; and Brigadier General John Thomas, Director of Command, Control, Communications and Computers and Chief Information Officer for the Marine Corps.

    Following the remarks of the first panel, I would invite committee members to ask questions.

 Page 7       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    For our second panel today, I want to welcome representatives from the space industry as well as academia.

    Testifying will be Dr. Robert Calico, Provost of the Engineering and Management Department, Air Force Institute of Technology; Captain Dan Bursch, United States Navy, Associate Dean of Graduate School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Naval Postgraduate School; Mr. John Douglass, President and CEO, Aerospace Industries Association; Dr. Pam Shockley-Zalabak, Chancellor, University of Colorado-Colorado Springs; and Dr. Victoria Coverstone, professor of aerospace, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champagne.

    We have a great deal of ground to cover today and we are likely to get several interruptions during that period. And I want to give the members as much leeway as possible in asking questions. And we will not get to all the questions we would like answered today and we would ask for you to respond to some written questions, and please do it within 30 days of receiving those questions.

    Likewise, Secretary Teets, I would ask you to be brief with your prepared remarks. The entirety of your written statement will be entered into the record.

    The entirety of the statements from our service representatives will also be entered into the record. And I have read all of them, and I must commend you for those remarks that you have made and all this progress that we will talk about.

    The development of a space cadre was a major thrust in the findings of the Space Commission 2001 report. The report emphasized the need to create and maintain a highly trained and experienced cadre of space professionals who could master highly complex technology, as well as develop new tactics and doctrines for space operations in the future. Slowly, the development of a space cadre has evolved. In an effort to encourage the process, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 directed the department to develop a strategic plan to coordinate and facilitate the development of space personnel career fields and integrate them into larger personnel systems for each service.
 Page 8       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    It also directed each service to develop and take a more proactive stance in the development of its space cadre.

    The committee is concerned about the breadth and depth of the current Department of Defense plan. It seems to lack sufficient detail and structure for implementation.

    Additionally, in the area of education and training, as well as in addressing the role of academia and industry in the space cadre, the committee has concerns. The committee believes that the accumulation of skills and the capabilities of government, academia and industry represent a comprehensive view of the military space community for the United States. Each has valuable tools and expertise to contribute. We all look forward to hearing the witnesses' suggestions on how this talent and culture can be cultivated and incorporated into the development of a space cadre in the military and for space professionals at large.

    Today, I look forward to exploring the status of each of your efforts and sharing ideas on potential solutions to developing today's space cadre and tomorrow's space professionals.

    At this time I would like to recognize my friend and distinguished ranking member, Mr. Reyes, for any comments that he may have.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Everett can be viewed in the hard copy.]

 Page 9       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. REYES. I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you again for holding this very important hearing.

    I want to join you in welcoming our distinguished guests and we look forward to their testimony.

    Mr. Chairman, when the Space Commission assessed national security space management and organization in January of 2001, they wisely recognized that organizational charts and management theories are not worth much if you do not have quality people.

    And frankly, they recognized that the Department of Defense was not focused in any coherent way on developing personnel who would be knowledgeable about the national security issues and its implications in space.

    So one of their main recommendations was to create a space cadre. The American Heritage Dictionary defines cadre as follows: a nucleus of trained personnel around which a larger organization can be built and trained.

    The Space Commission used the word ''cadre'' deliberately. It recognized that none of the services was training a critical nucleus of expertise in space matters and that the national security was sure to suffer without such expertise.

    Acting on the Space Commission recommendation, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, in October of 2001, issued a memorandum directing the military services to draft specific guidelines and plans for developing, maintaining and managing a cadre of space-qualified professionals.
 Page 10       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    While the Air Force is directed to coordinate efforts among the services, each service is responsible for establishing its own cadre of space personnel, space experts.

    We have asked our witnesses from the department to tell us how we are progressing. And from things that we have heard, in all honesty, many of us are going to be disappointed in what we hear today.

    One question that I would like our department witnesses to address is the following: If space is critical to our national security, do we need joint management? Or is this something that we should let the services do on their own, which so far has resulted in uneven progress across the departments, or should we look at establishing a joint operation to achieve these goals?

    As is obvious, Mr. Chairman, none of us knows the answer to that question. But certainly today I would like to hear our witnesses from the department address it.

    Mr. Chairman, I also appreciate the fact that you have asked experts from industry and academia to join us on a second panel. We need to develop a nucleus of trained space experts, not just in our military, but in our aerospace industry and academia as well.

    I think that the subcommittee is correctly viewing the issue of space cadre broadly, and I look forward to the testimony of both panels.

    With that, Mr. Chairman, I will yield back my time.
 Page 11       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. EVERETT. I thank my distinguished colleague.

    Mr. Secretary, I look forward now to your testimony.


    Secretary TEETS. Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee, I am honored to appear before you today to address our efforts to develop our professional space cadre. I am particularly pleased to be joined here by these distinguished flag officers from each of the services and the Marine Corps. And I would say that we have been working together to make certain that we do in fact address this issue of the professional space cadre in a joint fashion.

    In my role of overseeing national security space activities as the under Secretary of the Air Force, director of the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) and the Department of Defense (DOD) Executive Agent for Space, I am committed to preserving our advantage as the world's leading space-faring nation. I am pleased this committee shares that commitment.

    The DOD is working hard to develop the space cadre the Nation needs. We are implementing a space human capital resources strategy to ensure our people have the education, skills and experiences needed to develop space power, and more importantly, to bring that power to bear on warfighting, intelligence collection and other national security needs. The space human capital resources strategy has four goals: First is to ensure the services develop the space professionals they need to fulfill their unique requirements; second is to integrate the space professional development efforts within the national security space community; the third goal is to improve the integration of space capabilities into joint operations; and the last goal is to consistently assign the best space professionals to critical jobs across the Department of Defense.
 Page 12       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    An integrated strategic approach will help us recognize the services' unique missions while we develop the cadre we need. We are committed to building a total DOD space cadre to meet the needs of national decision-makers and joint and coalition-fighting forces.

    The NRO also fits into this concept. The NRO benefits from both its military elements and the expertise of its Central Intelligence Agency members. The NRO's multi-service, multi-agency identity allows the NRO to best serve the Nation by ensuring a focus on national intelligence needs. Within that construct, we will treat the NRO as part of the larger space community.

    We have made great progress toward the goals of the space human capital resources strategy. The Secretary of the Air Force approved the Air Force's space professional strategy in July 2003. The strategy has resulted in many positive steps under the leadership of General Lance Lord.

    The Navy has also created a Navy space policy document which defines their plan for space cadre development. Vice Admiral Jim McArthur has assumed responsibility for the Navy space cadre.

    The Army has initiated a space cadre force management analysis which will define the Army space cadre and identify all space-related roles and missions. Lieutenant General Larry Dodgen has been instrumental in the Army space cadre development.

    The Marine Corps has also established a focal point for space cadre management and has in place a mature process for developing space professionals, which Brigadier General John Thomas will describe.
 Page 13       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Time does not permit me to discuss all our initiatives in detail, but let me mention a few.

    We are holding a DOD space professional development conference to create our education and training framework. We are creating an implementation plan for the human capital resources strategy that we will provide to the defense committees not later than November 15th of this year.

    The NRO is developing a workforce management strategy that will be aligned with the DOD space cadre development programs. A new education with industry program will immerse Air Force members in today's space launch business. And we continue developing complementary space-related graduate degrees at the Naval Postgraduate School and the Air Force Institute of Technology.

    Let me discuss for just a moment two challenges we face.

    First is a shortfall in systems engineering expertise. We have focused efforts on professional development and identifying best practices to rebuild this critical competency. Our aim is to have our acquirers proficient in sound engineering practices and appropriate risk management decisions.

    Another challenge is to ensure that our space cadre in each service is given optimal opportunities for career progression and promotion. We are determined to ensure that the space cadre disciplines do not become stovepipes that stifle development and kill careers.
 Page 14       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Our space systems provide us with the asymmetric advantage needed to fight and win, but technology is useless without the leadership, vision, motivation and skills to employ it effectively.

    I appreciate the continued support the Congress and this committee provide in delivering these capabilities to our warfighters and national decision-makers. I look forward to working with you as we define and refine the requirements for our space cadre.

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    [The prepared statement of Secretary Teets can be viewed in the hard copy.]

    Mr. EVERETT. As usual, your testimony is very insightful and we appreciate that.

    At this point, beginning on my right—I always begin on my right, by the way—I would like to have each of the service leaders to explain the concept of the core and critical skills assessed that are required for your particular effort. And I hate to limit you, but if you would be as brief as possible on that, I would appreciate it.

    General Lord, we will begin with you, please.

 Page 15       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    General LORD. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is my honor to respond to that. Since we last met, we have made I think great progress in answering that question for you.

    What we have defined, as you look at the terms of space cadre as it was outlined in the Space Commission report, was really to take a look in our business, in the United States Air Force, that our operators, the people that operate the space systems as well as our program managers, the people who develop the programs, and also the scientists and engineers and acquisition experts who are part of that team—that is part of our space cadre, if you will, as defined by the Space Commission report.

    Now, we have extended our definition outside the space cadre to what we call a space professional career field, which are the people that come in and out of the space business and may not stay for a whole career but are certainly associated with us, the intelligence people who come in, the people who work in the support business, across the skills and abilities it takes to get programs all the way from concept to deployment and actual operation on orbit.

    So we have a whole set.

    And we have, as part of the process, one of our goals was to identify those in our Air Force and share that definition with our colleagues in the other services. When I last appeared before the committee, I suggested that by the end of the year we would have that all done. I am proud to report that we are way ahead of that and we have categorized over 7,058 people on active duty plus 3,000 Guard and Reserve and civilians in the business.
 Page 16       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    So we have categorized those folks and identified them by their specific skill levels who are part of the cadre, which is a major part of doing what you request of us as well as what the Space Commission asked and that is to identify the cadre and be ready to understand who they are as they fit into the joint operations area. So we are delighted about that.

    [The prepared statement of General Lord can be viewed in the hard copy.]

    Mr. EVERETT. General Dodgen.


    General DODGEN. Congressman, thank you for the opportunity to speak.

    As you know, the basis of the space cadre in the United States Army is the Functional Area 40 (FA 40) space experts, numbering today about 150 individuals. They are now training in the Air Force schools, so that integration is under way.

    Those 150 people have been to the war and have supported warfighters in Operation Iraqi Freedom and are also serving in agencies such as the NRO and advising in the acquisition process.

 Page 17       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    The structure to grow them over the next four or five years will in fact double the number of Functional Area 40 officers that we have advising commanders and advising joint force commanders in the field and at installations back in the United States where Army assets can benefit from their products. But that does not answer the question totally in the Army of just how big the space cadre should be. In addition to those Functional Area 40's, there are 3-Yankee skill identifiers that number about 700 additional officers. And then there are the 31-Sierra and satellite communications people that are enlisted soldiers that are also connected with that, and civilians. We have decided that we will need a year, probably, to address those other areas to see if the space cadre beyond the FA 40 should be enlarged to consider all those individuals which have specialties in the intelligence field and in the other fields that will also have space assignments.

    So we feel this is important so that we manage their careers properly, and we build this space cadre in an efficient manner.

    The basis we have today is our FA 40's, and they are being managed I believe in a way similar to what the Space Commission envisioned when they filed their report.

    Thank you very much.

    [The prepared statement of General Dodgen can be viewed in the hard copy.]


 Page 18       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Admiral MCARTHUR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    In looking at the Navy's space cadre, the composition of that cadre is mixed. We have individuals with space experience that are arrayed across all activities and commands and organizations within the Navy, and also within the joint world.

    We have people who are with Strategic Command, formerly part of U.S. Space Command, the National Reconnaissance Office, individuals who work requirements and assessments on the Navy staff. We have the Navy Network and Space Operations Center in Dahlgren.

    So there is a mix, and those skill sets involve anything with intelligence, with acquisition, with science and technology, research and development and operations as well as requirements and assessments.

    The basis for that mix has been assignments in space-related billets, that individuals glean experience. It has been the education provided by the Naval Postgraduate School and Air Force Institute of Technology, and even the complementary courses that are available through the Defense Acquisition University.

    So the skills are space engineering, space operations, operations analysis and acquisition, that are the underpinnings of the action we need in all those areas.

    Thank you, sir.

    [The prepared statement of Admiral McArthur can be viewed in the hard copy.]
 Page 19       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC


    General THOMAS. Mr. Chairman, thank you.

    The Marine Corps has made much progress in developing and formalizing our cadre. The cadre is based on the Marine Corps ethos of first and foremost our officers are riflemen.

    And what we do is, our cadre is comprised of Marines who have operational experience in a wide variety of military occupational specialties. And then we train them and educate them in space matters.

    To give you an idea, we have established two specialty tracks designating our officers either as space operations officers, or space operational staff officers, and they go through a series of training venues to qualify under those categories.

    For example, the space operations officer spends two years at the Naval Postgraduate School. We have 21 of those officers on active duty today, and we have nine currently at the Naval Postgraduate School.

    In our space operations staff officer, we started that program back a year ago, we have 62 billets that have been identified. We have 40 officers that currently are on active duty filling those billets.
 Page 20       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    So we have a good program. We think that the program is going to continue to grow as we identify other requirements.

    [The prepared statement of General Thomas can be viewed in the hard copy.]

    Mr. EVERETT. Thank you.

    Secretary Teets has mentioned engineering as a shortfall. Would each of you describe your single most needed skill—I assume it would be one that is short; I am just making that assumption—and identify what that is and also what your plans are to fill that? Beginning with you General Lord, if you do not mind.

    General LORD. Sir, I would agree with Secretary Teets in his assessment. If we look at our program acquisition team that lives in Los Angeles under the Space and Missile Systems Center, we have a lot of lieutenants but we do not have the captains and majors to fill in in our engineering billets. And that is a big issue for us, to do engineering on new acquired systems and the complexities of the things that we work for in the future.

    We have worked hard with Mr. Teets' leadership. We know we are facing overall in the Nation an engineering shortage, and we want to educate and excite people about how important engineering is in our business.

    We have been out selectively recruiting. The Air Force has had bonuses for recruiting engineers. We think if we team up with our great partnerships in not only civilian but military institutions as well to help attract people, we will be able to bring them in and excite them about the business.
 Page 21       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    And that is part of our space cadre efforts, to recruit and retain with wonderful educational programs that provide them what they need to mature through the system.

    I think that is our biggest task, to get the engineering content of our acquisition systems built back up to where it needs to be.

    General DODGEN. Mr. Chairman, certainly for the 100 3-Yankee individuals that are part of the acquisition corps, engineering is their primary focus. And they are building systems that will facilitate the use of space products to the soldier or advising the Air Force in the building of those space systems.

    For the FA 40, engineering is certainly one of the skills that they have in advanced degrees, information system management and just raw things which explain space just as physics and aerodynamics or certainly other advanced degrees that they have.

    So what they bring to the warfighter is a thorough understanding of the vulnerabilities and the capabilities that space will bring to the battlefield. And those are the type of individuals that we are growing and uniting with the warfighter for the future.

    Admiral MCARTHUR. Sir, just a little different approach on that relative to the Navy.

    You asked about shortages in some particular areas. Probably the area that in the relative sense is the weakest is the requirements and assessments process with the Navy staff, and that is determining exactly what capabilities from space offer the best contribution to naval operations in the scheme of maneuver.
 Page 22       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    So if there is an area where it would be good to build and expand on the expertise, that is with individuals who have space experience, have been at U.S. Space Command, U.S. Strategic Command, or in a joint force air component commander staff or maritime component commander staff, and then can take that to the Navy staff and work the ops analysis in modeling and simulation of those capabilities and how they fit in to overall Navy and naval capabilities.

    That is an area that we need to expand on and grow somewhat.

    Thank you, sir.

    General THOMAS. Sir, the Marine Corps does not have a requirement for engineers or acquirers. Our principal focus is on developing officers that are capable of integrating space into operational planning.

    Again, I emphasize the space-smart MagCap officer is what we are after.

    Mr. EVERETT. Let me yield to my ranking member at this point.

    Mr. REYES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    I was wondering, is there a system that you have developed of certification in this area to be able to have benchmarks in terms of the duties or the result of the training for officers enlisted and civilian personnel? Have you given it that kind of structure yet?
 Page 23       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    If each one of you would comment.

    General LORD. Yes, sir, we certainly have. That is part of our cadre development program, is to have a certification process. We put together, under the guidelines of the commission, a certification process that includes three levels—space 100, space 200 and space 300 courses—that you will have to have.

    Your basic course, which will be the 100 course, which will last about six weeks at your entry level and then at about the eight-year point you will come back for space 200, which will be a more detailed course that will be about four weeks, and then later on at the strategic level, space 300—those courses have or are under way and will be developed.

    Space 100 will kick off this fall at Air Education and Training Command in Texas. We are already teaching space 100, by the way. Our colleagues from the other services helped us validate that course, so we had Army, Navy and Marine Corps, NASA people, we had people from industry who were all part of course development for space 200. We have already trained about 250 people with space 200.

    So that is part of having job experience plus the requisite education to be a certified space professional.

    And in our identifying the cadre and then being able to track them with a certification process is essential I think to, as you requested and support us to do, grow the cadre in a way that we can recognize who they are, where they have been and what kind of experiences they have had so that we can track them and provide them the right kind of education.
 Page 24       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    General DODGEN. Congressman, our certification process is based on education also. First of all, they are selected at the major level to come into the FA 40. And when they are assessed into that process, they attend the qualification training that we have of which the 200 course in the Air Force is a big piece of that, and then there are officially certified as FA 40's. And then they immediately must go off to a utilization assignment in a space-related piece.

    The 3-Yankee added skill identifier is given, upon completion of the courses, at schools like Commander and Staff College where they get space training but they might still be intel officers or communications officers, and then that gives them a 3-Yankee skill identifier which awards them the identifier but does not necessarily make them go to a space-related position. And that is one of the things that the former really needs to look at, is when they will be officially space qualified.

    Admiral MCARTHUR. Sir, on the enlisted and civilian side, as part of the development of our space cadre management plan, we intend to expand the formalized certification and training process.

    Now, we have civilians and enlisted that work in many areas: National Reconnaissance Office, working at Dahlgren at our Network and Space Operations Center; Naval Space Operations Center in Point Mugu; as well as U.S. Strategic Command in Omaha.

    But most of the time, those individuals have baseline experience and knowledge going into that billet, and there is a tailored certification process to that particular billet that they work with.
 Page 25       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    For instance, an individual would be ordered into U.S. Strategic Command in a space-associated billet. Once in that billet then the individual will attend a training school, a formalized school, as General Lord alluded to, at Schreiver Air Force Base, and then the experience over the two-year tour allows him to achieve a level that we can designate them with a sub-specialty code for specialization.

    Thank you, sir.

    General THOMAS. Sir, similar to the Army, the Marine Corps' certification process is based on education as well. The space operations officer being the officer that goes out and spends two years at the Naval Postgraduate School gets a masters degree in space, his first tour after completing Naval Postgraduate School is a three-year payback tour in a space billet, either in the national security space community or on a COCOM staff.

    Similarly, on the space operational staff officer side of the house, he attends a course, completes a two-week training period, and then he is assigned to a billet either on the Marine Corps staff or with one of the Combatant Commands (COCOMs).

    Mr. REYES. Mr. Chairman, can I yield back to you and I will be back in a couple of minutes?

    Mr. EVERETT. Secretary Teets, do we need a standard definition of a space cadre or is there one?

 Page 26       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Secretary TEETS. Mr. Chairman, I think there is not a single definition of the space cadre that applies to each of the services and the Marine Corps, and I think that is a wise move.

    The mission of the Air Force, as it relates to space and bringing effects from space and warfighting from space and so forth, is considerably different from the role and mission of either the Army or the Navy.

    And so my own belief is that this is a case where one size does not fit all. And the definition of the cadre for the Air Force would of necessity be different from the definition of the cadre for the other services.

    If you think about the sheer numbers, General Lord now has put together a database that includes some 10,000 people—7,000 active duty and 3,000 Reserve people—that are now part of the space cadre. That would contrast with General Thomas who has an inventory of something on the order of 60 or 65 Marine Corps people that are part of his cadre.

    And so I think to define the term, it is appropriate to have different definitions for each service.

    Mr. EVERETT. I must admit, it was quite late when I finished reading all this stuff last night, but it struck me that in some cases, each of the services were talking about the same thing but using different definitions. Does that actually exist?

    Secretary TEETS. Well, we could probably work on that. And let me just say that we will be pleased to work at that.
 Page 27       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    We have a joint oversight council that meets quarterly and we work on problems like that. And what we probably should do is as a joint organization put together definitions that apply to the Air Force, a different definition for the Army, a different definition for the Navy, a different definition for the Marine Corps that fits the needs of each service, but then we all agree on what those definitions are and we have uniform meaning of the terms.

    Mr. EVERETT. General Lord, probably more so than any other weapon systems, the development of space systems require a close relationship between operators, users and acquirers. How does the Air Force plan to continue to build the relationship between these consumers?

    General LORD. Yes, sir, a very important point for us. As a matter of fact, we are having our new acquisition professionals attend the basic course and be there shoulder to shoulder with the operators. I was visiting up at Cape Cod just yesterday with our team that runs a space warning radar network up the East Coast. As a matter of fact, we have one of the acquisition experts who is on an operations crew up there at Cape Cod and talked to those folks yesterday, and he will go back to the acquisition business after serving a tour in the operations side of the house so he will be better capable of making good decisions about how operations and acquisition interface.

    So we see, as the space cadre, one of the fundamental benefits of this is to be able to take people, take the jobs we have in the business—not only in the Air Force, I am sure the Army and the Navy will do the same—and categorize what kind of experience, what kind of cross-feed do you need, what kind of experiences outside the particular areas you might have in a career, and work those on a billet-by-billet basis.
 Page 28       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    We have identified those. There are about 6,000 billets in the Air Force already, those kind of skills and abilities that will work this problem where we will have the ops acquisition interface, people who go to the same schools, that work the same problems together, that stand shoulder to shoulder as they work, and we think the payoff will be very large in that respect.

    Mr. EVERETT. General Dodgen, in your statement for the record, what is the difference between the Army space cadre, which includes only space operators, and the Army space professional cadre that comprises of officers, warrant officers, enlisted personnel and civilians from a wide variety of other areas who are space smart?

    General DODGEN. The Army cadre, I mentioned the FA 40's, are giving a very, very broad understanding of space at a very academic level so they can go out and advise across all the interests of space, not just the capabilities that come to the warfighter but also the vulnerabilities. For instance, how good is GPS on any particular day? Those warfighters can talk to commanders about that.

    So they understand the totality of space.

    When you are into things like the 3-Yankee and some of these other specialties, they understand a certain level of space but then they are essentially managed by the intelligence branch or the signal branch or the acquisition branch, and so their understanding of space is not as broad as the FA 40 individuals that we put through the rigors of the training I just mentioned.
 Page 29       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    What we want to do over the next year, without breaking the careers of those officers that just have the 3-Yankee is to understand just exactly what skills they should have in space beyond what they have now, and should they be brought into the space cadre, and should they be managed in a special way other than being managed as intelligence officers or signal officers or acquisition officers in their basic branch, and should there be some integration of those assignments.

    You can say the same thing about warrant officers and the enlisted people, such as the 31-Sierras that operate the discus satellite communication systems, and those are the things that our study will look at. And we will also bring in the institutions to manage those individuals that move into a space cadre in an efficient manner.

    Mr. EVERETT. Admiral, let me ask you what funds the Navy has budgeted for fiscal year 2005 and beyond for developing, managing and maintaining a cadre of space-qualified professionals?

    Admiral MCARTHUR. Thank you, sir.

    We have actually expanded our budget somewhat in modest terms compared to other services. But it has given us the ability to put key people in the right positions to develop the management plan for the space cadre and to execute and implement the plan.

    Our intention is to grow from one to two advisers—modest growth but, again, in key positions—that can help facilitate the assignment and management of space-experienced people to key billets throughout the fleet.
 Page 30       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Thank you, sir.

    Mr. EVERETT. General Thomas, what is the status of the implementation of objectives in the Marine Corps strategy and when will they be completed?

    General THOMAS. Sir, I would say that we are probably about 80 percent through our initial implementation of our space cadre. We recognize that we have still some work to do, and we think we have a pretty good head of steam on the fact that in just the last two years—or in the last year alone we have stood up the space staff officer and added that to our inventory as a testimony to that.

    So I would say we are about 80 percent with our initial plan.

    Mr. EVERETT. Mr. Reyes.

    Mr. REYES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    You know, as members of this committee, in terms of the armed forces, one of the big lessons that we have learned in recent years is the issue of operating jointly and being able to be a totally integrated force to face whatever challenge is presented.

    So in that vein, I am curious, Mr. Teets: Is there a requirement or a need to define—for all the services so that they can be playing under the same either umbrella or the same rules or the same specific I guess job description for lack a better word—in terms of developing the cadre in the three components, whether it be officer, enlisted or civilian? Is that something in fact that would be practical? Or maybe it is and you have already done it? Could you comment on that?
 Page 31       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Secretary TEETS. I would be pleased to, sir.

    My belief is that we are best served by having each service define their own set of requirements for how that particular service uses space and how it can most effectively organize, train and equip forces that can support joint warfighting operations.

    What I see my role as DOD's executive agent for space as doing is pulling together the services and the Marine Corps in a way that allows full visibility across the spectrum.

    Because if anything were ever joint, it is space. I mean, space services every one of the services and Marine Corps. All fighting forces are growingly dependent on the use of space assets for warfighting purposes and intelligence collection.

    So I think there is a need to have full visibility across all the services as to what each service is doing. But the roles and missions of what each service is doing should not be driven to be the same across the board. That is to say, one size does not fit all.

    Mr. REYES. Would any of you like to comment on that?

    General THOMAS. I would like to comment on it, sir, just from a Marine Corps perspective, and, again, we have had this discussion before.

    Again, on the Marine Corps side of the house, because we do not develop any space systems, so we do not need any acquisition specialties, we do not do any engineering of space. And if you take a look at our construct for building a space cadre, we start with the basic Marine air/ground task force officer and we build on that officer, we educate him, we train him, so he goes back out to the fleet and he is able to take and influence the commander by providing him that expertise relative to space, but at some point in time he may go off to another assignment back into his primary military occupational specialty.
 Page 32       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    So again, I think Mr. Teets' comment about one size does not fit all is probably appropriate for us.

    Mr. REYES. General.

    General LORD. Yes, sir, Congressman Reyes, thank you.

    What we have done is we have modeled our space operations school in Colorado Springs after the Joint Special Operations University down in Florida, which is really to do just what you said. It has put the inherent people together in a joint environment, to educate and train in that kind of environment to really work, and as Mr. Teets said, space is inherently joint.

    So our space 200 courses, which we validated with all the service members here participating and people from their organizations, we put the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, DOD civilians, NASA people all together in the same classroom, and in space 200 in four weeks we were able to give them problems and they worked together as a joint team to help solve the problems.

    For instance, we say a combatant commander needs a satellite to do some certain function, you have to design that, you have to figure how you are going acquire it, you have to work together as a service to make the requirements. We go through exercises like that in space 200 and it really builds the joint skills and abilities. We are all not creating individual stove pipe solutions for that; what we are doing is working it together to create a joint educational opportunity that will work that.
 Page 33       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Plus, all our service schools, our professional military education institutions, have space as part of their curricula. We learned that in joint operations.

    And I think that what you are seeing as a result of the actual application of space in support of war operations is the sum total of what we have been able to do in a joint environment by working together shoulder to shoulder as we grew up in this business.

    So I think you are on the right track and we have just got to do more of this.

    Mr. REYES. Any other comments?

    General DODGEN. Congressman, I would tell you that the more mature space becomes, the more warfighters must act in concert under a full understanding of the capabilities.

    In the past, the Army has operated its own training courses, but we fully embrace the National Security Space Institute that General Lord is leading. Our space cadre will be trained there. Our instructors will be there and our doctrine and our expertise will be fully matured within that institution.

    I assign all the FA 40's to the positions. The number one priority on assigning those positions is support to the global war on terrorism. Many of those are tactical units that are out there.
 Page 34       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    We had an Army space support team with the Marines as they moved forward in Iraq. We had an Army space support team with Ambassador Bremer, as he stood up his governing.

    The next priority are the joint assignments: STRATCOM, Cheyenne Mountain, NORAD, National Security Space Office (NSSO). The NSSO will probably double in its reorganization as the number of FA 40's that will be in that particular organization. And it is after those priorities that we actually assign individuals to the Departments of the Army (DA) staff and to my own command, Space and Missile Defense Command.

    So I think the joint training and interaction that we do together is very, very important as we continue to develop the space cadre.

    General LORD. Sir, obviously I concur with all the comments. We are joint. We have joint schools, which the Air Force offers to provide a baseline and a frame of reference for all our service members to work.

    It is also particularly important for us in the joint world to understand our adversaries' space capabilities—how do they use it, how can it be influenced and degraded?

    So that is important, particularly when we operate in a combatant commander's area of responsibility and in joint operations with the joint maritime component commander, the joint air component commander, that has a mix of all services in it.

 Page 35       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    So baseline knowledge, baseline experience, our blue force capabilities as well as Air Force area capabilities are important to know.

    Mr. REYES. With the challenge that we face today in terms of the war on terrorism, are we seeing any of that impact on your individual abilities to continue forward on this program?

    In other words, we know that the Operations Tempo (OPTEMPO) and the rotation going into Iraq, Afghanistan, South Korea and other challenges around the globe are stressing our capabilities almost to the breaking point.

    So is that having an impact on you, first of all, personnel-wise; and second, budget-wise?

    General LORD. I will take a shot at that, sir.

    I think that no direct impact either budget or personnel-wise right now, because the global nature of what we do in space operations, we operate as we do and support operations all over the world all the time, 24/7, 365.

    So our centers are really global operation centers to begin with when we are flying satellites or we are supporting with launch to put satellites in orbit, et cetera.

    So although we do have an Air Force space command, we have right now about 560 people deployed, most of them to Southwest Asia to support operations in-theater, but that is part of our normal rotational base.
 Page 36       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    So we are not stressed beyond the normal tempo that everybody is feeling with. I would not say over-stressed or over-obligated resource-wise. We have what we need to do. We are sufficiently challenged, I will tell you that, but we are not to the breaking point.

    Mr. REYES. And I guess I should have also included the pipeline. Because any program is only as good as the pipeline that you have got building up, as I think one of you mentioned, you know, you have got to have your sergeants, your lieutenants and so on up the chain of command. So is it having an effect on——

    General LORD. Pipeline-wise, we are doing quite well. We are continuing to attract people. We want to make sure and we are working hard to retain all our space expertise. That is where we get competition from industry sometimes and with people who are very skilled and capable.

    We think, and I know you will hear this from the next panel, that we think the educational opportunities that go with space education, not only in our Air Force but in the Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Coast Guard as well, the educational opportunities you have as part of the space cadre will certainly be something that you can take with you throughout your lifetime in the service, and people are dedicated to making sure that we have those opportunities.

    So right now we are not in trouble in any of those areas.

    Mr. REYES. General Dodgen.

 Page 37       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    General DODGEN. Congressman, we have had soldiers that have gone on multiple deployments as parts of space teams. Because of that reason, the Army realizes it just needs to resource more of these teams, and those teams will grow in the next few years and have already been approved as approved structure.

    Actually filling those teams and gaining the expertise, it takes some time to assess the officers into there at the field-grade level and then get them trained up. But that is all on track now.

    What we just did for the first time last June was a space support element showed up for the 3rd Infantry Division and it is reorganizing as a unit of execution, X, under our objective force. That is the first time we have had an organic space expertise shell inside one of our divisions. And we plan on doing that for all the divisions, so that is more growth.

    Our space support teams have deployed as needed. Now they are going to be organic to the division elements and now we are addressing what will be organic to the core and higher elements.

    So that has facilitated some growth.

    As to financing those deployments, for the most part they have been funded by global war on terrorism funding, which is basically supplementals from Congress.

    Mr. REYES. Admiral.

 Page 38       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Admiral MCARTHUR. Sir, I would say relative to the Navy especially—I guess you can say it is unfortunate—but Iraqi Freedom and the aftermath of that has benefited the space mission.

    We have individuals who are in positions of being providers for space effects who now deploy to a component commander or to the joint force commander in-theater and become the user.

    So relative to the space mission, this has been good in that we understand collectively now the capabilities that space has to offer to joint operations and the joint fight.

    So it has not been a negative impact, and it is actually been good because now you have user provider doing both on both sides and have a better understanding in general.

    Thank you, Sir.

    Mr. REYES. Thank you.

    General Thomas.

    General THOMAS. Sir, I would just follow up and say this: The global war on terrorism really has driven home the importance of space and the need to have folks that are educated and trained in space.

    To give you an example how we prepared for OIF–2. We have had the schoolhouse come out and train our folks and give them special instructions, even prior to them deploying, just to make sure they were aware of how to be able to exploit the capabilities that come with space.
 Page 39       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    And similarly, we have tried to take advantage of opportunities when the commanders were in town, their supporting the war, and getting them into those places that can better inform on how to exploit those capabilities.

    So I think it really has driven home the importance of space.

    Mr. REYES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Mr. EVERETT. Thank you.

    Mr. Thornberry.

    Mr. THORNBERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I apologize for being late. As I mentioned to you privately, we had more than one meeting going on at the same time.

    I do not want to duplicate questions already asked and may well have questions to submit for the record.

    Secretary Teets, you and I have talked before about one of my concerns, which is kind of highlighted in the answers to Mr. Reyes's questions, and that is: Space is seen primarily—and understandably at this time—as a place or way to support operations on the ground. But we also have to be thinking about space as a realm of warfare in and of itself. And if we let the services define their roles, they are not going to do that. They are going to support the other things that they have going on, by and large.
 Page 40       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Do we have a push—and we are talking about intellectual development of individuals who are well-versed in space—do we have that push to be thinking about the day when we may well face warfare of some sort or another in space itself?

    Secretary TEETS. Yes, sir, I appreciate the question and the opportunity to answer. Because I think we are making real headway in this regard.

    The lead role for space employment of force or space defense or space control, as you would say, the lead role is being carried out by Air Force Space Command. Now, that does not mean that they operate in a vacuum, because they do not.

    We have National Reconnaissance Office assets, we have Air Force space assets that are acquired by the Air Force and deployed by the Air Force, and we have important critical communication links in space that are actually acquired by the Navy and put into orbit on commercial satellites, on commercial launch vehicles.

    And so there is an overall requirement to worry about the employment of force in space, either in a defensive counter-space mode or a space situational awareness mode, or, yes, even thinking about offensive counter-space kinds of capabilities. And that role of space control has been given to our Air Force Space Command people. And it is real clear that that is the case.

    And again, we kind of attack this problem in a joint fashion in that we do not exclude Army, Navy, Marine Corps people, we do not exclude the NRO from discussion about it, but the lead role is at Air Force Space Command.
 Page 41       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. THORNBERRY. General Lord, let me follow up with you.

    Related to that, if you have all of—you or any other, Air Force or any other service—have all these plans and certifications and things to train people in space, it is not going to count unless the decisions made by promotion boards actually encourage people and reward people for focusing on space, and I would say even the aspects of space control that we were just talking about.

    So can you tell me that within the Air Force at least that people who devote their careers to space and even space control sorts of issues are going to be adequately rewarded and encouraged so that other people will want to join them?

    General LORD. Absolutely, sir. I think that is a very good question and something we need to make sure we look at carefully, and we have across the board.

    And I will tell you that Air Force Space Command will be 22 years old this fall and we celebrate 22 years of service. We now have colonels and soon-to-be I am sure generals in our Air Force who started out in that business 22 years ago and they are coming up through the system. I think we are really looking forward to that happening.

    Right now we are on par with the rest of the Air Force for promotions for people, looking at the most recent majors selection board, plus some of our ouw Non-Commisioned Officer (NCO) promotions as well.

 Page 42       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    So I would suspect—I cannot predict the future, obviously, in this, but I know that those people are very competitive and will be part of the greater leadership cadre of the future.

    Our commanders now are people who have come up through the system and are part of that business. So I am excited about that potential. And those who are recognized for starting in the business and staying in the business is part of the cadre.

    Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I may have some other questions for the record, but I yield back now.

    Thank you.

    Mr. EVERETT. Thank you.

    Mr. Teets, I am going to bypass you on this question, but service-specific, would each of our officers tell us the single thing that this committee can do for your service, not the overall space program, but for your service—for the Air Force, for the Army, the Navy and the Marines—as far as space is concerned.

    General LORD. Yes, sir, I will answer first.

    I think your continued interest and support of what we are doing in the medium of space plus the cadre education process is absolutely right on and we need to continue to emphasize that.
 Page 43       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    As we shift gears, as Congressman Thornberry raised, as we go from being a force enabling kind of capability to more involved directly as warfare and space has already started, we saw it in Operation Iraqi Freedom with the attempts to jam the global positioning system and we are already there. It is not a matter of if it has happened and we need to be smarter about that. And your continued emphasis as a committee will help us raise the right kind of people and the right kind of framework.

    We are like the Navy, we have about 550 people now in Air Force Space Command that have experience in the actual application of space. As in warfare situations begin to deploy to Southwest Asia part of that—that is the cadre that will help us build the kind of rules of engagement and things we need for conflict as it occurs in the medium of space when it happens.

    So with your continued support we will be ready for that.

    General DODGEN. Mr. Chairman, I would echo what General Lord said about support for this important area.

    I would also ask for my own particular case in the Army, where we are looking at this expansion of the space cadre over the next year, that there be some patience as we consider all those areas that are not yet in the space cadre. And one of the primary considerations of taking a year before we report out to the vice chief of staff and he can decide exactly how big the space cadre are career decisions on those other besides FA 40's. FA 40 promotions are higher or equal to the rest of the United States Army, and that is indicative of a group of functionary guys that are growing.
 Page 44       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    But it is the 3-Yankee guys that are intel, signal, acquisition guys, we have to be careful in their management so that we do not disadvantage them from becoming part of the space cadre.

    Mr. EVERETT. Admiral?

    Admiral MCARTHUR. Yes, sir.

    Again, your interest in this mission area is so important. I think space operations is probably relatively young compared to the other mission areas. But as we transition the department to network-centric warfare, we become more dependent on space at every step of the way. And it is understanding adversaries' space capabilities, it is understanding our capabilities and capitalizing on them and protecting them.

    Of course we can have all the technology in the world but we need the expertise with individuals to carry that out.

    And, again, your interest, particularly in the space cadre, is most helpful.

    Thank you, sir.

    General THOMAS. I would agree, sir, certainly the support of the committee for our efforts to build our cadres.
 Page 45       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    If I were to look at it from an operator's perspective, one of the things that I get hit with every day is the requirement for more bandwidth.

    So, you know, speaking for the operators, the warfighters out there, your support in making sure that we get those space programs that are going to provide real capability in bandwidth, like Tactical Satellite (TSAT) for example, those kinds of programs are really the kind of programs that we need in order to transform the force in how we utilize space.

    And I could name a few others, but I won't do it.

    Mr. EVERETT. Well, gentlemen, thank you all.

    And thank you, Mr. Secretary. Your input has been very helpful to us. And I also want to thank you for your contributions to this frontier that is going to be an overwhelming part of our lives in the future.

    It is something that we must get ready for, and I thank you now.

    We will now seat the second panel.

    Thank you.

    I would like to reintroduce the second panel. This panel includes representatives from industry, military academia and civilian academia. As such they will provide their perspectives on the development of space professionals for the purpose of military space. Each of the panel members will give a short—please, three minutes only—oral statement. Your complete statements will be entered into the record, and then we will begin the question and answer period.
 Page 46       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The members of the panel are: Dr. Robert Calico, Provost, Engineering and Management Department, Air Force Institute of Technology; Captain Dan Bursch, USN, Associate Dean of Graduate School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Naval Postgraduate School; Dr. John Douglass, President and CEO, Aerospace Industries Association; Dr. Pam Shockley-Zalabak, Chancellor, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs; and Dr. Victoria Coverstone, Professor of Aerospace, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

    Again, I ask you to please keep all statements within three minutes. We will put your entire statement into the record. That will allow us to get to some questions which we are anxious to submit to you.

    And I would also point out that we do expect votes in about 20 minutes or less, and if we could probably get through with the oral statements then we will take a recess and come back for the question and answer period.

    So we will begin on my right, the panel's left, and just go right down the line.

    Dr. Calico.


 Page 47       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Mr. CALICO. Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the committee, on behalf of Colonel David Eidsaune, Commandant of the Air Force Institute of Technology, it is my pleasure to talk with you today about the education of the nation's military space professionals.

    As the Space Commission highlighted in its 11 January 2001 report: Military space professionals will have to master highly complex technology; develop new doctrine and concepts of operation for space launch, offensive and defensive space operations, power projection in, from, and through space, and other military uses of space; and operate some of the most complex systems ever built and deployed.

    The key difference between military space professionals and those involved in civilian space programs is the focus on specific military uses of space highlighted by the report.

    Space science is fundamental to both communities. It is the fusing of space sciences with technology, doctrine and tactics that allows the space professional to accomplish assigned military objectives. AFIT understands this very well as it executes its educational mission.

    AFIT's response to Air Force needs in space education resulted in significant and successful initiatives and programs from its beginning. As early as 1957, as the Nation and the Air Force responded to the launch of Sputnik, space-related courses were added to existing curricula, and the first class of the Astronautics program—later renamed Astronautical Engineering—started in 1958.
 Page 48       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Responsiveness to Air Force and national defense needs is resident in AFIT's mission and what we have demonstrated successfully for many years.

    As a more recent example, AFIT initiated the Graduate Aerospace and Information Operations program in the fall 2001 as a direct response to an Air Force Space Command request to add information operations to our space operations program. This program retains the technical foundation of space science and engineering courses but also provides students with an understanding of how information is used, conveyed, assured and denied.

    In the fall of 2003, AFIT expanded its offerings under the Graduate Space Systems program. Under this program students take a common space core and augment it with tailored sequences to meet specific customer requirements such as systems engineering, information warfare and operations research.

    This program is designed to provide the space cadre with a broad knowledge in space systems engineering and space science, including the ability to plan, execute and valuate space systems in operation.

    The space systems graduate is ready to participate actively in the organization's responsibility for selecting, planning, management, operations and evaluation of space systems for DOD.

    AFIT has a significant history in participating in space education. We enthusiastically continue to support this through participation in the space professional development integrated product team, collaborating with Air Force Space Command, the Space and Missile Center, the National Reconnaissance Office and others.
 Page 49       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    We are also embarking on a new and exciting partnership with the Naval Postgraduate School to take advantage of the strengths each school can bring to the education needs of the space cadre.

    In conclusion, AFIT is a flexible, responsive institution well-suited to provide relevant defense-focused education for the 21st century warrior.

    Thank you for your time, and I look forward to your questions.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Calico can be viewed in the hard copy.]

    Mr. EVERETT. Thank you, sir.

    Captain Bursch.


    Captain BURSCH. Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee, as well as an associate dean, I am also a naval astronaut and instructor in the space systems curriculum at the Naval Postgraduate School (NPS).

    I have to say right now my heart is beating about as fast as when it was before launch. [Laughter.]
 Page 50       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    On behalf of Rear Admiral Patrick Dunne, the superintendent of the Naval Postgraduate School, and Dr. Rudy Panholzer, chairman of the Space Systems Academic Group, who is with me here today, thank you for the opportunity to talk to you about the Naval Postgraduate School's continuing role in the education of America's space cadre.

    I am also honored to be a part of this distinguished panel.

    In 1982, the Naval Postgraduate School, also known as NPS—that is just what you need, another acronym—formed the Space Systems Academic Group, an interdisciplinary group of faculty with the vision to serve Naval and DOD's space educational requirement.

    In the past 20 years, we have graduated over 560 Navy, Marine Corps, Army and Air Force officers in our space systems engineering and operations curricula.

    Having achieved a comprehensive understanding of space systems architectures and employment, these students applied their expertise in a wide variety of acquisition and operational space billets in the fleet and joint commands and in national agencies.

    The school's early recognition of the value of external partnerships led to the formation of a faculty chair position sponsored by NASA, Navy Space, the National Reconnaissance Office and our industry partners.

 Page 51       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    We also have an Air Force military instructor.

    These diverse participants with real-world experience and expertise provide an invaluable resource for our joint student body.

    Through regular curriculum reviews with senior leaders, we have maintained a flexible curriculum highly tuned to the needs of both DOD and national security space.

    Our lab facilities are a model of cooperative efforts with the NRO, Naval research labs, the Air Force research labs and others. Our students have the opportunity to take classified courses and perform classified research or pursue hands-on research building spacecraft, such as the petite amateur Navy satellite spacecraft built at NPS and launched in 1998 from the space shuttle Discovery.

    Recent programs created as a response to DOD needs include a space distance learning certificate program to provide space education to military members worldwide as well as an educational alliance with the Air Force Institute of Technology.

    In closing I wish to thank the committee for your ongoing support to our nation's security, to our nation's space programs and to all of us in uniform.

    The Naval Postgraduate School stands ready and able to provide education programs that meet our nation's needs.

    Thank you.
 Page 52       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    [The prepared statement of Captain Bursch can be viewed in the hard copy.]

    Mr. EVERETT. Thank you.

    Mr. Douglas.


    Mr. DOUGLAS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate this hearing today. I am particularly mindful of your time and the other committee members' time, so we really do appreciate this.

    My comments today are a little bit——

    Mr. EVERETT. Let me interrupt and say we very much appreciate your time. If you feel that I am sort of giving you a short time to say what you need to say, let me assure that you will be glad of that later on when you see these votes start coming in.

    Mr. DOUGLAS. Yes, sir. Well, I have been coming up for almost 40 years, sir. I started way back there in the back, so I know how things work, especially this time of year. We are mindful of your time.

    But my comments today really come to you from kind of a diverse background. I am a former Air Force general, I am a former commissioner on the Commission on the Future of the Aerospace Industry, appointed by President Bush, a former Assistant Secretary of the Navy and currently the CEO of the Aerospace Industries Association.
 Page 53       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I am mindful of some answers you got from the first panel. I should have added to this my comments as we started. You were asking them about space cadre, and their answers to you covered really two areas: one, the development of new space systems, and that is kind of one area that the cadre is in, and then the other is the operation of the space systems once they are up there.

    And as you know, sir, industry is primarily associated with the development of the new systems, but we are associated, both in the Air Force and at NASA, in the operation of space systems, but our primary mission is the development of those new systems.

    My first point to you is this, sir: that the nation, not just these military services that you spoke to in the first panel, are facing a very difficult challenge in human capital in the space area.

    Just to put that in a little bit of perspective: In 1963, when I graduated as a young engineer and went into the Air Force, one-third of the science and engineering graduates all over the United States went into aerospace careers, either into one of the military departments or into industry. Today that percentage is hovering somewhere around two percent. So we have gone from one-third down to two percent.

    Also, in 1963, in the development of new aerospace systems, we had somewhere in the neighborhood of 140,000 to 150,000 scientists and engineers working here in the United States on new systems. As a young second lieutenant going into the Air Force's development systems, I had many, many space and aeronautics bomb programs that I could work on. Today we have in our whole country less than 20,000 scientists and engineers working in aerospace research and development jobs. So we have gone from somewhere between 140,000 and 150,000 down to around 20,000.
 Page 54       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The second point I want to make is that the military, and indeed the other services who spoke to you this morning, are not going to compete well in this very difficult future that is coming unless they do something about improving their promotion rates.

    And without trying to pick on my good friend, General Lord, because he is a friend and someone I deeply respect, for him to tell you about the Majors board, sir—I mean, you know, who does not make Major these days?

    The real criteria is whether you make full colonel or brigadier general. That is when you are really beginning get into the full leadership of the department.

    So I would recommend to you that if you set criteria for the military services in developing within their military a leadership criteria for the future that you look very carefully at the promotion rates to full colonel and brigadier general.

    These lower-rank promotion rates are certainly important when you are going up for promotion, and I do not mean to denigrate that, but the promotion rates are very high at those lower levels.

    My last point is, sir, that industry sees this through the eyes of the President's commission that made its report last year. We think this is an extremely complex national problem. It involves our national ability to compete across a broad spectrum of technologies. Space is one that is enormously important to us. To solve it, it requires the Federal Government, our states, our industry and our academia to work together.
 Page 55       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    We are developing a national plan to do that at the Aerospace Industries Association in cooperation with the Administration and with our States.

    We appreciate your asking us to come today, and we will be glad to answer any questions you may have, sir.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Douglas can be viewed in the hard copy.]

    Mr. EVERETT. Thank you.

    Dr. Shockley-Zalabak.


    Dr. SHOCKLEY-ZALABAK. Thank you.

    Mr. EVERETT. That close enough?

    Dr. SHOCKLEY-ZALABAK. Close enough.

    Mr. EVERETT. Thank you.

    Dr. SHOCKLEY-ZALABAK. Good afternoon, members of the committee. Thank you very much for allowing me to talk about our efforts at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs to contribute to the important role of space professional development in all aspects of space systems design, implementation and operation.
 Page 56       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Because of its close engagement with the community of Colorado Springs, including the United States Air Force Academy, Peterson Air Force Base, Schreiver Air Force Base, Fort Carson, NORAD and Air Force Space Command, and now U.S. Northern Command, CU-Colorado Springs is uniquely positioned to assist in the development of space professionals. And in fact we have been doing so really since the mid–1980's.

    Our Network Information and Space Security Center is widely recognized for its supportive organizations such as U.S. Northern Command, Air Force Space Command and Air Force Research Laboratory.

    The mission of Network Information and Space Security Center (NISSC) is to facilitate cooperation and collaboration among constituencies in federal, state and local government agencies, the military, academia and industry.

    NISSC and our university departments currently offer graduate level certificate programs in homeland security, information assurance and secure software.

    NISSC also has been a founding member of the Homeland Security/Defense Education Consortium where over 30 academic institutions have come together to meet national needs.

    Our newest initiative is specifically in support of developing and expanding the professional space cadre. CU-Colorado Springs has formally agreed to serve as the designated higher education representative for Air Force Space Command for the purpose of establishing and managing a consortium of premier research institutions and other appropriate organizations to serve the broad educational needs of the military space community.
 Page 57       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The goal of the space education consortium is to be recognized as a national and international organization of excellence for space education to achieve national security needs.

    The consortium's interest will include a broad spectrum of space operations in all environments. Underpinning the consortium will be a series of agreements that allow students to take courses from consortium members, plan educational programs, transfer credits among member institutions and receive degrees.

    The tenets of the consortium include making sure that the military space role and perspective is adequately and accurately reflected in educational initiatives; to promote and facilitate program development in space-related areas; to facilitate space-related research and development; and to create the kind of cooperation among consortium institutions that will allow us to expand training, development, research and educational opportunities for space professional development.

    The university's approach to consortium membership will be inclusive and will include higher education institutions, military schools and educational institutions and other organizations that foster the advancement of space.

    We share the committee's view that this is very critical, and we will work collaboratively in support of meeting our current needs as well as our future challenges. Thank you.

 Page 58       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    [The prepared statement of Dr. Shockley-Zalabak can be viewed in the hard copy.]

    Mr. EVERETT. Thank you.

    Dr. Coverstone.


    Dr. COVERSTONE. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Victoria Coverstone, professor in the department of aerospace engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

    I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss a subject of critical importance to the security of the United States: the education and training of young men and women in the knowledge and skills needed to achieve military and scientific objectives in the space arena.

    My message to you today is that the pool of talented domestic students interested in careers in space remains large and highly motivated. But the lack of financial support and pipelines to these careers too often divert them into other fields of study.

    The University of Illinois is known for graduating large numbers of students with bachelors, masters and doctoral degrees in aerospace and aerospace-related fields. Illinois is one of the highest ranked engineering colleges in our country and our students are among the nation's best. But just as important is the high motivation of these students for space careers with the military, NASA and industry. All of our students consistently show that they have been dreaming of careers in space as astronauts, engineers and scientists since age 10 or even earlier. The strong motivation of these talented students represent the tremendous resource for the future of space development.
 Page 59       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    It is our opinion that this student resource is being severely under-utilized. Our best students sometimes have difficulties putting themselves through school. More scholarships, fellowships and research dollars, as well as job offers upon graduation, are needed to increase the number of space professionals. I hope you agree that much more must be done in supporting these students.

    I want to report to you today that the University of Illinois strongly supports our efforts to educate these excellent young students in space science and technology. We offer a broad-based education in aerospace fundamentals, but opportunities for education and space-related disciplines are much more than classroom lecture courses. We also stress the importance of hands-on experience. For example, our multidisciplinary Illinois orbit-observing nanosat project offers undergraduate and graduate students a creative window into the practical space mission design.

    We also heavily emphasize teamwork skills as highlighted in my department's two-semester senior design course. And I am proud to say that these system designs always do very well at the national level, in some years bringing in first, second and third prize.

    The University of Illinois is the lead institute for the NASA space-grant college and fellowship program in our state. The space grant brings together the research efforts of the University of Chicago, Northwestern University, the Illinois Institute of Technology, and of course my university to support research and to provide student support in space research.

 Page 60       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    My university's latest effort is the establishment of the Center for Human and Robotic Space Exploration with the purpose to train future leaders and develop the fundamental scientific and engineering expertise needed to achieve our vital national goals.

    In conclusion, my message to your committee is that my university very strongly supports national efforts to develop space capabilities and educate and train first-rate students. All that is needed is the financial support for those already motivated students anxious for careers as space professionals.

    [The prepared statement of Dr. Coverstone can be viewed in the hard copy.]

    Mr. EVERETT. Thank you.

    I thank all of you.

    I am going to yield my first round to Mr. Thornberry.

    Mr. THORNBERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Mr. Douglass, I want to ask you this, because all of us who really care about space have our stomachs turned every time we have a hearing or more often read the newspaper about the latest cost overrun, the latest delay in some sort of system development, the latest technical problem, and it seems to happen with pretty much every major space acquisition system.

    Now, this is not the hearing to get into all of the reasons for that. But what I want to ask you is this: is part of the problem that we have not developed the proper expertise in the military folks who are procuring and overseeing the research and development and procurement of these major space systems?
 Page 61       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. DOUGLAS. Yes, sir, it is part of the problem.

    Mr. THORNBERRY. And what do we need to do to fix it, because it is a major, major problem it seems to me in trying to move ahead on space?

    Mr. DOUGLAS. Well, you know, I think the most practical thing that the Air Force needs to do, if you are referring to that service as compared to the Army and the Marine Corps, is to look a little bit toward the way the Navy handles some of its particular mission needs.

    I guess the best example that you might want to look at is the Navy's nuclear propulsion program where you get specialized training and they stay in that career field all the way on up to be in the lead submariner in the Navy. And of course they have other specialized programs for their technical officers.

    The thing that I would watch, if I was most trying to track this from your point of view, would be what was pointed out by the Rumsfeld Commission, which is that if you look at the top number of people that are involved in space operations and space acquisition, if there is a relatively low number of them that came up through the system—in other words, they came into the system already being a general officer or a senior executive from somewhere—then you might ask yourself why is that, why are not the ones we trained in that technical skill getting promoted to those top jobs? And that is where I think you need to really keep your eye on the ball.

 Page 62       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    That is why I said promotion to full colonel or captain in the Navy, or into flag rank, is the real, real criteria. If they do not promote them at that level, then you know you got a problem further down—I mean, if they do not get promoted further down, then God knows we are really into a disaster.

    Mr. THORNBERRY. Thank you.

    Mr. EVERETT. Well, this is kind of what we were—unfortunately we are waiting for just a comment. I think it is an excellent question that our colleague asked. I assume Mr. Douglass that your answer is to keep them down on the farm, so to speak. We have to make the promotions quicker.

    Mr. DOUGLAS. Well, sir, you know, the military services always have the problem that their main mission is combat. And you heard what the young Marine general said. God knows there are no finer Americans or finer officers on this planet than our young Marine officers. I have been associated with them all my life and I continue to be amazed at the quality of young people we get into those jobs. So they start as a rifleman and they kind of go from there.

    Well, that line of thinking to a certain degree extends across all the services. In the Air Force it is, you know, you are a pilot, you can do anything. And it is something else perhaps in the other services.

    But you do have to, when you have a part of the military establishment that has got to have deep technical skills and insights into how those skills relate, technology to operations, if you are not careful you can drift far too much into pulling all of your resources off the operational side of the house and not enough off the technology development side of the house, and that is just where your colleague is aware that we do have problems. And I think there have been a number of commissions and panels that have—distinguished commissions and panels that—have illustrated that problem, including the Rumsfeld panel.
 Page 63       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. EVERETT. I now recognize our ranking member, Mr. Reyes.

    Mr. REYES. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    I was intrigued by your observation, Mr. Douglass, in terms of how we have gone from I believe it was one-third to 2 percent in terms of being interested. Isn't that also reflected in general terms in the general population? And I say that because I know, my wife is an educator and my daughter is an educator as well, and one of the hardest challenges faced by education today, from what we see and what they tell me, is getting students proficient in science and math and the kinds of core courses that actually feed into space and these kinds of careers.

    I reflect back on the initial space race, when the Russians put the Sputnik up and then President Kennedy declared that we are going to put a man on the moon before the end of the decade, and the excitement that that generated, I am old enough to tell you that I was young enough then to think that, man, that was the coolest thing in the world, to be on top of this rocket ship that could explode and get into outer space and be able to—that was the initial part of television coming into its early days and its heyday.

    So my question is: Do you have any recommendations on how we can ignite that same kind of interest, the same kind of motivation. Because certainly from what we hear, monetary compensation is not one of the motivators there because you have people that are willing to go into outer space that do not necessarily get motivated by money.

    So do you have any recommendations or observations?
 Page 64       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. DOUGLAS. Yes, sir, I do. I was fortunate enough to be one of President Bush's commissioners on the Commission on the Future of the Aerospace Industry, and we looked at this. And as you know, subsequent to that there has been yet another commission which recently gave its report on the structure of the president's new space program. And industry is very concerned about this.

    One of the things that we do is to create a rocket contest for young kids to keep them interested through high school. Because, sir, if they do not fight their way through Algebra I and Algebra II, my colleagues to my right and left are never going to see them, because they are not going to come to these wonderful universities and learn how to be a scientist or an engineer and work in this aerospace field.

    But another part of motivation is: We have to have a program, we have to have dreams for the future. And the president's new space initiative, you know, to go back to the moon and eventually onto Mars and to build a replacement for a shuttle, it is so important that we have those as national objectives, even though, sir, you know, we all know we have a deficit, we have the war in Iraq, we have other things, we have to have that dream or our young people, are just not going to go into this. Because our children are enormously more sophisticated than we were when we were young.

    I have an 8-year-old son and a 6-year-old son. They know how to surf the Web. And they love space-type things. But they are smart enough to know that if there is no space program out there in the United States, they better go into the medical field or they better, you know, study computers or something else.
 Page 65       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    And so we have to have a national program, but then we have to keep the kids engaged. And industry is willing to do its part in that respect, and we want to be in a cooperative program with our colleagues from academia, with the Federal Government and hopefully with our Congress.

    But you got to have that dream, you got to get them motivated. And then, sir, you got to get them through Algebra I and II in high school. If they do not do that, they cannot do any of this stuff.

    Mr. EVERETT. I am going to have to interrupt at this time.

    This is our effort to help you beat the clock so you won't have to sit here so long, but we only have about eight minutes left to rush over to the floor and there will be a series of three votes, which will be a minimum of 25 minutes to 30 minutes we will be gone.

    So I am going to recess the hearing at this point.

    Thank you.


    Mr. EVERETT. The meeting will come to order. I ask the panel to reconvene, please.

 Page 66       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Captain Bursch, will you please explain your vision of a joint space advisory group?

    Captain BURSCH. Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman, I would be pleased to.

    The Joint Space Advisory Group, or academic group, was initially formed as part of the AFIT-NPS alliance. When we first started getting together at the end of February of this year, we quickly realized that the scope of our charter would probably end up expanding beyond AFIT and NPS, not just to look where graduates go after our schools, but also looking at what we are getting from service academies and other institutions.

    And along with the Joint Space Oversight Board, their charter has been expanding too.

    So as far as between the two schools, some of the elements of a future state that the Joint Space Oversight Board has asked us to do is to come up with some recommendation on the right percentage of the space cadre with graduate degrees, including recommendations on the right percentages in each technical curriculum, also recommendation on the necessary through-put in capacity of each institution, and also recommendation on how we ensure that the graduate degree programs of the academic institutions meet the needs of the national security space community.

    One thing that seems kind of mundane—actually one of the things we have been working on—is developing some set of definitions for space terminology. Already today I have seen confusion when people say ''operations,'' or when people say ''operator,'' somebody may think of a warfighter and other people may think it is somebody operating a satellite.
 Page 67       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    So there is a lot to be gained in looking at definitions.

    Another thing that we are trying to do—another goal, at least would start in AFIT and NPS, which we think will expand to other institutions and other members—would be to somehow develop some type of common set of educational objectives. At NPS we call them educational skill requirements and that is how we build our curricula at the school. We also look at accreditation considerations. I am sure that every organization, institution out there does a similar thing.

    If we could come up with some similar way or process of doing that, I think we could make long strides in educating the total space cadre as far as graduate education.

    Our focus will be mainly on graduate-level education.

    I can go into some others, but those are the main areas, sir.

    Mr. EVERETT. I appreciate it.

    Dr. Shockley-Zalabak, in relation to how they may be used to develop space cadre and space professionals, please tell us about the Network Information and Space Security Center concept and the space education consortium: Who are the participants and what is their contribution? What is the charter and intended contribution of the space education consortium?

    Dr. SHOCKLEY-ZALABAK. Well, thank you for that question.
 Page 68       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Our Network Information and Space Security model has been a partnership model from the very beginning. Academic partners, military partners, industry partners have come together to identify needed certificate programs. And using that partnership model, we have actually been a founding member of the homeland security/defense education consortia.

    That model will then go into the space education consortia model where, again, we are looking at participating institutions around the country that have space education and research programs and want to be active contributors to not only looking at research that is very relevant to our military space needs, but looking at the kinds of programs that are needed, both at the undergraduate and at graduate-degree levels where service personnel can seamlessly work between institutions, among institutions to achieve degrees.

    Some of the initial people who are discussing this partnership in collaboration over the last 18 months are the University of North Dakota, Johns Hopkins University, George Washington University, the Space Foundation as well as Aerospace Corporation. And included in some of the consortium activities will be an emphasis on the K through 12 pipeline that Mr. Douglass discussed earlier where in fact we need to engage more young people in middle school in thinking about these kinds of opportunities.

    They are looking for active members, and we are quite confident that there are many in the Nation who want to be contributing members to this consortium, which will strengthen all of the branches of our service.

    Mr. EVERETT. Dr. Coverstone, speaking of the consortium, are you aware of any similar efforts in the Midwest or eastern United States similar to that which is headed up by University of Colorado?
 Page 69       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Dr. COVERSTONE. Yes. The Illinois space grant, which is a part of the NASA national program, space-grant program, we are actively involved in linking local and state government agencies, industry as well as colleges and universities. And actually the two of us have been discussing a way in which we can even become stronger by collaborating.

    Mr. EVERETT. The two of you, then, there seems to be a great shortage in higher trained and educated individuals coming out of our universities to support a robust group of space professionals in the military, industry and academia. What efforts would you find valuable in encouraging qualified students to pursue a professional career in the space arena?

    It seems to me it is such an exciting, and I use the word again, frontier that is going to consume so much of our lives in the future that this would be a very exciting field for young people to get into.

    I understand they have to pass algebra first.

    Dr. SHOCKLEY-ZALABAK. And algebra is kind of where we need to start.

    We have a new program called Partners for Change that we have a memorandum of understanding with Space Foundation, and we have corporate partners and others that we are discussing where we are going to go into middle schools, work not only with students about a pre-collegiate curriculum in science technology, engineering and mathematics, but work with their families and also work with re-inventing curriculum that addresses why those subjects tend to turn students away from what is obviously a very exciting career opportunity.
 Page 70       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    So it is not only reaching young people sooner; it is working in teacher training, it is also working in re-certification of certain kinds of curriculum that really meet these needs for the future.

    But it is also financial support for students, as in fact Dr. Coverstone indicated earlier.

    We have many pilot programs throughout the country that have done an excellent job, but we need a more comprehensive strategy that we in fact have evaluated over a period of time. We have never had greater interest in space programs that are university-based in the summertime. And we have declining participation all over the nation, and not just in Colorado Springs, although we have perhaps less of a decline than some others, we have declining participation all over the Nation in some of those degree fields, which of course becomes the space professional cadre of the future.

    Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. Chairman, could I comment on that a little bit from a national perspective? I thought it might be helpful to you——

    Mr. EVERETT. If you would briefly because we are running up against a time deadline where we are going to have to call the hearing to a close.

    Mr. DOUGLAS. Just to put in perspective, we have somewhere around 575,000, 585,000 workers in the aerospace industry today. That workforce, just looking at what we see coming now, is going to go up to about 610,000 by 2006. And our workforce is in its early 50's in terms of age. Engineering workforce is probably about 55. The blue collar workforce is about 52. So we are going to see between now and the end of this decade a large number of them retire.
 Page 71       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    What we do not have—and this strikes to your question about my two colleagues here working together—we do not have a national model that relates the jobs that we need in this country to the output of our colleges and universities in the programs that my colleagues on the panel are talking about, and that is one of the things that we are working with the Department of Labor to produce, is some sort of input-output model for the Nation as a whole so we know how many software engineers do we need, how many aeronautic engineers, how many astronautic engineers and so on. There is no national model as we speak, sir.

    Mr. EVERETT. I thank you for that. Dr. Coverstone, I had asked you for a response for that and I think you also were preparing to give one.

    Dr. COVERSTONE. Well, the words that I have heard resonate within myself, the only thing that I would like to add to that is the excitement with President Bush's space exploration initiative, and we are hoping that an appropriate percentage of the budget that is targeted for that will actually help go toward training of this workforce that will be required and not just go directly to the hardware in supporting the programs themselves.

    So we are hoping to build upon that vision. It is exciting and it is something that the students are behind and we hope to capitalize on it.

    Mr. EVERETT. Thank you.

    Dr. Calico, how should your programs adapt to the increasing needs of a space cadre? Do you have the focus to satisfy the requirements of developing a space cadre? Should your space-oriented programs be open to a larger number of students? Do your programs significantly address needs of intelligence for the purpose of national security space?
 Page 72       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    That is a lot of questions, but if you could take a poke at it.

    Mr. CALICO. Yes, at my age, remembering four things might be difficult——

    Mr. EVERETT. We will come back.

    Mr. CALICO [continuing]. But I will try.

    Really, I think this would be true for both us and the Naval Postgraduate School.

    I think we have a strong system to respond to identified needs in certainly the DOD space community.

    But one thing I would say, I do believe that as the development of the space cadre from concept to employment that they are working at, we are more at the concept stage. While I think the space 100, 200, 300 are great, I think setting the requirements from the services' point of view in a joint manner for degree graduate education is still something we need to spend a little extra work on.

    I do think processes are in place to develop the curricula as required. I think we have both had a long history of doing that.

 Page 73       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    In terms of meeting the needs of the intelligence communities, that is certainly a focus of our program in some of the areas. And by the intelligence community, now, I would be speaking at a broader intelligence community—the NRO, the National Geo-Spacial Intelligence Agency, the DIA as well as CIA. We have a strong connection with the NRO. We run a program in an area termed nascent measurement intelligence which is simply paid for by the National Geo-Spacial Intelligence Agency and is strongly connected to their requirements and its really employment collection techniques they are using as space assets.

    And then finally in terms of a wider audience, I think our focus is the defense community. And certainly we believe there is an increased and a growing need to educate all segments of that community. The popular term I think in the Air Force is total force, and total force means that its not only our officers, it is our enlisted, it is our civilian workforce, and increasingly it is our contractor base.

    And many of the things that we are involved with in areas like intelligence or in some of the space program delve into areas where foreign disclosure is an issue, where security is an issue, and in those areas we do think there is a need for broadening that base a little bit.

    I think I touched all of them but I know not to have.

    Mr. EVERETT. You are remarkable, you did.

    And I regret we have run up against the time restraints for my colleague and I. I hope you will consider the fact that your written statements, I read through every single one of them. It was late last night when I got through. The book is this thick. And the staff has read through all those statements. And they are most helpful to us in trying to figure out where to go and how to do this.
 Page 74       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I will tell you, though, that we do have additional questions that we would like to submit to you, and we would like as timely answers as you can give us, preferably in the next 30 days. That will give us the answers by the time we get back from the traditional August work period, not recess. [Laughter.]

    I do not understand that term.

    So I again want to thank you very much for your kindness in being here today. It was well worth it for us for you to make the trip. We need the kind of input that you have given us. And again, I appreciate it very much.

    The meeting is adjourned.

    [Whereupon, at 4:32 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]