Media Center

Mike Turner, Chairman of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, released the following opening statement in conjunction with the subcommittee’s hearing on the Administration’s Fiscal Year 2012 budget request for national security space activities:

“Good afternoon. I want to welcome everyone to the Strategic Forces Subcommittee’s hearing on the Fiscal Year 2012 budget request for national security space activities.

“I must express the committee’s disappointment that we did not receive General Shelton’s testimony until just hours ago. While I understand the General’s testimony was completed several days ago, it was not cleared by OMB until recently. We take these hearings seriously and want to have a substantive discussion on the material presented in testimony. Therefore, our committee requires witness testimony 48 hours in advance of a hearing so that members have sufficient time to review it and can use it to inform their oversight questions. I hope this occurrence is not the Air Force precedent being established for future hearings.

“Let me first start by congratulating the Department on an impressive 38 out of 38 successful Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) launches, and commend our dedicated space professionals for placing the first GPS-2-F satellite, the first AEHF satellite, and the SBSS Block 10 spacecraft on orbit this past year.

“I am pleased that major space acquisition programs such as AEHF, WGS, MUOS, GPS, and SBIRS appear to be sufficiently funded in the budget request despite a $178 billion efficiency reduction for the Department over the next five years. Finishing these acquisition programs and getting them on-orbit is vitally important. Equally important are the investments in next-generation science and technology, and innovation and ingenuity that can lead to new—and sometimes revolutionary—capabilities.

“There has been significant turbulence in space acquisition over the past decade. This has resulted in significant cost growth and schedule delays; leading to greater fragility in our space architectures and greater instability in the industrial base. Therefore, I was pleased to see the Air Force propose its space acquisition efficiency initiative, or ‘EASE,’ in this year’s budget request. However, the Department is requesting legislative authority this year to implement EASE that is different than in previous years. It is important for our committee to understand why this legislation is needed. We also need to understand the longer-term strategy for EASE because this is a different approach to space acquisition and we want to have confidence that this isn’t just a one-year activity.

“I am concerned about the industrial base for solid- and liquid-fueled rockets. Costs for the EELV have skyrocketed with the termination of NASA’s Constellation program and infrastructure costs currently shared by the Department and NASA are being passed on to the Department of Defense (DoD). I am also concerned that the current EELV block-buy approach does not fully meet the national security launch needs of the Department despite cost increases of $3.5 billion in the outyear budget request.

“I would also like to highlight a few other concerns that I hope our witnesses can address today.

“First, the National Security Space Strategy recognized that space is becoming increasingly ‘congested, contested, and competitive.’ Orbital debris—such as that created in the 2007 Chinese anti-satellite test and the 2009 Iridium-Russian Cosmos satellite collision—increasingly threaten our space assets. However, our current Space Situational Awareness (SSA) toolset rests largely on 1980s computer and network technology. The Air Force plans to replace this with the Joint Space Operations Center Mission System, but this information system program has experienced several challenges and setbacks. This is an important capability. I would appreciate our witnesses’ thoughts on how we can set it up for success.

“Second, I would like to further understand the Department’s concerns about a new commercial communications capability that could potentially interfere with GPS, as highlighted in a recent letter from the Deputy Secretary of Defense to the FCC. Such interference could have severe consequences, not only for the military, but also first responders, the FAA, and other civil and commercial users who are highly dependent on GPS.

“Third, the Department’s $100 billion efficiencies initiative and $78 billion deficit reduction initiative appear to take significant tolls on our space workforce. These cuts appear to be in areas that were scheduled for growth to accommodate rapid mission growth. What is the magnitude of this issue and how is the Department approaching it?

“Fourth, the discussion in the National Security Space Strategy on ‘norms’ has lead to questions about whether the United States intends to sign-up to the European Union’s ‘Code of Conduct’ for space. Some believe the Code could be a first step towards space arms control and limit U.S. freedom of action in space. What are the impacts of such an agreement? I would hope that the Department would carefully consult this committee before taking any further steps that could limit our future options in space.

“Lastly, a year ago I expressed my concern that the National Air and Space Intelligence Center (NASIC) was being restricted from doing ‘original analysis’ in certain counterspace areas despite their long history of technical expertise. Some of this has been resolved, but I still am uneasy with the current allocation of space intelligence analytical responsibilities. Like our committee, I understand that many of your organizations are routinely briefed by NASIC. Limiting their ability to continue to provide such support cannot be in our best interest, especially with the Department’s increased emphasis on space situational awareness and space protection.”