before the senate subcommittee on strategic forces. >> called to order the meeting of the strategic forces subcommittee of the senate committee of armed services. our hearing today is on the subject of the space force. i want to thank general salzman for being with us today before this committee and the purpose of the hearing is to understand your vision and priorities for the space force as its second chief of space operations. while the budget for the department of defense and space force has just been released, we plan to have a space budget hearing which includes the space force later in may after we have had time to understand in detail the president budget request. there are many complicated topics such as missile warning and launch that will take time to understand and are not right for this hearing today, but we will take up in may. instead the hearing will focus on you, general. this is your opportunity to explain to the subcommittee and the public how you will train and equip the space force as the department of defense separate military service and be a presenter of forces to the combatant commanders in order to accomplish their mission as assigned by the president. my understanding is that today you will explain to us your three lines of effort for our space force guardians. as i understand it they are to first field a combat ready force, second amplify the guardian spirit and third partner with the inner agency allies and industry to win. i look forward to having to explain in detail each line of effort and give us examples. simple ones that we can take with us and explain to our constituents and the public, the importance of the work that you're doing. let me conclude that general said it best, there is no such thing as a conflict in space by itself. any conflict will involve all domains, although i believe it will start in space. the land, the sea the air, space altogether at once. i hope today you will explain how your vision for the space force will meet the generals astute observation and enable combatant commanders to publish the mission that the president accomplished. after your opening statement we will have questions for five >> general, thank you for being here today and sharing your perspective with the subcommittee. thank you for your many years of service. your only the second ever chief of space operations in the unique position to leave your mark on what is still essentially a brand-new military service. an opportunity like this comes around less than once in a generation, and i am sure you feel the gravity and the expectation of this every single day. i look forward to hearing more of your vision for this new service branch, specifically how you are forming it into a fighting force ready to prosecute war as part of the united states military. i would also like to understand how you are shaping space acquisition enterprises to that vision, enabling the joint force. thank you, mr. chairman. >> general saltzman. gen. saltzman: kevin king, ranking member fisher, distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the continued support and opportunity to discuss the opportunities in the united states space force. one of my first phone calls as the cso was to the commander of the european command. my first trip as the cso was to colorado springs to meet with the commander of the u.s. space command. my first overseas trip was to hawaii where i met with the commander of the u.s. indo pacific command. during the last four months, i also have performed vital missions around the world for the space force, the joint force, and the nation. in december, i met with military space chiefs from australia, canada, france, new zealand, and the u.k. michael -- my goal is to understand the mid term and long term focuses as we address threats and challenges. these combatant commanders emphasized the vital role that space plays in integral deterrence. the guardians of the space force make this possible and are the brightest and boldest america has to offer. because of these advantages and our shared interest in the domains, u.s. allies and international partners are eager for expanded collaboration with the space force, especially areas that strengthen the areas of coalition and reinforce norms of responsible behavior. our mission forces, people, and partnerships make the space was the most formidable organization on the planet. china and russia know this and are accelerating their efforts to undermine u.s. advantages. to meet this challenge, the spaceports will prioritize three lines of effort. fielding combat ready forces, amplifying the guardian spirit, and partnering to win. these lines of effort are designed to deliver forces, personnel, and partnerships required for the space force to preserve u.s. advantages in space. before i expand on the effort, i would like to update the subcommittee on the threats spaceports has faced. there was a handout provided and it indicates that space is a contested domain. when describing space threats, we account for two. first, threats from space assets, and second, threats to space assets. both china and russia have robust space based capabilities that allow them to refine, target, and attack u.s. military forces on land, sea, and in the air. equally important are endangering the satellites that the nation relies on for prosperity and security. russia and china continue to deploy a range of weapons aimed at u.s. space capabilities. the threats include cyber warfare activities, electronic attack platforms, directed energy lasers designed to blind or debt -- damage satellite sensors, and space to space orbital systems that can attack u.s. satellites. the contested space domains shapes the purpose of the united states space force. this means protecting u.s. space capabilities and defending the joint force and the nation from space enabled attacks. our lines of effort are designed to achieve this vision by providing the partnerships required for the space force to reserve u.s. space superiority for the near future. to build combat space forces, we will pivot towards resilient satellite constellations, ground stations, networks, and data links. the space development agency has provided a prime example of these efforts. we are also defending cybersecurity and preparing guardians to defend and move against cyber attacks on our networks and satellites. we are developing an operational testing and training infrastructure that will be the development -- the backbone of space readiness as the guardians prepare for a high-intensity fight. this will allow guardians to execute realistic training against simulated adversaries. we executed one such exercise last september with the inaugural black skies exercise focused on space magnetic warfare. we create a forest ready for emerging threats. second priority is to amplify the guardian spirit by embracing the talent management process that recruits the best talent, develops and retains an elite workforce, and empowers guardians to succeed. one example is our credit service program that allows experienced professionals from key fills -- key fields to fill the space force at ranks appropriate for their experience. we recruited seven cyber professionals to become guardians, one of which was on boarded as a lt. col.. the second will incorporate additional personnel. over the last year, we have also deployed space centered curriculum for the officer training corps and officer training school. in addition, our partnership with the johns hopkins school of advanced international studies begins this summer. with congressional support, we will approve -- improve our talent system by integrating the air force into the space force as a single unit. this will allow guardians to transfer between part-time and full-time opportunities and subsequently returned to full-time duty without barriers to reentry or a detriment to their career. we will ensure that such experience is in strict compliance with federal acquisition and appropriate conflict of interest statutes. single service personnel management systems will maintain highly qualified guardians and allow flexible career paths. my third and final priority is to strengthen partnerships the space force lies on. the space force will and the many barriers to collaboration so we can build enduring advantages with our partners. personnel from over 50 countries have participated in training, education, and exercise events hosted by the space force. you're also expanding our war fighting capabilities. recent examples include establishing a partnership with luxembourg for satellite communication services. in total, we have more than 240 military sales bases, with a multitude of countries for broad space capabilities. we pursue emerging technologies like advanced power, propulsion technologies, artificial intelligence and machine learning, and in space, servicing, assembly, and manufacturing. the commercial services offices building partnerships to improve our ability to leverage more commercial office shelf capabilities. in conclusion, thank you for the opportunity to share these priorities with you today. the space force is the preeminent military space organization in the world. we cannot and will not allow adversaries to prohibit -- i very much look forward to your questions. thank you. >> thank you, general. i want to jump on the comments you made about recruiting and bringing people in midcareer and providing more flexibility on leaving and coming back. that is a creative idea. it strikes me that will be necessary in today's environment, particularly in the technology field. gen. saltzman: we currently do not have the ability because our reserves in the air force, they are in the international guard, so we do not have the option where if you leave your full-time position from the space force, we lose your expertise. so anything that can allow us to keep their knowledge. >> do we need a space national guard? gen. saltzman: i need the capabilities currently in the air national guard. there are a couple of ways to do it. we assessed three different options. we can leave things as they are, which i think is the worst solution, because as general brown points out, as the chief of the air force, he does not have organized training for space missions, yet he has the space capabilities in the national guard. it creates conundrums when i train forces aligned under the national guard, so i think the status quo is the most untenable position, but there are other options and we are going through a series of cost estimates to figure out what a preferred option might be. >> is one of them to partner with the air national guard that have different units with different functions? is that one of the possibilities rather than setting up an entirely new space national guard structure? we are currently partnered with the current status. we are partnered to make sure we can have the capabilities. it creates a problem with the difference in organized differences. >> how are you doing on recruiting both in terms of quality and quantity? some of our other services are having problems in this economy. how is space for storing? gen. saltzman: i'm almost embarrassed to say but we're doing very well. we have smaller numbers to recruit and we have the ability to handpick those that decide they want to join the space force. right now, we are doing ok. the problem is going to be sustain it over time -- sustainment over time and retaining them long enough to benefit from their experience. >> you mentioned several times commercial assets, commercial space assets. we know russia is trying to jam or damage the star link network which is assisting in ukraine. is that precedent making it more difficult to partner with commercial satellite users? one of these strategies is liberation in using commercial using -- cut using commercial satellites what's been the reaction to using sterling in ukraine? gen. saltzman: it's important to the space force for the reasons you are saying. across a border number of participants, if you will. the commercial augmentation space reserved we are trying to establish what is kind of like a crab like if you know the civilian that uses commercial capabilities we are exploring options to do something along those lines. i think the key with commercial industry is make sure the expectations are managed upfront. we are going through a series of plans, industry data if you will to clarify what are the policy, part of the contractual, what are the legal responsibilities and hurdles we have to clear in order to establish this so the expectations are clear across all spectrums. >> this is an evolving kind of capability? gen. saltzman: it is but i will tell you we have significant industry. there were 84 participants from commercial industry. there is interest in doing this. >> what's the difference between space force and space command? gen. saltzman: i get asked that at home sometimes. it's as simple as any of the other services if you think about central command and the u.s. air force or indo pacific command and the u.s. navy. the u.s. space command and u.s. space force we have different responsibilities. as chief of space for as chief of space wars i can train, equip, and operate the forces presented to u.s. space command who has the authority to direct those operations. >> your organized space command is operating? gen. saltzman: they have the authority to conduct missions. they would direct our forces that are presented to them to conduct the operations. >> thank you. senator fischer. sen. fischer: as we discussed last year the nexgen opi are satellite program is one of the key components of our future missile warning along with proliferated constellations, smaller satellites operated in the lower orbits. during your nomination hearing you stated that having no gaps in coverage for missile warning was a high priority. at the missile warning mission is the cornerstone of our strategic deterrent. if we can't effectively respond, if we can't detect when our adversaries are launching nuclear weapons, we are in trouble. so it is very important that we continue to fund this next gen opir given the importance of this no fail mission i'm concerned to see that the space force's fiscal year budget request appears to purport cut ins for the satellite. does this base force intend to complete that architecture and if not how are you going to mitigated? gen. saltzman: yes, ma'am, thank you. the real architecture that we need is the one that is under -- yes, can you hear me? the architecture that we really need is one that is survivable. that is the proliferated leo and multiple orbits to include middle earth orbits as well. that is with the space development agency and the analysis we did is progressing towards that's the investment we made. because that's a pretty big technical shift, we wanted to make sure that we, for this no fail mission had some hedges to make sure we didn't miss anything. next gen opir we felt like a two by two was it sufficient to ensure that the mission did not have any gaps, two that it was a hedge against any technical risk with the pivot to the more survivable missile warning track architecture. sen. fischer: your same with this pivot, the two lower orbits you have no plans to look at the geo now? gen. saltzman: we have the plans with nexgen opir. that constellation we are still navigating the budget. that's the long-term transition to the proliferated missile warning. but geo satellites are too much of a target. having them in lower orbit creates a problem for an adversary which lowers the threshold for attack on orbit. it's more resilient and creates a level of deterrence because they can't attack the satellites. sen. fischer: it seems like the major opposition programs that are executed by space force have been late. they have cost overruns or both. does the space force acquisition community, i guess i would say how do you plan to address that? and do you agree with my assessment? gen. saltzman: i've been doing this business a long time. i have seen the same things you are noting there. i can't argue with the facts about cost of schedules. i've been very impressed with the way frank cal valley has run the program. he's focused on several different things. buying small satellites, having shorter-term contracts going with well developed technology so we don't have as many nonrecurring engineering costs. sen. fischer: sorry to interrupt you when you say well developed technology, is that, you want to make sure things are proven? would you say your risk -- you are risk adverse then? gen. saltzman: before we commit to putting something on orbit if there is well developed technology were going to leverage it to the max extent. otherwise build everything from scratch and it delays things. our requirement ships and it can get in that spiral where you spend more money to delay the timelines. we should take advantage of those. i think in satellite production that's exactly where mr. calva lli's head is on that. i can't speak to all of the programs that have existed since we've been putting satellites in orbit. the acquisition community has shifted to a different mindset for how it requires systems and i think the development strategy for the tracking and data transport is an example from quarter to orbit which is substantially better than we have seen in other programs. sen. fischer: thank you. mr. chairman: i would like to call on our only committee member who's been in space. sen. kelly: inc., mr. chairman. the chairman asked most of my questions. i'm going to go a little bit different, different approach her. to the ranking members question you talked about there is a little bit of a deterrent by putting something at a lower orbit, i think you said. why is that? why is it more likely that an adversary goes for that and if at a lower orbit? gen. saltzman: if it sounds like i'm lecturing an astronaut, i'm, some not. it's more than just the orbital regime. in lower orbit to provide the coverage you have to have a fast rate or number of satellites. dozens, instead from geo you can have a single orbit and look at a third of the earth. going to lower orbit were buying smaller satellites. more satellites great the targeting problem. which one do you want to shoot on that you think is going to be a problem for the mission? sen. kelly: so more, they have to shoot more rounds? gen. saltzman: a lot more. so much more that i think the escalatory threshold is raised to the point that they probably wouldn't do it. sen. kelly: that's helpful. general, of the nro, air force space force satellites that we put into orbit, what percentage of those is it space force responsible for the, you know the contracting, the management of the operations to get these to their targeted orbit? gen. saltzman: compared to the nro? sen. kelly: yeah, like what percentage do you have? gen. saltzman: sir, i want to get back to you. it has a number of consolations for its mission set. we have, i'm try to think if there's any examples. we have the vast majority of department of defense set allies but not all of the department of defense satellites. i hesitate to say all but i'm struggling to think of an example. sen. kelly: and how many lunch providers do you have that you contract with to get the satellites into orbit? gen. saltzman:two. actually, for demos and other things we've contracted other providers as well. sen. kelly: and, to date, while you've been involved with this are we saying the typical kind of success rate and safety records from both companies? gen. saltzman: absolutely. sen. kelly: and no identifiable problems that you feel puts our satellites at risk? gen. saltzman: it's been a while since we've had an accident. and nro satellite actually that happened to be done at the kennedy space center. i was on the console when it happened. i had just walked out of crew quarters. wasn't even expecting it. so this rocket launch and it exploded 15 seconds later. sen. kelly: is great we've gotten better at this. spacex has a, i would say a pretty remarkable record of success. we just need to keep that going i think it's important to be trying to be looking ahead and seeing what the next failure mode is. make sure you have the workforce that is really tracking this stuff closely because some of these assets are in the billions, billions of dollars. i've got another question. actually i do have about 50 seconds so, so as has been around for a couple of years. i think maybe three years is that right? gen. saltzman: a little over three years. suppose kelly sen. kelly: on the transfer from the air force or another service they are coming up on the end of that time are you seeing a good reenlistment rate for the enlisted ranks and officers that are going to stay on? gen. saltzman: i think the final assessment is still out. i want to see it all play out before i commit to this. i'm encouraged so far and i think were providing the kind of challenges that the workforce is looking for. i'm still hopeful that were going to be at good retention numbers. probably need to let this full cycle play out before we judge. sen. kelly: thank you, thank you mr. chairman. >> you've been in your position now what? less than a year? gen. saltzman: performance. >> give us your number one priority. gen. saltzman: i need to make sure that the guardians are ready to leave the thread. i've said this from day one. the systems we are buying are exquisite. i want to make sure the guardians have the training and the ability to practice their training, reps and sets i call them. we have to get that into the guardian so they validate their tactics and are trained to make any adversarial challenges thrown at them. >> so it's more training than anything? gen. saltzman: there's a lot of challenges. that's what i'm focused on right now. i like to use the example that were trying to turn a merchant marine into the u.s. navy. we have to convert this is that we have from a benign environment to one that is contesting the domain. >> is this a slow process? gen. saltzman: sometimes it's slower than i'd like but i like our progress. i need to buy them the simulators, the virtual ranges, that takes a little bit of time but we are already doing a new force generation model. we've established the new training requirements and know we just have to get after it. >> so space, hasn't rdt in the budget of 19.2 billion and a proposed budget of 4.7 billion what's driving that difference and you see that changing in the next few years? gen. saltzman: this is a way the space first has to do its business because so much of our effort is it spent in developing the satellites and we don't have a lot -- we don't have to put a lot of satellites in orbit traditionally so there's less procurement than there is rdt so i think it's just the nature of the space business that were frontloaded a little bit in terms of procurement relative to what you might see. so even when we go to a proliferated consolations our numbers will be so much smaller than what the other services have to buy. >> in your mind what cybersecurity standard minimum moved commercial satellites should have? gen. saltzman: i'm worried about the ground infrastructure and how the links are protected to make sure that we have access to those capabilities that are put on orbit. in commercial terms him a little less worried about the on orbit sections as much as i am the ground network and i think those at cyber protection centers are well understood and we can hold the commercial providers accountable for putting cyber defense capabilities on the ground networks. >> i've had several private companies come by my office saying they have a great idea for space debris. have you talked to quite a few of those? gen. saltzman: i have. >> what you think? would we privatize it at the end of the day? gen. saltzman: i think there's a lot of different ways to go after that. i haven't seen demonstrated capabilities and i'm always thinking in terms of its one thing to have a pitch that says we can do something. if something else to have the capability, i'll be honest with the wheat have a lot of serious effort making sure we understand what's on orbit and preventing debris from hitting each other or things that we care about. right now i would say this isn't my number one challenge. but if somebody feels like they can demonstrate a capability, cleaning up debris is an important concept as well. >> is going to be worse and worse, right? gen. saltzman: is not one to clean itself up. >> a lot of people believe conflict with china could very well start in space. what might that look like one day? gen. saltzman: the chinese and the russians have gone in the last 20 years and they know we belted joint force structure that relies heavily on the assumption that space capabilities will be there. whether it's navigation and timing, satellite communications, the missile warning that we rely on and the intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance persistence that we have with space capabilities. they know we rely on that. they can blind us if they can interfere with those capabilities or out for because destroyed them completely they know that will diminish our advantages and but the joint force at risk. so i can see interfering with, i can see blinding i can see some of those gray area kinds of attacks on our capabilities to try to put us behind the eight ball. >> that balloon wasn't in your purview was it? gen. saltzman: no, sir. >> 60,000 feet? gen. saltzman: they like to call it space but i like to call it far air. [laughter] mr. chairman: senator rosen? sen. rosen: thank you, mr. chairman. for everything you're doing and i know everyone has been talking about workforce is key we need a pipeline to qualified -- of qualified individuals going forward. it's young, three years old train to get this workforce especially like you said research and development, critical. to protect our country and our families from the threat we feel from space. i talk about education an awful lot but i believe investing in stem education is essential to matching our adversaries as you have alluded to. general, during your confirmation hearing in september you highlighted that space force has established a university partnership program partnering with universities to provide stem students opportunities. how is space force growth and retention benefited from this program? i'm really excited to hear about that and what can congress, what can we do better to support this program, specifically? and maybe some national security focused stem education at american universities, generally? gen. saltzman: thank you for that because any opportunity i get to talk about how great our guardians are i take full advantage of it. you would be really impressed with the quality of the people that are joining the space force. the average age of our enlisted members is 22. that's a relatively high number considering the other services. if we have an educated workforce, very educated. we have the luxury of handpicking the best and brightest of a large applicant pool that wants to join. so were benefiting more from the fact that we are kind of small and we can take the cream of the crop, if you will. we are looking for diversity. we are looking for high quality stem education and going to the areas that maybe you don't have a chance to get to in some of the other services. ray markel set of opportunities that we've taken full advantage of. every time i go out in the field i'm impressed with the quality and capability of what i've seen. sen. rosen: we should expand the program's jamaica -- to make your job a little better. gen. saltzman: you can help me select. i think there were 42,000 hits of interest to join and we have about 1000 slots. calling that down to who's eligible, who can meet the requirements there's a lot of effort there too. real happy with the way the recruiting team has done and happy with the standards we have set. really happy with the quality of guardians forgetting. sen. rosen: cyber attacks in space is a fighting domain. cyber is really, probably more effective there as it would be anywhere else. last week we discussed during space commands posture hearing that both russia and china are developing rapidly and fielding these technologies that will provide timing and double threats. we need to be sure that we are stopping that. the sophisticated cyber attacks will include packing satellites disrupting internet services. i know the proliferation concept is really good because there is so many. that resilience architecture particularly in lower orbit as you have alluded to is really important. what other kind of things besides what you mentioned to senator kelly and senator tuberville how are you keeping our most important space assets safe from attack and increasing there was a yancey? gen. saltzman: i like to talk about two particular areas. i want to avoid operational surprise. that is a tenant in my serious success if you will. by avoiding operational surprise do we have the sensors in the right places to see what's going on? that's cyber and space. do we recognize hostile activity, aggressive activity, the minute they occur? can we attribute them to the bad actors? that is the surprise i'm talking about. we have to establish norms of responsible behavior. developing a coalition of like-minded space nations that supports those norms of behavior is a powerful motivator to do the right things and call out irresponsible behavior. all of that, i think protects our capabilities as well. sen. rosen: i know my time is up but my next question is partnerships. we will take it off the record. we will submit that for the record. thank you for leading me right there so thank you very much. i yield back. mr. chairman: there is one member of the subcommittee who has more to do with the founding of the space force, boat early and that's senator cramer. sen. cramer: thank you, mr. chairman. good to see you again, general. i don't think you are lecturing senator kelly at all. he asked the easiest question he could and you answered it really only. i think the issue in redundancy sort of answers senator rosen's question as well as how well they work in the kyl lab, if you will. i didn't think -- i thought it was brilliant. you brag about the guardians, you have that luxury and it's because of the mission. i think it's an important mission particularly younger people. they are attracted to it. my hope is the space force creates more stem students because they all want to be part of the next big thing. i want to get into -- senator fischer asked you about the cap issue with regard to what we see with the gap in defense when we learned our breeders couldn't see anything everything. we see some money coming for that. i would presume that means it would be upgraded it would be monitor ice for me since we have one. maybe speak a little bit to the role of the modernization and how that will help you and the joint force in terms particular bernie warning. it's a two-part answer because i don't want to be gen. saltzman: distracted by the balloons issue. that's not where those radars are looking. you could easily build radars but that's not our mission. the mission that's being done is twofold. it's missile warning and its surveillance primarily. those radars are really good at those jobs. so the real challenge is how to why go to a rapid assessment and decision quality information of the data those radars are pulling in? and turn them into decision-making information. we've got work to do there but it's more associated with the latency of the data. i can tell you where something was, i can't tell you where it is precisely at that moment and we are getting better at that. sen. cramer: with the issues that we talked about and rosen act about -- asked about what are the things that stood out and we had this discussion many times. how many times do we hear the general say lean, agile, fast. do you still feel like you arlene, agile, fast? is the budget helping you? again, those relationships that are so important how valuable is that and difficult is that balance to make sure you maintain those characteristics? gen. saltzman: there is no question we are still lean and we are going as fast as we can. that's a tough standard for me to say. i'm always looking to go faster and be more agile. i'm going to be our toughest critic going forward trying to ensure we stay as fast as possible. being small does offer some advantages. we could move rapidly through a smaller bureaucracy than some of the other organizations. but it also comes with, that means there are fewer eyes on ideas and fewer opportunities to catch mistakes. we have to have good, solid processes and innovative technology that supports us. there is no question we are still lean and we are trying to become optimized based on that to make sure we are still producing high-quality capabilities or a high-quality work froze. sen. cramer: the bureaucracy involved, were all about that but we want you to be as agile as you can be to keep us above the speed of china as i like to say. one last thing, i want to make sure you're getting that, the right policy that don't restrict your offense of abilities. you've spoken to it at some point. again, whether it's the budget or the administration or chain of command. do you feel like you have the right policies in place to both protect and adapt? gen. saltzman: i can assure you there are no policies that prevent us from exploring operations. it's about doing the work, establishing what i call understanding of what the capabilities can and can't do and then we test and learn from our experiences. sen. cramer: thank you, well done. mr. chairman: thank you, senator cramer that reminds me of my heisel football coach who said he wanted us to be mobile, agile, and hostile. [laughter] i'm not going to go into our record. our team motto was were small but were slow. senator gillibrand. sen. tillis: brain >> can you speak to the ability to leverage funding and service capacity would impact the space force space launch efforts? gen. saltzman: yes ma'am, thank you. we have grown our capacity. from what i remember the 10 12 launches we are getting close to a hundred lunches a year and most of that is commercial launches so the infrastructure that we are providing is being used and it needs to be refurbished on a more regular basis then what i call the old days. i think commercial industry understands this and they are trained to figure out the best way to support and now we have to look for the contractual and legal mechanisms to make sure that we can maintain that infrastructure. our investments started us on that path. we've still got a lot of work to do to make sure we maintain the kind of infrastructure we need to support the commercial industry. sen. gillibrand: as you said your mission is very technical. making sure your guardians are properly trained and able to execute missions. you currently have the training resources you need to provide fully trained guardians, and are any additional resources required to make sure we have a space force fully capable of operating in the space domain? gen. saltzman: the budget includes about $340 million dedicated to operational tesla training infrastructure. i think that's sufficient for this year because they got a lot of studying to do to make sure were building the right kind of simulators and were going to learn as we go a little bit. i'm comfortable with the level of investment we are here -- we have. sen. gillibrand: you spoke about competitive endurance. to awareness, to deter attacks, and counter activities can you speak how the budget proposal will help achieve competitive endurance through each of these four exhibits? gen. saltzman: avoiding operational surprise, we are investing heavily in new centers we are investing in capabilities with allies and partners to increase the data set associated with awareness. and most importantly we are investing in command control capabilities which is kind of military talk for how do you take that data in an rapidly turn it into operational decisions? i think we have good software investments to make sure we are doing the support tools that go with the space demand awareness. go ahead. the resiliency piece is also important and this budget definitely invests in shifting to a more resilient architecture. we start that in earnest. sen. gillibrand: looking on your documents you have this document about what china is doing. the prc has developed counterspace and antisatellite weapons including demonstrations of antisatellite missiles. you say they are launching orbit to ground. the ability to move the satellite can you speak to our ability to defend against these? gen. saltzman: the transition, the architecture includes the capacity to find an track supersonic capabilities. that's why it's an important transition were making. with employing satellites out of orbit it's tougher to deal with when you have older than legacy satellites. shipping -- shifting to a consolation where you don't have the big juicy target sitting there makes that a much tougher proposition for them to execute against. sen. gillibrand: that makes sense. what lessons are you learning from the war in ukraine about the role of the space domain in large-scale military operations? gen. saltzman: the most important observation is that space is critical to modern warfare. we've seen the russians attacked satellite communications, we've seen attacks trying to dismantle the gps jamming they've recognize that space is a force multiplier and the ruling to attack it. the fact that we have to defend cyber, we have to defend from cyber attacks on the ground reminds us that ground is also a part of space. those networks are critical assets. i think were also seeing commercial augmentation. if there is a viable path to provide capabilities and i've been harping on it through the testimony here but proliferated leo that's what we are seeing to support ukraine and it's turning out to be a much tougher target for the russians to take apart. sen. gillibrand: thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. general, think you for your service. there have been efforts, general, driven by political decisions regarding the shared use of the 3.1-3.5 gigahertz portions of the spectrum. can you confirm that you have systems critical to our national security that reside on this portion of the spectrum? gen. saltzman: yes, senator. we have one in development that occupies that portion of the spectrum. >> would it be not just rate of up her heart communications as well. gen. saltzman: i think the key emergency kind of communications live just outside of that band. as long as we manage very narrowly we would avoid those. >> it's primarily radar? gen. saltzman: it's primarily radar for the space force. >> communications portion is not -- gen. saltzman: i wouldn't want to talk to the others services capability. >> can you provide your military advice on how detrimental it would be to your mission and the security of our nation if you lost the use of this portion of the spectrum? >> i think the most important thing i can say is i'm not sure because we haven't done the technical analysis of exactly what is vacating or sharing any of that spectrum would look like. in terms of cost and technical performance. we do have a study on going and so we would hope that any legislative decisions or decisions along these lines would wait for that study to come out later this fall so we can make the decision with data informed analysis. >> have you been given the opportunity to provide your professional advice on the use of this portion of the spectrum? gen. saltzman: yes. >> thank you. i presume you expressed your concern prior to the september study being completed? gen. saltzman: i've described i don't know the impacts until i received the study. >> thank you. i would also like to go on record saying that i'm concerned about the dod's approach to providing space-based ground moving targeted capabilities the gb mti. it's my understanding that this capabilities being moved under the funding authorities of the intelligence community do not have -- can you share with me how you are assuming that it validated requirements are captured on by the i see community? gen. saltzman: because of the way the funding has been moved we are focusing on two areas where we think we can provide some level of collaboration. the first is decision authority which still there are some decisions which reside at the ofd level and could be delegated to secretary calvelli. the other side is the operational concept this is still a dod mission. the space force nation to do this for the joint force. so we have the responsibility to provide the operational concept and we have to work closely with the program managers to make that happen. >> the technical capabilities to track the moving targets to our soldiers on the ground. we just want to make sure that that same capability is still found in a space-based system and that's what talking about here. gen. saltzman: yes sir. and the beauty of the sensors being developed is they are more survivable relative to the current threats we are facing and we will do it on a global space >>. this needs to be made available for title x operations? gen. saltzman: these are direct. >> i understand there is a legislative proposal in the works to integrate the reserve elements. it seems like a logical move as the service matures and embraces the role. its oversights within the air national guard and is organized, trained, and equipped by the air force. from your perspective, which of the subcommittee forces has the space force matures? gen. saltzman: let me describe the reserve integration i think this is a very important just light of proposal. it gives us the flexibility to have both part-time and full-time guardians in the space force. it's going to give incredible career flexibility and serve as an innovative way to retain the kind of expertise we know were going to need moving forward. i think we've done a much better job of capturing key details that are needed in legislation to make the proposal work. i hope we can continue to work with this committee and others to make that happen. and the guard standpoint i have been clear from the beginning the critical capabilities that are living in the international guard for space are must haves for the space force. that's the most important thing. i don't believe, because of the way authorities reside with chief of staff in the air force and i responsibilities that general brownfields like he can -- it creates a little bit of a disconnect. it's the toughest to figure out how to do properly. other than that i think there might be some options that are worth exploring that are based >> on cost estimates. >>and, mr. chairman, i would like to commend the general. he has taken a very direct and strong approach with regard to advocating for the subject of the missile community cancer study. the finding cancers in areas where these guys are working underground for extended periods of time. he has taken a interest. anyone of these airman or guardians that they get help, they find out, they keep track of it. i just want to commend him and i would hope that the committee would make available funds for him to be able to share with us moving forward just exactly what he has found with regard to any health concerns surrounding the cancers that seem to be more prevalent with these folks that are working underground at these missile silos. thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman: a couple follow-up questions. several times you've mentioned the possibility of norms developing international norms. expand on that. is it a realistic possibility? gen. saltzman: personally the norms they are talking about are not norms we would support. they have kind of shown a propensity to not support -- this is a narrative of international norms what i can tell you is when i talk to my counterparts in the other nation they are interested in this. the secretary of defense issued his tenant for responsible behavior. those are all lively views from my peers as helpful in establishing what it means in a like-minded set of nations with responsible behaviors in space. we have an initiative called the coalition space operation initiative which is seven countries that have also detailed what responsible behaviors means. for he consistent with the secretary of defense's tenants. i think this is kind of a widespread understanding that we have to behave a certain way in order to maintain a safe, secure, sustainable space domain. i believe there's widespread agreement for that. mr. chairman: is the state department engaged as well? gen. saltzman: they are. mr. chairman: i think that would be an important aspect of moving this forward. gen. saltzman: they are. mr. chairman: just a comment, you mentioned cyber protection several times. it seems to be the experience that most major cyber text start with the sub, not the general contractor. but a smaller firm working with the general contractor and then they get into the system. i hope that something when you're talking about the protection of your assets and very rightfully you talked about ground and space that you worry is well about those small companies that might act as a gateway for cyberattack. gen. saltzman: yes, sir. i talked to my submitter defenders at night -- cyber defenders at length. i don't understand the technical details but one of the things they start with is mapping the cyber terrain. in other words, understanding with the network looks like, where it might befall marble and how they might best since her it to detect any intrusions. understanding how the companies fit together is an important foundational aspect. mr. chairman: final question, is it space force in charge of defense, defensive? you talked a lot about proliferated leo are you also in charge of developing the capability of maneuver and otherwise defending our space? gen. saltzman: i would say it's important that as we develop our dod capabilities through the space force that we make sure were applying all of the right concepts for active and passive defense to meet the requirement. >> this is a relatively new concern. the russians and the chinese have been very active anti-satellite technology. so we need to be developing counters to that in order to maintain credible concerns is that correct? gen. saltzman: absolutely and that's about how fast can we go. again my analogy is converting the merchant marine and u.s. navy. we have a ways to go before we can take our legacy platform that we've got so much utility out on. and convert them to providing the same or better capabilities while being able to perform contested domain and will have to make that transition as rapidly as possible. mr. chairman: thank you. >> this is been a very illuminating hearing. i appreciate your foresight and being responsive to our questions. and your long career of service to the united states. gen. saltzman: thank you you, thank you sir. mr. chairman: hearing is adjourned.