صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

(The information requested is as follows:)

In considering a preliminary version of a proposed Department of Defense Directive relating to "space" the staff of the Office of Assistant Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) took into consideration the fact that the proposed new Directive would provide a general statement of policy representing an additional step in the evolution of appropriate arrangements for managing the Department of Defense "space" programs. This evolutionary process was started immediately following the initial concern resulting from the first Russian satellite placed in orbit. At that time the primary U.S. satellite effort involved Project Vanguard conducted by the Department of the Navy as an element of the International Geophysical Year program and the Air Force was working on other projects such as the Weapon System 117L. (Reconnaissance Satellite.)

It was then recognized that management of the Department of Defense "space" programs should be consolidated to the extent possible pending the development of national policy with respect to the investigation, utilization and exploitation of the space environment. As a result of these considerations the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) was established and most of the then current Department of Defense programs directly relating to "space" were assigned to ARPA. During the same period the preliminary aspects of certain non-military "space" programs were initiated through ARPA, with the approval of the President, prior to the establishment of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). When NASA was later established these non-military "space" programs were transferred to NASA. ARPA continued to be responsible for managing and directing the major portion of the Department of Defense "space" program, utilizing the facilities and capabilities of the military departments and contractors for the actual codnuct of the programs. The existence of ARPA provided the Secretary of Defense with a management mechanism to minimize duplication and over-lapping of "space" projects within the Department of Defense during the development of more finalized plans and objectives for "space" programs. As decisions could be reached and as developments approached the operational stage, various projects have been assigned by the Secretary of Defense to the Army, Navy or Air Force, as appropriate. Where applicable both program responsibility and funds have been transferred from ARPA. The Congress recognized the need for such adjustments and reassignments in the language included for the appropriation, Salaries and Expenses, Advanced Research Projects Agency, Department of Defense.

During the early part of this year the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) was in the process of identifying and summarizing current data for the various "space" and "space related” programs of the Department of Defense. These programs and projects vary all the way from large development projects, such as Samos and Midas, down to the relatively small basic and applied research type projects which are many in number. A tentative preliminary summary, dated March 6, 1961, classified SECRET, is attached which will indicate to the committee the programs which were under consideration on March 2, 1961. The identification and review of "space" and "space related" projects is still in process in cooperation with the staff of the Director of Defense Research and Engineering, and the initial phase is expected to be completed in the near future.

The March 2, 1961, comments on a preliminary version of the proposed DOD Directive relating to "space" were developed within the context of the evolution discussed above. Specific line items were not, at the time, singled out for specific comment since the proposed Directive of itself did not transfer or reassign responsibility for any specific programs or projects. However, these projects have been under continuing review as a matter of normal practice. The staff did point out that the proposed Directive, as an additional step in the evolution of more effective management devices within the Department of Defense would bring the "space" projects under even closer scrutiny and more fine grained control of the Secretary of Defense, so that even more effective utilization of DOD resources, including funds, could be expected along the following lines:

(a) By further restricting the independent freedom of action of the three military departments to initiate research and development projects without prior approval of the Secretary, it is far less likely that new projects which could grow up to be inter-Service competitions with the same general objectives will be initiated.

(b) By limiting the latitude of the military departments to increase emphasis and funding for various projects it is less likely that competitive projects can get far enough along to be difficult to stop if such a determination is made by the Secretary of Defense.

(c) By assigning general responsibility for "space" projects to the Air Force, the department which will be primarily responsible for the development of "space" projects is then generally known in advance and there will be less incentive to initiate new or competitive projects in the expectancy of being able to induce assignment of continuing responsibility by virtue of a project in being. (d) By achieving development of a Department of Defense "space" program (rather than independent "space" programs for each of the military departments) approved by the Secretary of Defense and under continual surveillance by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, which gives every promise of resulting in a better integrated program without unnecessary or undesirable competition. (e) By encouraging vital scientific and technological competition which would be controlled to exclude unnecessary and costly development competitions. For example, it does not seem to be reasonable or economical to have two or three independent competing space surveillance systems, or two or three competing satellite communication systems, or two or three or four weather satellite systems, or many independent competing projects to develop major components for such systems.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Ryan.

Mr. RYAN. In your opinion, do you believe that the effect of this directive, that one of its defects will be to diminish the interests of the Army and Navy in research?

Secretary HITCH. Yes. I think that is going to be true to some extent in this particular area of research-not in research generally but this particular area of research.

There are a great many areas of research where we are very anxious to get more work done by the Army and the Navy, but I think it is inevitable that this will diminish the interests of the Army and the Navy in space research.

Mr. RYAN. And do you think that that effect will have an overall effect on our space program?

In other words, do you think your statement now is inconsistent with that expressed in the book quoted?

Secretary HITCH. Let me say in making a decision of this kind, we can't think only of the effect on the space program.

We also have responsibilities for research in other areas. We have to take into consideration the fact that we need to stimulate research in some of the other areas where the Army and the Navy have primary concern.

I hope that it won't have a deleterious effect on the space program, but we do want to get more research done, for example, on weaponry associated with limited warfare and research associated with antisubmarine warfare. There are things we have to think about as well as the effect on space.

Mr. RYAN. The result really will be to place space research in the hands of the Air Force?

Secretary HITCH. Not all of it, but I think the effect will be to reduce somewhat the amount of space research in the other Services and their interest in space research.

The CHAIRMAN. Would the gentleman yield?

Mr. RYAN. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. By the same token, it would serve to intensify research and development in the Air Force.

Secretary HITCH. It certainly should and the Air Force as you know, just announced a reorganization that promotes space and will lead to an intensification.

The CHAIRMAN. What do you think will be the effect of the announced reorganization in the Air Force? Will it speed it up, do you think?

Secretary HITCH. This has only reached me this morning, sir. Upon reading it over, it looks very good to me.

The CHAIRMAN. Now generally speaking, do you feel that the organizational setup for space in the Department of Defense is going to redound to the accelerated program of space over there? Secretary HITCH. Yes, sir, I think it will.

The CHAIRMAN. Economically-now you are Comptroller, there, and you have a terrific responsibility, spending $42 billion, which is a lot of money, do you feel that the present setup insofar as you have studied it-now I understand you haven't studied it very carefullydo you feel that it will be economical and will not lead to a waste of funds?

Secretary HITCH. Well, I will do my best to make it so, sir. I am new to this job.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Randall.

Mr. RANDALL. I wondered for a long while why you were considered such an important witness and I want to observe that I had not at that time read your biography.

I understand you were born in Booneville, Mo., and went to Kemper Military Institute. Now, I understand.

The CHAIRMAN. The Secretary has at least one supporter on the

committee.

Mr. Fulton?

Mr. FULTON. I would estimate 91 percent of space expenditures are going through the Air Force currently.

The CHAIRMAN. You mean military space?

Secretary HITCH. Military space.

Mr. FULTON. Just the Department of Defense, yes.

The question then comes up under the new directive with the special emphasis on the Air Force and likewise decreased emphasis on research and development in the Army and the Navy in space, what budgetary percentage would then go through the Air Force except in these unusual circumstances?

Secretary HITCH. I don't know, sir.

Mr. FULTON. What is the percentage going up

to?

Secretary HITCH. I do not know and I will not be responsible for the assignment of these development projects to one Service or another. That is the responsibility of the Secretary.

Mr. FULTON. Your job, of course, is on such a directive, and that of your office, to evaluate what the budgetary change is. That is why I have given you the figure of 91 percent and then asked in this change of emphasis, what will that figure go up to?

I said to the previous witness, will it be 96, 98 percent to the Air

Force?

Secretary HITCH. I do not know, sir. This would involve predicting what future decisions the Secretary of Defense is going to make and I am not in a position to do that.

Mr. FULTON. Really the Comptroller's Office at no time then made a budgetary estimate of the effect of this directive.

Secretary HITCH. Of how much money would be transferred from one Service to another?

No, sir; we cannot do that.

Mr. FULTON. Don't you think that prudent corporate management or governmental agency management would have required some sort of a budgetary estimate as to the effect of a directive? On the division within the Department, of expenditure in the management of the funds? Don't you think it should have been held up until that was done, until you got back?

Secretary HITCH. No, sir. There is no immediate effect and I do not see that it is necessary to predict how much will be transferred eventually.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Comptroller, may I ask you one question which is a little bit beside the purpose of the inquiry: Would you say as Comptroller, that our military budgets are going up higher than they are now or are they going to be stationary or are you going to be able to drop them some?

Secretary HITCH. Sir, the size of the total military budget is not the primary responsibility of the Comptroller. This is the responsibility of the President.

The CHAIRMAN. Are the recommendations in line with your recommendations? That is what I am asking you.

Secretary HITCH. It is up to the President and the Congress. This, of course, is a matter under the most active consideration and discussion by the Secretary of Defense and the President right now and I will be happy to testify on this after they have made their own statements, which they will do soon, but I would rather not do so

now.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any further questions?

If not, the committee is going to stand in recess until tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock at which time we are going to meet to accommodate two witnesses here for this hearing.

We want to thank you, sir, for coming here and testifying. I haven't read all of your book, but I promise you this, I will read it. We want to thank Secretary Gilpatric for coming. You have both been very helpful to the committee.

As I mentioned at the beginning of the morning, I have certain supplemental questions, the answers to which we desire to add to the record.

(The questions and answers referred to are as follows:)

QUESTIONS FOR DEPUTY SECRETARY GILPATRIC

Question 1. Suppose that the Army or Navy pursues a program of space research through the preliminary phases, aimed toward an operational need of that Service, but that development is assigned to the Air Force. Which Service's budget will carry the cost of this development?

Answer: Budgetary responsibility follows the assignment of program responsibility including the placing of cross-servicing order; that is, if a program is assigned to the Air Force, Air Force will provide budgetary support for that program.

Question 2. Please amplify on the charge that the Navy and Air Force made uncoordinated announcements of new space programs in December 1960. Could they have pursued these programs beyond the preliminary stage without the approval of D.D.R. & E.?

Answer: In the over-all R.D.T. & E. field, the military departments cannot pursue major hardware, research development, test and evaluation programs without specific approval of the Office of the Director of Defense Research and Engineering (O.D.D.R. & E.). However, study efforts and laboratory experiments can be conducted within broad technical areas without specific approval by O.D.D.R. & E. of each detail or element within that broad technical area up to $2.0 million annual budgetary level unless the Service specifically identifies the project under a budgetary line item. The new DOD Space Directive, and the Instruction thereto, is more cntrolling. Nevertheless, the Services will still have latitude for the exercise of individual initiative, the generation of new ideas and concepts, the evaluations and analyses of new ideas and concepts as well as laboratory feasibility tests. It should be noted that in support of the new Space Directive, a DOD Instruction is about to be issued which will define preliminary research and specify the level of effort which must be approved by the D.D.R. & E. All space programs beyond the preliminary research stage must be approved by the Secretary of Defense or Deputy Secretary of Defense. Examples of preliminary research pertinent to the question involved active and passive communications satellites, mobile launch vehicles, and tactical satellite applications, based upon mobile launch techniques. Speeches and press releases relating to these efforts have resulted in eroneous impressions that certain of these preliminary research efforts were approved major development programs. In some cases this resulted in an inappropriate level of industry-sponsored activity, and also created some embarrassment in dealings with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) on the basis that it appeared as though the Department of Defense (DOD) was not keeping faith with explicit written agreements between the two agencies.

Question 3. In the past the practice has been to carry on most research. and development in the Service which plans to use devices operationally on the grounds that the user can better make known his operational requirements. If assignment of space development work to the Air Force does not commit operational use to the Air Force, what steps will be taken to insure adequate reflection of Army and Navy operational needs in detail?

Answer: In the past, it has, indeed, been the practice to carry on most research and development in the Service which plans to use the devices. It is still the practice in those cases in which only one Service has a unique requirement operationally. However, a review of the various Service requirements would indicate a tri-Service interest in all current major space programs as well as those under discussion.

It is the policy of the DOD to make use of unique technical capabilities within the DOD wherever they exist. In the interest of effective management and economy, however, future space system developments aimed at meeting common requirements will be integrated to avoid the emergence of multiple large management organizations. This does not preclude continued use of technical capabilities and competency existing throughout the DOD.

Question 4. Did Mr. Gilpatric receive comprehensive briefings by the Army and the Navy on their respective space capabilities and future requirements prior to the drafting of the directive of March 6?

Answer: If by "comprehensive briefings" is meant formal oral presentation of the Army and Navy positions with respect to the effect of the proposed space and research and development directive upon their respective capabilities and future requirements, then neither Mr. McNamara nor Mr. Gilpatric received "comprehensive briefings." Neither regarded such briefings as necessary in arriving at his decision. For almost two months both had spent a great deal of time studying and being briefed in almost every aspect of the Department of Defense, including space matters. Each Service had fully presented its position on the proposed directive in writing and the written comments and supporting data were carefully studied by both Mr. McNamara and Mr. Gilpatric. In addition, Secretary McNamara discussed the matter with the Secretary of the Navy; and Mr. Gilpatric discussed the matter fully with the Secretary of the Army and other Army representatives.

As a matter of general practice it is the intention of both Mr. McNamara and Mr. Gilpatric to dispense with formal oral presentations on matters submitted for decision. Secretary McNamara has directed that all proposals for decision shall be submitted in written form sufficiently detailed so as to permit action without oral briefings. In such cases, oral presentation will be used only to clarify and to explain technical details when requested.

« السابقةمتابعة »