Message-ID: <0ZTUGEC00VcJMD5k55@andrew.cmu.edu>
Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU
From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU
To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU
Date: Thu,  7 Dec 89 01:34:56 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #318

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 10 : Issue 318

Today's Topics:
		     Hearings on HR2674 (6 of 6)
			Shuttle Payload Status
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 6 Dec 89 19:43:55 GMT
From: usenet.ins.cwru.edu!mailrus!sharkey!itivax!vax3!aws@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu  (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Hearings on HR2674 (6 of 6)

Below is testimony fron the hearings on HR2674. The next step is
to pressure Congressperson Nelson of Florida to send the bill to
'mark up' so it can get to the floor.

This information comes from Tihamer Toth-Fjel of the Ann Arbor Space
Society and Catherine Rawlings of Congressperson Packard's office.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

DR.  GEORGE R.  SCHNEITER

DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DEFENSE RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING

TESTIMONY
BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE SCIENCE AXD APPLICATIONS
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
9 NOVEMBER 1989

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY UNTIL RELEASED BY THE
HOUSE SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE


Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I appreciate the opportunity
to come before this committee to present the Department of Defense
views regarding our support and use of commercial space activities.

Joining me today are Mr. Richard McCormick, Deputy Assistant Secretary
of the Air Force for Space Plans and Policy, RADM (select) Donald
Eaton, Program Director, Space and Sensor Systems, and Col Gary Payton,
Assistant Deputy for Technology, SDIO.  I have a brief statement that I
would like to present and then we would be happy to answer any of your
questions.

I would like to address the subject of this hearing from two different
perspectives.  The first deals with efforts within the Department to
comply with the President's direction and the Commercial Space Launch
Act.  The second deals with HR 2674, the legislation proposed by
Congressman Packard.

The Department of Defense remains committed to implementing the
President's policy to encourage space commercialization, including
commercial launch 6ervices.  We have worked very closely this past year
with the Office of Commercial Space Transportation within the
Department of Transportation in support of their licensing
responsibility.  We have made good progress in understanding the role
of DOT as a regulatory agency, the licensing process, including the
procedures for insurance, cross-waivers, comercial range safety, and
public information - although this progress may seem slower than
desired.

I want to emphasize that we are plowing new ground in our efforts to
implement the Commercial Space Launch Act and instituting commercial US
capabilities.  We hope to leverage the Department's almost forty years
of experience in launch vehicles and the launch process to enhance the
development and use of commercial space.  However, this will not be an
overnight process.  Launch is a very complicated process, and not to be
thought of as routine.

We also recognize that space launch is extremely expensive, and we must
drive down costs, while still maintaining a reliable capability.  To
meet these goals, we have undertaken a number of initiatives, which
range from selected improvements to current launch systems, otherwise
referred to as planned product improvements, to supporting technology
for the Advanced Launch System program, to totally new developments by
the services and DARPA. These efforts will benefit both the government
and coaercial launch arenas.  Certain of the imprpvements to the
current fleet, because of the relatively low investment, don't
necessarily have to be the responsibility of the government.  One
example would be the improvements to the Atlas-Centaur, implemented and
funded by General Dynamics to allow them to be more competitive in
commercial market.  Some new launch vehicle developments, such as
DARPA's PEGASUS Air Launched Vehicle and the Standard Small Launch
Vehicle, also referred to as TAURUS, are cooperative
government/industry programs with significant private investment.
Other DoD initiatives such as the Advanced Launch System and the Navy
Sea Launched and Recovery concept are being pursued solely in response
to government requirements without private investment, and can still be
expected to have significant technology and hardware spinoffs to
benefit the cownercial launch industry.  At this time, and without
substantial government subsidy, we believe the market is not there to
support that level of commitment on their own.  It is unclear what
enduring role the commercial launch industry has in the US national
launch architecture, and what is the government's role in providing the
support infrastructure, technological developments, and a captive
market to that industry.

I also want to mention a few other steps we have undertaken to support
the commercial policy.  These steps range from codifying DoD efforts to
support commercial launch services through the establishment of a DoD
directive to actually purchasing commercial launch services to support
DoD payload deployments, such as the Navy's UHF Follow-on program and
SDIO experiments. In the Air Force Delta II and Atlas II programs, we
have adopted a number of commercial-like practices which, from a
management and cost reduction perspective, were sensible.  From our
point of view, the choice of whether to use a commercial launch service
is best determined through our normal acquisition review process.
Through this process, we can assess the implications,
cost-effectiveness, and risk before proceeding on a particular course
of action.  I would hesitate to substitute another process that is not
consistent with the decision-making process for other programs within
the department.  The ability of commercial providers to offer cost
effective and responsive terms and conditions for space transportation
services that meet DoD's needs should determine when commercially
provided space transportation services are purchased.  Let me assure
you that we have made substantial progress in implementing the
Administration's policy to purchase commercially-available goods and
services to the fullest extent feasible.

The last area that I will address is HR 2674, the Space Transportation
Services Purchase Act of 1989- legislation proposed by Congressman
Packard.  First, let me state that the department supports any efforts
that would result in placing the US commercial launch industry in a
better competitive posture in the world market.  However, these efforts
must consider national security implications and should not substitute
for the decision making authority of the executive branch.  Our concern
is that the legislation as currently drafted would infringe on the
decision authority of the Secretary of Defense in programmatic,
management, and operational decisions.  The Secretary should retain the
right of judging the appropriate course for booster selection, whether
commercial or government.  Certification to the National Space Council
is inappropriate and beyond its charter.  As I stated before, the
department has initiated a number of efforts that clearly support the
intent of the legislation and the objectives put forth in the
President's national space policy.  I hope my comments and our answers
to your questions will enhance the understanding of the extent of the
Department's activities.

This concludes my formal comments.  We would be happy to respond to your
questions. 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Allen W. Sherzer                    |  Is the local cluster the result   |
|  aws@iti.org                        |  of gerrymandering?                |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: 7 Dec 89 04:25:51 GMT
From: tank!iitmax!demodmb@handies.ucar.edu  (Dean M. Bleess)
Subject: Shuttle Payload Status


  Would someone decrypt SLS-1 from STS-40 for me... PLEEEAASSSEE ??

   Thanks in advance.

			DMB  @  IIT    Aerosp. Eng.  PP-ASEL

------------------------------

End of SPACE Digest V10 #318
*******************