tegic forces indeed appears to be in excess of what we are currently endeavoring to do. In addition to a progress report on the Peacekeeper development program, we look to the testimony today to provide military and economic considerations that support the requested missile procurement level. We will lead off with Secretary Cooper. STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS COOPER, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE FOR RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND LOGISTICS, ACCOMPANIED BY LT. GEN. ROBERT D. RUSS, USAF, DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND ACQUISITION; MAJ. GEN. JOHN A. SHAUD, USAF, DIRECTOR OF PLANS, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF, PLANS AND OPERATIONS; AND BRIG. GEN. GORDON E. FORNELL, USAF, SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR ICBM MODERNIZATION Mr. COOPER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. As always, it is a pleasure for us to appear before the committee. You have introduced my colleagues here today: General Russ on my right, who is our Deputy Chief of Staff for Research, Development and Acquisition; and to my far right is Brig. Gen. Gordon Fornell, who is General Russ' Special Assistant for the ICBM modernization program; and to my left is our operator, Gen. John Shaud, who works for Gen. Jack Chain, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans. As you have mentioned, Mr. Chairman, the purpose of our hearing today is to discuss the ICBM modernization program. I would like to draw your attention to the chart on my right, which is to your left. We will appear again on Friday before this subcommittee to discuss the bomber modernization program. Today we will restrict our comments, however, to the ICBM program. Mr. Chairman, as you well know, we have had a number of very turbulent years as far as the ICBM program is concerned, and I am pleased today to bring good news to you. I think the program has stabilized. We are following the Scowcroft Commission recommendations to a "T", we are right on schedule in developing, procuring, and deploying 100 Peacekeeper missiles as recommended by the Commission. Those will be deployed in existing Minuteman III silos. We have had three what I consider to be extremely successful tests to date. We had one small, minor problem in the December test, where on the third stage we lost the extendable nozzle exit cone. But other than that, we are extremely pleased with the progress to date on our program. We also, as recommended by the Scowcroft Commission, have an aggressive small ICBM program under way. We have now established a separate program office out of the Ballistic Missile Office at Norton Air Force Base in California. It will have its own assets. We are in the process right now of robusting the office in terms of placing people there. Of course, the program is still in its infancy. It has been in existence less than a year. Mr. Orr, on his own initiative has directed, to give the program more visibility, that a brigadier general will be placed in charge of the office, and that should happen within the next 3 months. I personally think that this is an important thing to do. Our resolve to bring forward the small missile program was questioned at various points last year, and I want to assure you that this program has support at the very highest levels in the Air Force, and in the Department of Defense. Secretary Weinberger is personally reviewing the program periodically. The third thing that was recommended in the Scowcroft Commission was that we undertake a very aggressive ICBM technology program. We are doing that, and General Fornell will discuss that in some detail. Mr. Chairman, as you mentioned, I really do not think-and I concur with your remarks—that this is the year for change. We believe that the need for the ICBM modernization program is indeed greater today than it was last year, when you measure it against the Soviet activities. Senator WARNER. I carefully said those are the questions. Mr. COOPER. Well, I misunderstood. In attempting, then, to answer that question, I do believe that the need is still there. In fact, it is more pressing today. We do have a stable program. This year is in our view not the year to change it, and what we ask of you is for your continued support, and the support of this committee has been very genuinely appreciated. If it were not for this committee, I do not believe we would have the program we have underway today. And what we would like to do is to do our job and keep it smoothly on track. Within those very general remarks, Mr. Chairman, what I would like to do is, with your concurrence, enter our prepared statement in the record and turn this over now to General Russ, who will give a brief overview of the program. [The prepared statement of Dr. Cooper follows:] UNITED STATES AIR FORCE FY 1985 BUDGET ESTIMATES AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT MISSILE PROCUREMENT RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, JOINT STATEMENT OF HONORABLE THOMAS E. COOPER ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE (RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT & LOGISTICS) LIEUTENANT GENERAL ROBERT D. RUSS DCS/RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT & ACQUISITION HQ, UNITED STATES AIR FORCE PRESENTED TO THE 98TH CONGRESS 1984 Over the past two decades, the Soviets have relentlessly modernized and expanded their military capability. To counterbalance this massive Soviet buildup, this nation has, for the past three years, been embarked on a steady course to restore the strength and credibility of our strategic and conventional forces. Our sustained national commitment to a stronger defense has been a signal to the world of our resolution to protect our vital interests from the global Soviet reach. The Air Force budget request for Fiscal Year 1985 remains consistent in its priorities and continues the momentum to rebuild the deterrent capability of our forces. Our modernization programs have laid the foundation for a well-balanced and measured course to correct our most pressing deficiencies in our on-line weapon systems and in our readiness and sustainability. This statement is organized according to Air Force budget priorities. Our objective is to maintain quality people and a quality force. After people, our priorities are to modernize our strategic forces, to improve the readiness and sustainability of our forces, to enhance our force projection capabilities, modernize and expand our theater forces, and improve our capabilities in space. For your convenience and ease of review, we have included an Executive Summary to this statement which describes the threat to U.S. national security and the thrust of the major Air Force research, development, acquisition and logistics programs to meet that threat. Following the Executive Summary is an Introduction to our major Air Force investment programs. Our acquisition initiatives and our technology base efforts are also highlighted in the Introduction. The remaining Sections follow our budget priorities and discuss the major programs within each priority for Fiscal Year 1985. Since the research, development, acquisition and logistics programs represent future capabilities, it is important that they be carried out fully and completely-not just for Fiscal Year 1985, but for years to come. Our programs are economically feasible and supportable over the long run. In addition, we are emphasizing efficiency, better management and innovative cost-effective approaches in the selection and development of our weapon systems. We urge your support for the Air Force programs in the Fiscal Year 1985 budget request. Thomas & Cooper THOMAS E. COOPER Assistant Secretary of the Air Force Dean Den ROBERT D. RUSS, Lt Gen, USAF EXECUTIVE SUMMARY We begin our statement with an overview of the serious threat which confronts the United States--the ever increasing military power of the Soviet Union. It is this threat that determines our budget priorities, as well as our programs for the next five years. Our objectives are to develop and field weapon systems necessary to meet the Soviet challenge in the late 1980s and beyond, and to get the most out of the defense dollar. In addition, we are firmly resolved to increasing efficiency in our weapon system acquisition process, controlling cost and using our technological advantage. The Soviets are building a vast military machine which each year encourages them to undertake more political and military adventurism. Soviet military investment during the last 10-15 years has resulted in a larger, more modern and ever growing Soviet military force structure, both strategic and conventional. The se investments have allowed them to steadily gain military advantages, which, if left unchallenged, would create a dangerous instability in the balance of power. It is important to note that through the rest of the 1980s, even with the projected increases in U.S. defense spending, the Soviets will continue to outspend and out produce us. The Soviet threat is real. It is a threat that will not dissipate in the foreseeable future. We face an adversary whose long term political goals are incompatible with our own. It is imperative that we continue our efforts to protect our vital interests around the world, to deter any use of force, and to develop a firm basis for negotiating reductions in nuclear armaments. The Air Force budget request for Fiscal Year 1985 represents a realistic assessment of the programs necessary to respond to the Soviet threat. The request was constructed with considerable deliberation regarding a balance among required military capability, program priorities and available resources. Our objective is to maintain quality people and a quality force. After people, our priorities are to modernize our strategic forces, to improve the readiness and sustainability of our forces, to enhance our force projection capabilities, modernize and expand our theater forces, and to improve our capabilities in space. Today's investments in research, development, test and evaluation, procurement and military construction provide tomorrow's force structure growth and capability. In Fiscal Year 1985, about 60 percent of our total request is for investment programs. To maximize the return on this investment, the Air Force has several management initiatives underway to enhance program stability, control cost and revitalize the industrial base. By managing our defense dollars wisely, we benefit not |