« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
6:30 in the morning and he will be in his office. I can call him at 7 o'clock at night and he will be in his office. I meet with him at least 2 or 3 times a week.
With respect to what we do in the Defense Communications Agency, it ought to be on the record that nothing in the Defense Communications System is installed, operated or maintained by the services—that is not approved by the services and by the Joint Staff. Whatever budget I put together receives appropriately an agency scrub, it also receives a Joint Staff, OJCS, scrub, and it receives a very, very rigorous examination by Mr. Latham and his staff at the OSD level.
It also includes PA&E, the Comptroller, and it goes to the DRB process. As far as the oversight part for the Defense Communications Agency goes, it is about as rigid as it can be, and I think it has been greater in the last 5 years than it ever has been, and I have been associated with this Agency for about 25 years.
Now with respect to the idea of, like Mr. Latham said, parceling this out to the Army, Navy and the Air Force; there is a certain synergism you get by having a centralized look and the operational direction for this worldwide network. DCA provides to each one of the CINC's a capability to look into that global system, to determine what their requirements are, and we work that through the joint process and we get the services to understand it.
DCA, you could say, acts as an honest broker. We have no axes to grind. We take the emotionalism out of it, and add up what the system has to provide for connectivity for each one of the CINC's. If you go to CINCEUR, he will tell you that. If you go to CINCPAC he will tell you that, and right on through the structure.
Now, if you parcel it out, you have to look at whether that is sufficient, whether it provides economies. As an example, we provide centralized leasing and contracting for the Defense Communications System through our office at Scott Air Force Base, and on the average, since that organization was created, we have been able to achieve cost avoidance in the neighborhood of around $8 million because we have the books, we have the people, we have the ADP to look into the overall system. So when there is a Navy requirement or an Army requirement, a Marine or Air Force requirement, we know the cheapest route to take.
Now, with respect to divestiture and what that has made us do in the commercial world, Computer 2, and now we are going into Computer 3, the centralized management activity of DECCO, in my judgment, has been the savior because they have the books and have been able to work with the 450 contractors that are now into this commercial business.
Mr. LATHAM. In fact, let me add something. To answer your question what would it be to break up DCA, just look at what divestiture has done to the U.S. telephone system. Everybody's phone bill has gone up, standards are going to have to be worked so much more now, and so on, so that that is a direct analogy of what would happen, only worse if you did it in the military.
Mr. NICHOLS. I think you have made your point.
Mr. LATHAM. I might say something else about the budget scrub. Gramm-Rudman-Hollings and the fiscal year 1986 undistributed RDT&E cut hit these agencies very, very hard, because the decision was made to protect SDI. So these agencies have been under incredible fiscal scrutiny to try and see how we are going to recover from these reductions. For example, the Defense Communications Agency lost 22 percent of their RÔT&E budget.
DMĂ also lost over 10 percent of its R&D budget, and there were significant reductions in O&M. So the defense agencies have really taken a very significant hit in 1986 as a result of these deficit reduction acts, and I can tell you that we are working budget issues with them on a minute-by-minute basis. In fact, we are going to be coming back over here for some relief, I believe.
General ROSENBERG. I will try to answer both pieces of the question. First let me just add to the comments already made by General Powers-that I would say everything he said plus some. Mr. Latham spends a great deal of time working with me and providing oversight of the program, not that I need it, but I have only been the Director for 6 months and I find myself in the position, with some of the very major programs I have going on, particularly in light of some of the budget reductions, of working with Mr. Latham to assure that we get the right focus in the Pentagon on my problems.
Now with regard to breakup implications. Sure, I think if you could get commitments out of the military departments to do exactly the same thing I do, I suppose one could operate back in the fragmented manner again. But again going back to 1972 with the formation of the Agency, I think that the goals that were levied on DMA of increasing productivity and minimizing duplication, redundancy and overlap, in fact have occurred.
We have had a 34 percent increase in productivity. We are different than many Government bureaucracies, because I produce things. I actually put things in the hands of operational military commanders, and I think that that has something to do with the productivity and our ability to measure it. We do use exacting standards on the production line, and we understand where the problems are that we have to fix. That, by the way, has been noted by both the GAO and the Grace Commission—that DMA is one of the few organizations in the Government bureaucracy that, in fact, has a very exacting productivity measurement system.
Breaking it up and putting it back in the military departmentsthe problem with that is my principal customers are operational military commanders, the unified and specified commanders, the very people you were expressing concern about support of with Admiral Train this morning. So my principal focus is on assuring our mission of deterrence; providing timely credible, accurate, and useful products to operational military commanders, and, if deterrence fails, to make sure I get the right products of the right kinds of the right numbers at the right place so they can fight, and fight to win.
That doesn't mean the military departments aren't important. They also are a very important customer of mine, because they train and equip those forces that are assigned to the unified and specified commanders, and they also are responsible for the development of the new smart weapons systems which must operate from DMA data bases, so that isn't to lessen the involvement of military departments. Further, I provide the mapping support of the U.S. Government, exterior to the the continental United States, for which the U.S. Geological Survey and the National Ocean Service are responsible.
I take care of the requirements of CIA, DIA, NSA, the State Department, for their emergency evacuation plans, NASA, anyone else in Government who needs maps and charts.
So to fragment this Agency and put it back in those pieces is of questionable value to me, in particular, when as I mentioned earlier, we provide things from a common source, that is, it is either an older cartographic source, a topographic, hydrographic, or aerospace product, and imagery, and update it, and in that updating process, or making a new map or chart, we then specialize it into a customer's needs.
For example, the air-launch cruise missile built by the Air Force, the ground-launched cruise missile built by the Air Force, and the sea-launched cruise missile built by the Navy all use identical digital DMA brains, or digital maps is the best way to describe it. It is like AAA triptiks; we put them in the brains of the cruise missiles and they fly along to their targets and they look at these digital maps to see if they are on course. The Army's Pershing II system uses that same data base. The Army's Firefinder counter-artillery fire system uses that same digital data base.
Simulators of the Army, Navy, and Air Force all use the same digital data base to produce products for training crews in weapons system trainers. And because I don't have enough resources to go around, and because we have a mandatory conversion of the source that we are using, we have a major modernization program going on. It is about a $2.3 billion program over a 5. to 7-year period, the purpose of which is to go to an all-soft copy environment, an alldigital environment, mostly driven by the source needs, but also driven by the fact that I can't satisfy the needs of all that large community of customers. This all-digital system will then provide me the ability to take those common data bases and make products much faster for all users, reducing the throughput time to get a product into the Grenada commanders' hands in 75 percent less time and at a cost of about a half of what we are doing today.
I think all those interfaces are so major and that program so large and so critical to our future posture that it would be wrong to fragment the Agency and put it back in the separate military departments.
62-630 O - 87 - 7
PREPARED STATEMENT OF MAJ. GEN. ROBERT A. ROSENBERG, U.S. AIR FORCE,
DIRECTOR, DEFENSE MAPPING AGENCY
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee:
I welcome this opportunity to address you on the mission of the Defense Mapping Agency (DMA)
DMA has a critical defense role. Our mission is deterrence. DMA products and services help maintain the viability and credibility of our strategic and tactical military forces around the world..., and should deterrence fail, DMA's mission is equally clear--to provide timely, accurate, responsive mapping, charting and geodesy (MC&G) products needed by the Commanders-in-Chief (CINCS) of the Unified and Specified (U&S) Commands to fight and win. DMA was formed at the direction of the President in 1972 to overcome inefficiencies and duplication of effort that then existed among the separate mapping activities of the Services. About 8,800 of the 11,000 manpower resources then identified with mapping in DOD were consolidated into DMA. The improvements in production efficiency and technology sharing made possible by consolidation resulted in a 19 percent productivity improvement in the first four years of DMA operations. The critical requirement for product commonality and compatibility was, and is, a major factor dictating consolidation. For example, Naval forces use 80 percent of the products DMA produces, yet very few of them are uniquely required by Navy. Furthermore, even products as seemingly different as aeronautical charts and topographic maps derive from the same base products. Since its formation, DMA has continued to receive high marks for its productivity from various observers, including GAO and the Grace Commission.
DMA contributes directly to the combat effectiveness and readiness of the (U&S) Commands. Operational military commanders are the principal focus of DMA's programs and efforts. However, DMA support to the Military Departments is equally important, for they are charged with training and equipping of today's forces, and the development of "smarter" and more accurate weapons that are dependent on advanced DMA products. DMA also supports the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency--the entire intelligence community. Beyond DOD, DMA works closely with the United States Geological Survey, the Coast Guard, the Maritime Administration and the Departments of State and Commerce. In fact, interagency and intergovernmental cooperation contribute strongly to DMA's effectiveness and responsiveness.
The U&S Commands, Military Departments and Agencies obtain a wide variety of DMA maps, charts, film-based products, digital products and geodetic data. Paper products continue to be the mainstay of DMA support, and will continue to be in the foreseeable future. Aeronautical charts provide current and accurate information for preflight planning, and enroute navigation by Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force aviators. Topographic maps display the terrain and cultural features essential to all planning, intelligence analysis, and operations. Nautical charts provide for accurate navigation at sea and safe passage to port. DMA's film-based products are common to many users. For example, point positioning data bases (PPDBs), consisting of precisely controlled photographs, are used for precision battlefield targeting by land, sea, and air forces. Navigation filmstrips, which store aeronautical charts and topographic maps on film for cockpit displays, are used in aircraft. Terrain analysis products which are overlaid on topographic maps to assess the ability to program air drop zones, and move vehicles and forces through various types of terrain are used by Army and Marine forces. Similar products are aiding in the Air Force studies to detect and track strategic mobile targets. DMA produces standard digital products that support a wide variety of systems with many different service uses. Standard digital products include terrain elevation, feature, and vertical obstruction data. DMA is also producing video discs containing maps and charts to support new graphic systems for command and control at various levels. DMA geodetic data programs provide very precise coordinates of points on the earth's surface for targeting of advanced weapon systems. Gravity data collected by DMA worldwide is fundamental to land, sea and air based inertial navigation products and is especially important to trajectory calculations of both land based ballistic missiles and submarine launched ballistic missiles. Finally, to promote safe air and sea navigation for all Services, DMA provides critical Flight Information Publications and Notices to Mariners, and by statute provides nautical charts to the U.S. Merchant Fleet.
EXTENT OF EFFORT
Let me put the extent of DMA's efforts into some perspective: In fiscal year 1985, DMA printed 54 million maps, distributed 42 million maps, produced 4.4 million square nautical miles of digital cartographic data, precisely located 11,000 points on the ground, produced 700,000 square nautical miles of PPDBs and determined the Earth's gravity at 38,000 points.
The DMA organization has seven components to support these and other efforts with approximately 9,500 people. Two main production components in St. Louis, Missouri, and Brookmont, Maryland, produce the paper, film and digital products. The Office of Distribution Services distributes those products worldwide through forward-deployed distribution offices supporting the theater CINCS, and maintains war reserve stocks for all CINCs. The Inter American Geodetic Survey coordinates important MC&G cooperative agreements and training programs with the Latin American nations, in direct support of the United States Southern Command. The Defense Mapping School trains military personnel of all services and our allies in both technical and staff level MC&G disciplines. The Special Program Office for Exploitation Modernization manages DMA's major initiative, the Exploitation Modernization Program (EMP), which I will describe later. The Office of Telecommunication Services provides the necessary communications that link DMA'S production systems and plans the telecommunication interface to users.
DMA production is centered in the two major production facilities described previously and four field offices in the U.S. In addition, commercial firms extend our production capacity. DMA's two major distribution facilities in the U.S., and other DMA distribution offices overseas and in CONUS deliver the products to the operational commanders. DMA production, distribution and liaison functions are in 50 locations around the world. DMA's capabilities are also augmented by formal cooperative production and product exchange agreements with over 70 countries that involve air, land and sea products, and foster interoperability of allied forces. The products received from our allies under these agreements, in effect, augment our production resources by approximately 40 percent.
REQUIREMENTS AND PRODUCTIVITY INCREASES
The Unified and Specified Commands identify their MC&G requirements through an annual submission to DMA. They state their needs for the standard DMA products required to successfully execute their operation and concept plans, and to conduct peacetime operations and training. In crises, commanders submit to DMA immediate requests for either standard or tailored MC&G products. Weapon system developers in the Military Departments submit their requests for DMA standard products or for new prototype MC&G products in conjunction with research, development, testing and evaluation of their new systems. Similarly, other agencies identify their requirements to DMA. Since DMA was established, in 1972, these requirements have dramatically increased. Digital programs have expanded to meet the current requirement for 38 million square nautical miles of digital terrain elevation data and 27 million square nautical miles of digital features analysis data. At the same time, the demand for maps and charts increased, especially for Third-World coverage, and requirements for gravity data have also increased dramatically. DMA has met the challenge of increased requirements