Lieutenant General Daniel James, III
Director, Air National Guard
Air Force Association National Convention
Washington, D.C.
September 18, 2002
Policy Forum: The Air National Guard

I am very pleased to be here today and have the opportunity to speak with you.

Actually, I think I am one of the first Guard directors that have had the opportunity to speak with you. In the past, it is not because we didn't care or we weren't true members of the total force, it was because, unfortunately, our National Guard Association of the United States conference was scheduled around the same time as this conference. And this year, for the first time, they figured out that they don't have to be at the same time. I know that they would never schedule the Association of the United States Army at the same time as NGAUS. So I think maybe they are listening to us. I certainly hope so.

Once again, thank you for allowing me to come here and speak to you. I am going to talk to you today a little bit about the Air Guard, about who we are. Our constitutional routes and background and then I'll talk a little bit about our play in homeland security and then from then talk to you about the involvement of the Air Guard in the events that transpired in September and then some of the challenges that we have in the future.

Like most patriotic Americans, I am very proud of what our Air Force has done in the current operations. I am extremely proud of the part that the Air National Guard has played in the air and space force of today. Especially our involvement in Operation Noble Eagle, the AEF and in Enduring Freedom. Since the end of the Cold War, I feel that the Air National Guard has validated its role in the total force concept and the concept itself along with the Air Force Reserve and have been a very important part of securing our national strategies. We are proud of the homeland defense capabilities that we bring to the table and I'll talk to you about that a little bit later.

Over 200 years ago, our founding fathers debated the role of the military for this nation and how the military would play. Because of their experiences in the countries that they came from, the conceded a standing army may be necessary but they wanted to rely on the militia to support that army. The new nation was founded on the militia concept.

The first armed forces to defend this nation, to defend their communities, their colony and eventually what we know as this nation were the militia, as we know it today, the National Guard. The founding fathers, via the Constitution, wanted the militia to be part of the state organization, ready to be called upon when needed, to support that standing Army, as I mentioned earlier. Therefore, in the Constitution, they challenged and charged the Congress to provide arms, organization for the militia, so that it could do its job but still retain control by the state. It is important to note that the National Guard when it was conceived, was not conceived to be in fact a sustaining force, but rather a responsive force. As I talk about some of the deployments and talk about some of the things we are involved in today, you'll see how those roles may have been blurred somewhat.

A little bit on the structure, and I hope I am not oversimplifying this for those of you who are very familiar with how we work and what our structure is, but for the benefit of those of you who may not be, this may be informative for you. As the defense establishment evolved, so did the National Guard. At the state level, the governor, through the adjutant's general, are responsible for training National Guard personnel. The adjutant general, or TAGs, have access to the Chief of the National Guard Bureau as well as to their congressional representatives. This is very important, this access that they gain to their congressional delegations can be leveraged if used properly to secure some of the goals and support that we need as an Air Force. But we must remember that he or she, this adjutant general, reports and responds to the governor.

As the director of the Air National Guard, I report to the chief of the National Guard Bureau and am an extension of the Air Staff and therefore I am responsive to the Chief of Staff of the Air Force and the Secretary. I serve as one of the primary channels of communication between the state, the chief of staff and the Bureau. This relationship has another vital purpose. It is the basis for our ability to accomplish homeland security. Because the National Guard, as a state resource, can respond rapidly to local emergencies under the direction of the governor. This response includes a wide range of missions from natural disasters, civil disturbances and missions and events such as occurred on 9/11.

There is National Guard presence in all 54 states and territories, as was mentioned earlier by Don Petersen. The 50 states plus Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Island. In general, TAGs are appointed by their governors with the exception of Vermont, South Carolina and the District of Columbia. It is the governor who is in fact the command in chief of his state military forces, the National Guard. I point with pride to the number of Air National Guard adjutants general that are now running the National Guards in their states. The number is up to 20 and maybe even 21 on last count. I thought when I left, after that experiment in Texas, they'd go back to the Army, but it didn't quite work that way and we are gaining, so to speak. I think that tells you how we are being seen and thought of as a force and the leadership of the National Guard in the blue suit in the states.

It is worthwhile also to note that President Bush was the 19^th National Guardsman and the first Air Force veteran to serve as president of the United States. President Bush, as a former governor, has made the transition from commander in chief of the Texas National Guard to the commander in chief of the America's Armed Forces. You have got to like a president with a flying suit, a pair of wings and a fighter pilot smirk on his face. You have got to like that.

he National Guard can and does participate in the full spectrum of state and federal missions from responding to local emergencies to national contingencies. The status of an individual Guard member depends on what mission they are involved in. It is an incredible value to be gained by the flexibility, especially for homeland security. For example, a Guardsman on Title 32 status could be used to assist law enforcement activities, where posse comitatus would preclude a Title 10 or active duty officer from doing so.

The next slide is just designed to show you the three primary statuses you will find yourself in. My high school Latin teacher wouldn't like me statuses. State Active Duty is the one more often used prior to 9/11, and in that status you can see that the governor initiates and the governor has control and the state funds. It transitions into Title 32 where the governor still maintains some control of the forces but the federal funding is gleaned and also as you transition into Title 10, which is full federal status and the status that I find myself on today, where you are a federal officer under the control of the commander in chief, the president.

There are some 70 bases located in communities throughout the United States. By comparison, there are 177 National Guard installations. This connection to America is vital, both in war time and in peace. You see, by mobilizing our citizen airmen, when America needs them, we fight for the country with our active duty counterparts shoulder to shoulder. We connect every state emergency department and every police and fire station to the Pentagon. And every statehouse to the White House.

The story here is simple. These are our resources. This is what we bring to the table. We provide 34 percent to the Air Force's mission while absorbing less than 10 percent of its budget.

As you know, prior to 9/11, our country was set up with the radars and all of our sensors looking outward. We had a mere seven air superiority/air defense sites with 14 aircraft. On September 12^th, the next day, we had some 25 sites with over a hundred fighters flying CAP or on alert with the radars looking inward. This is a great story and I hope Tom Clancy tells it one day in coordination with someone from the Air Guard and the Air Force. In one day, we mobilized, we activated, we used our volunteers, we showed up when they saw that the nation needed them, without being put on status, loaded airplanes, set up communications, coordinated with 1^st Air Force ­ and I have to say, 1^st Air Force did a brilliant job of turning those radars inward, talking to/setting up communications and ROE through the FAA to secure the skies over America. It is a great story and I hope it will be told. General Eberhart is quoted as saying, "I want to thank you for savings us from ourselves."

Before September 11^th, 84 percent of our Air National Guard activity was in support of combatant commanders or service support and only one-half of one percent was used for domestic emergencies. I don't know whether you can see the colors in the back there by you can see that counter-narcotics ­ 10 percent and then as it breaks down with mobilization exercises and domestic emergencies. I don't want you to be lured into thinking that because the blue is listed primarily as training and drill and some additional annual training, that is all of our operational contingencies. Any operational contingencies or exercises is in that pie shape.

Dual-missioning. The key to the National Guard. We can do both ­ state and federal. We recognize like many others that there is a key role for the Air National Guard in homeland security as part of the total force we must and should always be engaged in the full spectrum of missions. We've been doing missions from our inception, responding to federal and state requirements in peacetime and during our nation's wars. Many don't realize it that we fought in Kosovo while we responded to domestic emergencies at home. And that we had units supporting fire fighting in specific states that needed us while we were also deployed in the AEF. You see, it is that same support structure that allows us to build runways for a combatant commander overseas that also allows us to help in the rescue of Americans who are trapped in the terrible bombing in Oklahoma City.

Although we've never said we can't do both, the question now becomes how long and how much? How long can we, as a responsive force, pressed into more of a sustaining mission, how long can we support that? What is going to be our new steady state? That is one of our great challenges.

Prior to 9/11 our optempo was high. We had somewhere from five to eight thousand people on active duty and it was higher than at any time in the previous 10 years. Naturally, our operations tempo, like everyone else's, spiked after 9/11. Since then we have been incredibly busy. We have flown over 45,000 sorties from more than 150,000 hours in support of worldwide operations. And the breakdown goes something like this. Operation Noble Eagle. Because of our posture in air superiority, we have been the backbone of Noble Eagle, flying the majority of tanker and one-third of the airlift sorties and three-quarters ­ or as the chief pointed out ­ close to 80 percent of the fighter sorties.

As this new mission and this new condition seeks its steady state, we have to ask ourselves how long can we contribute so highly to Noble Eagle and still retain our relevancy for the global missions? As we determine the steady-state requirements for Noble Eagle and the alert posture we must seek, it must be and there has to be a total force solution.

Operation Enduring Freedom. Well, we've also been pulling our weight there. We've been in the thick of things and we contribute to the innovative way that the war on terrorism has progressed. For example, an Air National Guard pilot was the first to use a Predator UAV to help provide terminal guidance for his munitions in combat. The AEF -- there is a common misconception out there that the Air National Guard has been unavailable for AEF because it has been too busy. Well, that is just not so. Not only have we been fulfilling our taskings in the AEF, we've also accepted other taskings.

Volunteerism continues to be the cornerstone of the psyche of the National Guard. And we like the idea of volunteerism because it gives the commander of the unit the flexibility to take care of his folks and still cover the mission requirements. You see, we have to balance the needs of the individual with his civilian employer, which is vital to his participation. In addition to improving morale, it also has the effect of cost avoidance. At one point in February, we had over 7,000 volunteers with a cost avoidance of over 200 million dollars. We are today at approximately 18,000, with just under 3,000 volunteers. We will continue to allow volunteers to step forward. If they can do that, we will continue to do that. It takes the stress and the strain off those folks who can't. But as you can see, even with large amounts of volunteers, we've been very active and we've had to mobilize significant numbers of our force.

There is much more than just iron involved in the fight. Expeditionary combat support is involved as shown here on this slide. The new steady state. What I've just shown you is an incredible effort by some incredible people. But unlike our active component our Guardsmen have jobs and families that they have to respond to. The job primarily in that we have to maintain information and support, we have to get that support from the employer if our Guard members can continue at this incredible pace or at the new steady state. We never want to put our people in the position of having to choose between their family, their job and the Guard. Because we know who will win that. And we don't have the luxury of having a large infrastructure that an active duty installation provides. So we have developed our own family support programs and we continue to emphasize employer support of the Guard and Reserve.

What this slide is designed to show you is that for those 18,000 plus members, there are some 7,000 family members, too, that are affected.

The future. The next four years may be the most challenging and demanding for the Air National Guard in our history. I am just saying so you'll know what a tough time I'm going to have and you'll give me a good report card when it is all over. These challenges really fall under some terms and titles that you are all familiar with, such as transformation, BRAC, extended mobilizations, force structure issues and still others that fall on the fringes of these areas.

Transformation. Very clearly the Air National Guard will be a part of the transformation of the Department of Defense and this great Air Force of ours. It is the right thing to do and we will do it. A key factor in transformation is that we have to work within the end strength caps that are a reality to us in the National Guard and we also have to work within the constraints of the budget.

You see, the Department of Defense is trying to fight a war, transform and maintain readiness. That is a tough order of business in anybody's language. But doing that with no additional funding is going to be quite challenging. As I said earlier, we need to consider our involvement in the full spectrum of missions that the nation has on the plate for us. Because if we get relegated to only a constabulatory position, here at home, we will lose our relevance and therefore lose our position as a full member of the total team.

New missions have to be looked at. They must include space, information warfare, information management, and UAVs. However, we can never forget that we are in fact a militia and that 65 to 70 percent of our people will always be traditional Guardsmen, even though some of the new missions may lean very heavily toward more active duty personnel in some of our units.

What does the future hold for us? You've heard about some of the innovative ways we are working to preserve our role, such as the JSTARS mission in Georgia, which we will have a formal ceremony for on the 30^th of this month. It is a blended unit ­ active duty and Air National Guard command and control and personnel, working side-by-side, and the mission is going very well. It is the first of many to come I believe, but there is no cookie cutter approach that says it will be done this way every time we do it. But we have to seek innovative ways to do the new missions or else we will lose our relevancy.

Re-engineering. We've been re-engineering as an organization since 1998 and we will continue to re-engineer to free resources and spaces so that we can adjust our force structure to be what we need to be for the future. My motto for the National Guard is, now more than ever.

Ready. Certainly readiness is important to us and will continue to be important to us and we will be challenged to keep our readiness so that we can continue to participate in AEFs and others while we are flying missions like CAP that don't provide the training that we are normally getting.

Reliable. One of the big issues becomes with the National Guard, is the Guard accessible? Can we rely upon them to be there. I think if you saw what happened since 9/11 and even before that, whenever there is a contingency, whenever there was an emergency, whenever there was a need, the National Guard was there. Relevant. This speaks to our involvement in modernization. The Guard must remain relevant to be an active player. My motto for modernization is, we don't have to be first, but we certainly should not be last. Ready, reliable and relevant. Needed. Now more than ever. The Air National Guard.

Thank you.

Q: How are the troops holding up with all of this activity?

Lt Gen James: By and large, they are holding up quite well. The spirit of the American men and women who wear these uniforms has not changed much from the kind that you had the privilege of knowing when you were in uniform. However, as I said before, the National Guard and Reserve are a responsive force and there is only so long you can keep them in the sustainment posture before it starts to fray on the ends. We are seeing that ­ we will see that impact on what we call our stressed career fields, our stressed AFSCs ­ civil engineering, security forces, fire fighters and some others. Right now there is a study going on by the Air Force to look at those areas that we have low density, high operations tempo to see if we can do something to relieve that stress. The problem is, how do you generate replacements for those folks that you are going to need with the experience that you are going to need them to have with the pipe line we have going through training right now in training command.

For example in security police, one of the things we are doing is we are accelerating the building of a dormitory at Lackland so we can accommodate people who may be leaving the security police ranks after these deployments. One of the great positives and pluses about the Guard is the level of experience of our people. So it is very painful for us when we lose someone because as you know you do not generate a 12 year experienced mechanic who decides that he has had enough or that she has had enough over night. So if we don't retain our people in the Guard, it is kind of a double whammy. We lose what we have, what I consider to be one of our greatest core competencies and that is the experience of the people we have out there working on the flight line and the back shops, flying our air planes who may determine that it is time to move on. Right now, it is good. I wish I could tell you that I have a meter that is going to tell me exactly who and what numbers. At first I thought we may have on small percentage, but that in some of the stressed career fields we are going to be challenged to replace many of the people who do leave us.

Q: What can be done to modernize the aging computer equipment in the Guard?

Lt Gen James: That is funny because I went to 1^st Air Force and I saw the same thing ­ made the same observation. I am not exactly what you'd call your computer geek ­ my staff can tell you that. But I will tell you that even I saw that we had some equipment that could stand some modernization. I went back for the change of command, when General McKinley took over and I saw how, again, the old ingenuity. They had some systems that they had piggybacked right there with those old consoles right above them or right next to them to upgrade their equipment. I was there probably six months prior was my first visit and then within six to seven months they had almost the entire operation center there upgraded and modernized. So, necessity is the mother of invention, as they say.

So, yes, we do need to upgrade our equipment. They are going to do that. They are continuing to do that. They are finding some very innovative ways to do that. And we will watch that because the speed with which we have to take information or react to information is something that we have to deal with or else we will not be responsive the way we need to be as a force.

Q: How is the civilian sector holding up?

Lt Gen James: You are talking employers. We've had some really great stories. I'm glad you brought that up. One of the things that has happened, some of the employers have even stepped forward and taken the delta between the salary that a Guardsman or woman is being paid in their mobilized status and made up that difference. And they've done that for the first year. The problem we face is, that is at great sacrifice to the bottom line of that company and if it is not the company that can sustain that over a period of time, most of that went away after the first year. I will say most of that, I can't give you the exact figure, but I've heard that when they step forward they step forward for the first year. They can and will be, in most cases, very supportive and you'd be surprised.

I'll tell you what I learned as the AG in Texas, it wasn't the smaller companies that you had problems with. It was the large state and federal bureaucracies. Bureau of Prisons ­ excuse me, Texas Department of Corrections, post office, the county and state ­ and state believe it or not ­ state agencies where the executive director of the agency was on board and said yeah we've got to do this, USARA says this, we should support our people, etc...but it was that middle level supervisor or manager who said, well, you can go, but you may not have a job when you come back. Well, that is illegal, but they say it and it causes a tremendous amount of stress on the family, on the individual's family, so it is the middle management and the middle level supervisor that we've got to get the word to that says, you know, let me people go.

But we have another part of that that we've got to do well. We didn't do as well as we could this time. We have got to learn everything we can from this mobilization and this de-mobilization because we have to, if we are going to keep the Guard and Reserves healthy, if we don't want to break them, we have to learn how to mobilize just what we need, just when we need it. And de-mobilize them and send them back to their families and their employers.

We have two concepts that are in conflict right now. One is what I call the just in time concept and that is what the Guard is about. It is a responsive force. Then we have another what I call the just in case theory and that is ­ I may get beat up on this ­ but that is what an operator will do when they have a force and think that they are going to have to respond tomorrow, the next week or the next week and they say I want to keep these folks just in case the balloon goes up. We've got to figure a way to get the Guard and Reserve where they need to be, in a timely manner and then release them when it is time for them to go home. This will help keep that good will and support of the employers and the community that you are talking about. It will also keep the support of the family.

Another thing that we find out and I found this very interesting is that the families of employers can understand better their person being mobilized if they know when they are coming home and if we send them overseas. They can accept that better than an open-end deployment or an opened mobilization to backfill something in the states. That is another interesting information that came out of this current mobilization. So we've got to mobilize, de-mobilize in a timely manner, when we mobilize, try to give them some predictability. Remember, the AEF is based on predictability. Have we taken that predictability now that we've brought with the AEF for our active component and destroyed the predictability that the National Guard and the Reserve had at one time? We may have.

Q: In the past, most of our Guard members and Reservists have always trained 15 days with annual tour training stateside. Now new studies say it will be overseas part of AEF. Do you see, some time in the future, when we may move away from 15 days of annual training to a larger number of days to facilitate the transition time that we need to get over to the AEF?

Lt Gen James: First of all, I don't know the answer to that at this time. I know that we've had discussions about how we are going to do business and we are still focusing on two weeks at a time, understanding that we have to get people to theater. There are some people who will be able to take more time and so we may have a core of folks that stay in theater longer on a rotation. Again, the CINC would like to have somebody there the whole time who understands the ROE, understands the mission, is very experienced. Well, in fact, we bring very experienced people to the fight. So the CINC may be able to become comfortable with us being in the fight at a shorter period of time. Our motto has always been, where is the track and what is the record and then you let me run this race. If it takes three Guard units and a Reserve unit to fill 120-day block of time, we'd rather do it that way. But the idea of extending our national mobilizations or natural annual training, I don't have an answer for you right now. But it is being looked on. Right now our position is 15 days.

Q: How are you doing in terms of keeping up with maintenance?

Lt Gen James: Money. All we need is money. No, but seriously. That is a big challenge. That is what I was alluding to when I talked about this new steady state and how do we maintain the first R there, the Readiness that we need and the answer to me is to cycle people on shorter times in the mobilization aspect, cycle them through on shorter times so that they won't spend that much time sitting alert, flying CAPs and we can get people off alert and get them back going to the range ­ of course, they are getting plenty of refueling experience in flying CAPs, but they are not getting their strike.

For example, in the National Guard, one of our big challenges is to make sure we have enough precision guided munitions to be invited to the war, to be invited to the engagement and the conflict so that we can maintain our relevancy. If we have our block 30s and 40s that have that PGM capability sitting CAP, then they are not practicing for the next AEF. So I have asked that all of our units look very carefully at when the next AEF is and how many of our units that are shooters as we call them ­ smart shooters, PGM capable, are practicing and training for the AEF as opposed to out there sitting alert and flying CAP. We are looking at that because we want to make sure that we take people off CAP, take people off alert that are going to the AEF or going to Enduring Freedom. Well, Enduring Freedom is the AEF, ask General Jumper or at least he'll tell you that ­ we are not misusing or misguiding our resources to cover Noble Eagle at the expense of their training.

Q: You talked a bit about the additional flying hours and so forth. Talk to us about modernization ­ the C-130J, the C-17, F/A-22.

Lt Gen James: Modernization is the part of the relevance piece that I talked earlier. So we focus on modernization. We have to be modernized and modernization to me is not just cascading aircraft. We have to be part of the fielding plans for new equipment. As you know, we have the C-17 in Jackson and we are making sure that is done properly so we don't have the haves and the have nots. In other words, no dual standard for those airplanes that come to us because when we get a modernized system, most of these new systems are designed to operate at an operations tempo that we have not traditionally operated in. The C-17 is a perfect example. So we can't have a valuable, expensive resource like that operating at one-fifth or one-sixth tempo of the active component. So we are looking at that, getting more crew ratio, maybe getting some manpower trades, which is very expensive if you just go out and try to purchase it. We are working with the active component and the Reserve to see how we are going to do the next couple of blended units there.

As far as the C-130J, there is a program, a roadmap for the C-130J coming into the inventory. I was just talking to some of the pilots from Maryland that are flying the airplane. As a C-130J comes in, there is also a program that probably will modernize or at least upgrade the C-130 fleet Air Force-wide. There are more C-130E models on active duty than I realized as a Guardsman because the C-130 is the backbone of our theater airlift fleet. So with this roadmap, the addition of the C-130Js and we are also going to retire some of the old Es and place H1s, 2s, and 3s in these units that have ease right now so we'll have a more modernized C-130 force in terms of the J and a more upgraded C-130 force in terms of removing the Es.

As far as the F/A-22 is concerned, we have a lot of fighter force structure, as you know, but if you look at the buy of the F/A-22 and the Joint Strike Fighter, there is just not enough iron to go around to look the way we look today and that is why we are exploring some other missions to make sure that we have units that retain their force structure and their relevancy in the total force. We support the F/A-22 and the Joint Strike Fighter. What is good for the Air Force is generally good for the Air National Guard and here is a perfect case of where what is good for the Air Force will be good for the Air National Guard. I support that program 150 percent and all the numbers that we have seen plus some.

I expect that the Air National Guard will be participating in some fashion, whether it be a blended unit or some other type of force structure in the F/A-22 and I sure hope the Secretary is listening because he said we are going to be a part of the F/A-22. That is my quick piece on modernization.

Q: What planning may be going on today with regard to the relationship between the National Guard and the Air Force proper and the new Department of Homeland Security?

Lt Gen James: The coordination ­ what we are trying to do ­ and the chief probably can handle this question better than I ­ but we are trying to look at the involvement of the National Guard as the National Guard Bureau and the respective states. The resources are in the states so we have the adjutant general, the chief has appointed the vice chief of the Guard Bureau to be the focal point to coordinate with a Department of Homeland Security to make sure that the Guard was involved. You see, the Guard is a natural. As you saw by looking at the numbers of units that we have out there in the communities, it is a natural to be involved in homeland security. We have a natural relationship in most every state with the first responders. We have resources that we can bring to bear. We are currently working plans to coordinate all of that.

Now, we have to go across state lines. We have to get mutual pacts of agreements ­ MOUs/MOAs ­ that allow us to do that and that is what we are working through right now. And as in any other new emerging mission, you have a situation where the big questions starts to become, ok, who is the boss? Who is going to be the boss when something goes down? Is it going to be JFCOM? Is it going to be NORTHCOM? Who is going to have control of the Guard? Is the governor going to retain control of his forces? And you can believe the governor says, yes I am. But is it going to be of such great magnitude that it will overwhelm the local response, the state response and it will go across state lines and do we have then something in place. We are working that right now as we speak and we have focal points both in the Guard Bureau and in the states to work that Homeland Security mission and coordinate with what is to hopefully emerge as an efficient and effective force.

We have to be very careful because we have just taken on a huge task because we are all very critical of bureaucracies. This bureaucracy that we are about to put together is bigger than any other bureau, any other agency that we've ever had in the federal government. We've got to get this right or otherwise it will be fractionalized and it will be a big budget fight, a funding food fight, if you would, instead of a well coordinated, well put together effort.

Click here for the slide presentation in .pdf format