Watch, Read: CMSSF Discusses Guardian Careers, Education & Readiness
May 14, 2024
Chief Master Sergeant of the Space Force John F. Bentivegna joined AFA President & CEO Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.) for a May 10 fireside chat. Bentivegna discussed how the Space Force intends to redesign career paths as it reoptimizes for great power competition, expand educational and developmental opportunities for Guardians, improve overall readiness and quality of life, and more.
Watch the full event or read the transcript below.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Welcome to Warfighters in Action. I’m Burt Field, President &CEO of your Air & Space Forces Association. Thank you to everyone joining us online today, as we talk to the second Chief Master Sergeant of the Space Force, John Bentivegna. Chief B-9 became the Space Force’s highest enlisted Guardian in September of 2023.
He’s the personal advisor to the Chief of Space Operations and the Secretary of the Air Force, on everything from readiness of the force to Guardian development. But before we begin, I want to take a moment to thank our sponsors listed here on the screen. We are very grateful for their continued support in making Warfighters in Action possible. Chief B-9, thank you so much for joining us today.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Thank you.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
So I thought we’d get right into it with an easy question.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Sure.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
In our Warfighter Symposium, the secretary in the Department of the Air Force rolled out a significant overall of all the forces and the structure, as you all prepare for Great Power Competition.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yep.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
What does that mean for the future of the Space Force?
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah. If I may, speaking of great power, I think today is Military Spouse Appreciation Day. I would be remiss if I didn’t give to my teammate, Kathy, and say thank you, Kathy, for all you do.
Give a shout-out to our Spouse of the Year for the Space Force, Dr. Courtney Baker. I want to say thank you very much to you for all that you do, and for all the spouses across the military. Because you enable us to do what we do every single day, so thanks for that.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Fantastic. I’m in trouble again because you beat me to this.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
I’m sorry, General.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Okay.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
We should have coordinated that before, so I apologize. But to your question on the Great Power Competition and what that means for us as a service. When the secretary laid it out, it was 24 decisions that were made really in four pillars. It was how do we develop people, generate readiness? How do we project power and how do we develop capabilities?
Under those, there are several Space Force specific things that we’re focused on right now, and I’m excited about it. When we talk about how do we develop people? It’s when we look at the service, four and a half years into this, what are the career paths? How do we utilize the professionals we have in our civilians, our officers, our enlisted cadre, to get after Great Power Competition and the mission sets that we have to do?
There’s career paths that we’re looking at under the pillar of developed people. Talk about generate readiness. One is how are we looking at our readiness standards? For many years, I was a space operator, I did this for almost 30 years I’ve been doing this business. How do we look at the readiness and the systems, and the personnel and the training required for the high-end fight in Great Power Competition?
We’re looking at readiness standards, but also what are the exercises and training events that we do to generate readiness? One of those, as an example, I think last month we had Space Flag, I think, 24-1, which is really a good example of how we are looking at how do we focus the events that we bring the service together?
The warfighters of the service, and also some of our joint partners as well, and prepare them and expose them to a thinking adversary. How do we execute the OPLANs that we’re responsible to execute, and really hone in that warfighting mindset? That’s generating readiness for us. Then how do we project power? Space Force Generation, the SPAFORGEN model, it started in about ’22, but we’re really moving out on that.
General Miller, Space Operations Command, and Chief Lloyd are making that happen, and that’s how we’re going to present forces, if you will. Then, of course, how do we develop capabilities? We’re going to stand up a new field command, Futures Command here hopefully this summer.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Okay. We’re going to dive into a whole bunch of that much more deeply.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah, I threw a lot at the table. Yeah, let’s have fun.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Yeah. Let’s talk about so specifically, is there changes from what we’re doing now to addressing just focusing more on big competitors like China or Russia?
Or some of these other actors out there that Space Force is doing either in their acquisition or training of our Guardians?
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah. I think because we’re only four and a half years old, I think when the service was envisioned and established, I think it was looking at Great Power Competition as one of the forcing functions as domains started to change.
We started having, it was a contested domain that we were warfighting kind of moving into. But that continued evolution, if you will, of where the service is going, where I think for the years I did this under Air Force Base Command and was still part of the Air Force, it was more of a benign environment.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Right.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Focused a lot on functions and systems. Are the batteries okay? What’s going on with the availability rate of the systems that I was operating, whether it would be DSP, GPS throughout the years? But now we’re truly focused as a service, rather than providing those engineering type of functions and looking at it through that lens, from a warfighting mission thread from a service.
It’s pivoting where we were, where we are today and how we look at how we execute. I think another example would be how we’re implementing the new, the way we’re doing the Deltas where we have acquisition authority in the Deltas as well. I think you had Colonel Petrucci as one of the first that we did that, and have them responsible for the readiness and then the funds associated with that.
I think as we’re looking where we are today, we’re pivoting to make sure we’re continuing evolution that the service is ready for Great Power Competition. But I think the advantage we have is we started, if you will, already thinking about how do we create a service for a contested domain under Great Power Competition vision?
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Right. Oh, that’s a great answer. Let’s talk about how we present forces. Right now, the Space Forces are presenting forces through a process called Space Force Generation or SPAFORGEN.
Can you go over what that is? How is that different from how it was done in the past? Are you fully up and running, or is it still a little bit a work in progress?
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah. There’s a lot to the SPAFORGEN model and it covers a lot of initiatives, things that we had to get after. On the one end, how do we normalize how we present forces to the combatant commands and to the joint force? SPAFORGEN allows us as we, in a normalized way, that we have capacity that we present forces and it’s not a complete unit.
I think when I was doing this when I was still an operator at an operational unit, the whole squadron was presented so we were on all the time. That wasn’t a really good way to measure readiness and how we present forces. It was different than maybe how the other services did that from that capability perspective.
But what it also prevented me from doing, was when was my time when I was working shift or crew all the time? Eight hours, two days, two swings, two mids, when was I getting advanced training? When was I upgrade training? That wasn’t built into that model.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Right.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
As we look at SPAFORGEN, there’s a lot of things from the Pentagon perspective, the very high-end integrating with across the Department of Defense, that this allows us to do from a force presentation. But really when I talk to Guardians about, “Hey, why are we doing SPAFORGEN? What does it mean?” It’s really for them. We send these men and women, they come in and join the service.
Say, “I want to be a cyber operator, I want to be an intelligence operator, I want to be a space operator.” We send them to schools, but then we have to give them the time to train, to hone those skills, to be the warfighters that they want to be. The SPAFORGEN model with the three cycles, so prepare, ready and commit.
The prepare and ready phase really is to carve out that time, so they can become the warfighters that we need, to hone those skills and be ready for the high-end fight. Previously, that time really wasn’t dedicated for them to allow to do that, so there’s a lot of benefit to the SPAFORGEN model.
But depending on whether you’re sitting in an office in the Pentagon, and you’re in the tank and talking to OSD, it allows us to articulate it that way. But if you’re a tactical-level leader trying to hone your skill craft, there’s a lot SPAFORGEN will do for you.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Exactly. That leads into another question. As you generate these forces and train, and then as you move them out and deploy, either as they deploy or they employ from home.
How are you looking at working with our international partners? Are you doing anything different with them with the focus on Great Power Competition and this new way we present forces? What are we looking at with international partners these days?
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah. If you look at General Saltzman, one of his LOEs is the Partner to Win. That includes our international partners, as well as interagency across the DOD and commercial. But from an ally perspective or when you look at it from that, there’s a lot of benefit, there’s a lot of interest in collaborating with us. I was in at the Space Symposium just last month with General Saltzman, and he had his Space Chief Summit.
It was a day where we got together with 18 partner nations, and really talked about where are we, as a Space Force, in our journey and that development? Then some of our partners who were just starting, if you will, to get into and trying to develop their echelons of command. We’re all at different levels, but sharing where we are and lessons learned.
But the consistent theme was that we have to have some norms of behavior in the domain, because the domain provides not only capabilities in how we fight, but also how we live. The space economy, exploration, commerce. Everyone has a vested interest in working together to figure out what the norms of behavior are, and then also work together from a collaboration perspective.
When you look at, for example, I think rideshare with Japan for Space Domain Awareness, we’re looking to partner with Norway for some protected SATCOM capabilities. We have some of our deep space radar that we’re working with Australia and UK. From a mission partner perspective, there’s a lot to do there, because we’re all like-minded in how we see the domain, how we have to protect it, and make sure we have free, unfettered access.
I’m excited about a lot of that. Even at the Space Chief Summit that week during the symposium, I got a chance to engage with several of my peers across Italy and Canada, and Australia and the UK. So it was great to get a chance to talk to them. From an enlisted perspective, it’s a lot of discussion about how do we grow space-minded warfighters? What does that developing cadre look like?
Because a lot of them, very much like we did, are trying to organically grow that out of their air forces. So we share lessons learned on where we are going forward.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Yeah. I know that we’ve talked to some Space Force Guardians, and they’ve mentioned that you’re also attacking some of the classification barriers.
And taking that on to see what really needs to be protected as US and what we can share with our partners. Can you talk about that a little bit?
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah, it’s too classified. I can’t talk about it.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
All right, I’m sorry. I shouldn’t have asked that question.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah. That has been a consistent drumbeat that we’ve had, as we’ve tried to evolve, especially the collaboration, not only with our mission partners in industry, but just internally with the joint force. I’ve had the opportunity to serve at several echelons of command through the years, as an Airman and as a Guardian. Each time as I left one organization to go to another, it was always a challenge.
What reads are you going to get? Do you need the reads? What’s the purpose of the chief or the enlisted guy sitting in some of these meetings? I’m like this is all relevant to warfighting and development for the enlisted cadre that I’m responsible, and advising my team and the commander, whoever that is at the time. We’ve really tried to address that.
I think in December and January, Deputy Sec Def Hicks put out a memo that says, “The services, especially from the space portfolio, need to really look at why do things have to be so highly classified?” With an understanding is that we have got to be able to work across agencies, across nations, to get after what the nation expects of us.
I’m very hopeful that based on the guidance that’s come out, which I think is one of the most significant changes in that domain for a while. Really say, “What are the reasons that we have to classify things at such a high level?” When operationally we fight on SIPRNet, we fight at the secret, releasable levels where we have to get to.
But even at the TS/SCI, there’s still a lot more opportunity to share and collaborate than it is at the SAP level. So we’re making us a headway there. It’ll take some time as we go through it, but I’m really excited that we’ve made that decision as a Department of Defense. Now we just have to implement it going forward.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Do you think that when we work with our partners internationally, are they reciprocating in that same vein?
Are they like-minded in this area as well, do you think?
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah. There’s CSpO that we have from an international partners and there’s events that we do. Schriever Wargames, as an example, is one where our nations, they come to the table together and we share, “Hey, what are the systems they’re working on?” Because we know we’re going to do this as a joint, as a coalition, especially for the domain that the size that it is, to get after that.
Yes, there is sharing that goes back and forth, but again, it’s a process as we go through that. But I think the realization that for integration to really have to get after who’s buying what, who’s investing in what capabilities? How do we leverage one another? We have to have more open communication to do that. I’ve seen that both as an ask from our ally partners.
But also coming to the table and, “Hey, here’s what we can contribute. How do we integrate this capability and how do we communicate and talk better?”
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Yeah. Okay. Now we’re going to go even deeper into this, because you all have just announced a new Commercial Space Strategy, and there is so much commercial entry into space these days. How does that affect how you look at integrating across the force?
Then first off, how are you working with our industry partners, many of whom are watching today, to take advantage of their capabilities, to do what you all need to do to accomplish your mission?
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah. From being involved in this business for many years from an operational side, the philosophy now that from a commercial capabilities perspective, that we want to operationalize and integrate commercial into our plans. That’s a significant kind of change when you think about that. But the motto that we’ve picked up is we’re going to exploit what we have, buy what we can and only build what we must.
I think if we continue to look at things through those lens and leverage our commercial partners. When you think about the innovation, especially in the space domain. Man, over the last several years, it is impressive how fast they’re moving out, their production capability, and just how they’re thinking outside the box. To leverage and partner with them, it’s extremely important for us to move fast.
The secretary has talked about we’re out of time, we’re out of time, and to leverage where the strong industry base is, that’s part of the national space strategy where we have to have a very robust space industry within the country. That meets that objective by partnering with and leveraging how fast they’re going, their innovation. I’m really excited where that’s going to go.
But when you think about the fact, again, that we’re going to think from a commercial perspective to integrate it from the beginning and operationalize it in the plans, the operational plans, and how we actually present forces to the combatant commanders, that’s a significant change. I think it’s really going to pay dividends.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
I’m just imagining this how you, “Okay, I’ve got some US capability, I got some international capability, I have some commercial capability. I’ve got to integrate it all, and here’s how it is.” That’s no easy task for you all to do.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
That’s right. When you talk about resilience, think about the resilience that’s built into that. When we have so many partners coming to the table, like you’ve pointed out, either our allies, commercial or what we’re bringing from the US, it’s impressive.
But again, it is a pivot, it is a change, I think, in how we approach this problem set, but I think it has so much potential as we go forward.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Yeah, I agree. Okay. Let’s talk about something related, but a little bit of a different slant.
The 2024 budget has more than $300 million for operational test and training infrastructure for Space Force.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
What are you all trying to accomplish with that funding?
Can you continue on some of the things you mentioned earlier about training our Guardians, and integrating into the higher-end fight into that contested space?
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah. When we talked about earlier that we recruit and train Guardians to do specific mission sets and they’re excited about doing that. In the SPAFORGEN model, when they’re in that prepare and ready phase, having the infrastructure that they can actually execute, not only from a positional perspective. That I understand positionally what I’m supposed to do. But how do we have an environment that not only has the cyber landscape?
But we have an adversary, a thinking adversary in a digital domain where we can bring different weapon systems, whether it be Space Domain Awareness, orbital warfare, a missile warning all together. Where if you think like a task force, a force that we’re providing from the service can come together, train, execute, have a chance to try out TTPs. OTTI is going to be the foundation for all that and that’s what we owe our Guardians.
There’s a lot of work to do there. I think it was $360, $380 million in ’24. Hopefully, we’ll continue that investment in ’25. But when I think about as I trained, when I did missile warning years ago as a young non-commissioned officer, it was literally a piece of paper that was taped to the top of the monitor. The instructor would be standing there going, “Okay, flip it over.” It’d say, “This is now what you see on the screen.”
That was a training that I had. It wasn’t a virtual environment. I wasn’t collaborating or working with other mission partners from other squadrons across the service. It was just positional. Then from an adversarial threat perspective, it was literally, and this is joking, but people who are listening may realize this. One of the most catastrophic threats I faced in an evaluation or a training event, was an uncontrollable trash can fire.
Because if I didn’t take the right actions to save lives, that was the threat. It wasn’t an on-orbit jamming capability, it wasn’t an ASAT, it wasn’t laser dazzlers, it was an uncontrollable trash can fire. We’ve come such a long way in how we think about the domain, how we think about the threat. But we have to provide the infrastructure and capability for Guardians to work together across mission sets in a domain that takes in the intelligence, the cyber landscape.
How do you execute that OPLAN? Competitive endurance, when you think about every single day when Guardians go to work, whether there’s a crisis or conflict happening or not, every day they’re campaigning in competitive endurance. We have to make sure no operational surprise. We know what’s going on. What is the deterrents that we have as a service?
How do we provide them the landscape, the infrastructure for them to train and be able to do that? OTTI and where that’s going with that money, is going to be well spent to provide that to the Guardians.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
That’s great. Okay. Continuing on this education and training theme.
Can you talk about how, just explain the US Space Force Officer Training Course and the unique features in that, as opposed to other services perhaps?
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah, absolutely. This goes back into under Great Power Competition, we talk about how do we develop people? Under that pillar of developing people, that’s going to have an impact on our civilians, our officers and our enlisted. But on the officer side, that was the first one that General Saltzman said, “Hey, let’s get off the blocks and this will be the first one we make changes to.”
Traditionally, when you commissioned into the service, you were to either go to become an intel officer, you’d go to tech school, and then you’d go to your operational job. Or if you’re going to be a cyber operator, a cyber officer, you’d go to school and then go to your mission site. What we realized is the last several years when intelligence and cyber landscape specifically, they’re no longer supporting functions.
They are operational domains. Information domain for intel and the cyber domain for our cyber operators and then the space operators. General Saltzman, as we looked at how do we utilize our Guardians, especially on the officer side, they need to understand not only the operational side, the intelligence and the cyber. We’re sending them to all three schools.
We’re bringing together the syllabus from what were three separate schools for cyber, intel and space. Letting officers go through that gauntlet to produce a Guardian that has a foundational understanding. So that as they do their operational tour and they go off and become FTOs, if you will, they are integrators and planners for the service.
There is such a demand right now for Guardians on combatant command staffs, on the joint staff, our ally partners. They’re looking for Guardians to help integrate the Space Force and space capabilities into everything they do. How do we produce and grow the officer cadre to be able to go off and do those things? That’s the first iteration why the officer training course is pivoting and changing.
Now, I think, that’s going to start with the commissioning sources this year as we go through that. Now that we’re working on that, I think September will be the first class that starts. Now we’re looking at those changes that have been made, and now we’re going back to, for example, the enlisted courses.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Right.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Right? On the syllabuses, on the enlisted courses, what has to be added, changed, modified? Now that we know how we’re developing, growing officers to employ them, now how do we grow the enlisted cadre to do that?
Also, how are we developing and investing in our civilian cadre as well? Because it takes all of us as a service to get together.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
In the warfare symposium, you mentioned you were going to have some conversations on PME changes for enlisted Guardians, and the unique opportunities you guys are looking to leverage.
Can you continue on that vein a little bit and give us the results of those conversations or what’s exciting in there as well?
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Absolutely. The Vosler Academy out at Peterson Space Force Base from an enlisted perspective is where we do all of our EPME, enlisted professional military education. The schoolhouse shut down, so Chief April Brittain, she’s a commandant out there. Her and the cadre, they brought in some subject-matter experts and said, “Okay. Knowing what we do as a service, knowing that we need space-minded warfighters. What is the experience, education we need to provide them, which is unique to Guardians?”
For several months they were shut down and they were free-thinking. In fact, it’s funny because everybody wanted to go visit and see what they were up to. “Hey, let us do the work and we’ll come back,” kind of what we did. The first iteration of what they call the fellowship. It’s a journey that Guardians will be on, so you don’t go there necessarily and graduate. When you go there, you’re inducted into the fellowship.
The first course, I had a chance to speak at the induction, I mistakenly called it a graduation, I got yelled at, for our tech sergeants, for our E-6s. Occurred just last month. Over the five weeks, when they re-envisioned this, it was more of an experience for the Guardians that were there. It was peer-led where the instructors, traditional instructors at the schoolhouse, were really more a little bit of facilitators.
And brought Guardians together in teams and said, “Here’s a curriculum. Here’s what we want you to think through. Here’s the experience we want you to go through together as a fellowship to learn through that.” They focused each week on something different. The first week is about the individual. How do you build trust? How do you be vulnerable? How do you be a genuine leader, looking at yourself as an individual?
Then focus on the cognitive domain. How do you learn? How do you invest to be a lifelong learner? Then the third week was problem solving. How do you critically think through the challenges we have as a service? Then they had a week on warfighting. What does it mean to be a space-minded warfighter? Then the last week was the culmination where we brought it all together. How do you define your leadership philosophy?
As we send these tech sergeants back out to the field where they’re going to be team leaders, where they’re going to be the unit of action, the combat squadrons and the combat detachments that now we’re going to present to the combatant commands. How do these tech sergeants go out there and lead those individuals to get the mission done? How do they think through the hard problems? How do they know themselves?
How do they leverage the talent that they have on their teams to solve hard problems? The feedback from the first fellowship was phenomenal. They really, really valued it and enjoyed it. That’s the Fellowship II that was inducted. Now they’re going to focus on Fellowship III, which would be for our senior non-commissioned officers. We’re hoping to have the first iteration of that this summer.
That Fellowship III is now being executed. Then Fellowship I, probably later on next year, that’ll be for our junior enlisted, E-4s, E-5s. That’ll probably be in ’25. There’s been a lot of headway on that, and I’m really excited to see what the results were. Because indications from the first fellowship, the first inductees was great.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
That sounds fascinating.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
That’s great. I’m excited about it.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
That’s great. Okay. Here’s another hard question though.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
None of these have been hard.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Yeah.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
This is fun.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Yeah, it’s been amazing. But Congress just passed the Personnel Management Act in the 2024 NDAA. General Saltzman says, “It’s a monumental shift of how Guardians will manage their careers.”
Can you walk us through that and what does that mean? How are you approaching what you think are your biggest challenges to implement this concept?
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah. I don’t think I’ve ever been in any operational unit where… I won’t say operational. I don’t think I’ve been in any unit doing this space business, where I didn’t have either an associate reserve unit with me or I had IMAs. I had reservists that were sitting side by side with me, or helping me execute the mission, whether it be subject-matter expertise or surge capability.
That partnership, I’ve experienced that and valued that my entire career. But the challenges of being a separate component, getting MPA days when we needed to activate, different rules set. When you think about how small the service is and how focused we are. Having two separate components, different change of command now that we’re a different service, isn’t necessarily beneficial for unity of command or for readiness.
The Personnel Management Act is going to allow us to take that capacity, if you will, and bring that into the Space Force as a single component. The vision is not to create the reserves in the Space Force. That’s not what we’re looking to do. We’re going to have full-time and part-time Guardians.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Right. 100% percent of the time?
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
100% percent of the time under one component, which is a phenomenal way to think. It’s a different way to think of service, so I’m really excited about where we are with that. Now what does that mean going in the future? A lot of focus is on the part-timers of your traditional reserve is coming in and filling that role, but that goes both ways.
If you’re a Guardian somewhere at a part of your life where something is going on where, “Hey, maybe I want to go part-time.” A family situation, an opportunity comes up, whatever the case is. Previously, you would have to change, you’d have to separate from the active component to go into the reserve.
Now under one component you could say, “Hey, I want to apply for maybe a part-time position for a bit, where I do whatever it is I need to do,” but then also have the ability to come back as full-time when that life situation changes. It adds optionality to the Guardians, so I don’t have to leave the team, if you will. We can still leverage that deep expertise that Guardians bring to the table.
Especially, because a lot of our reservists are part-timers, if you will, in the future. They’re in the industry. They’re doing very similar jobs. If they’re not necessarily in the same industry, they’re leaders and innovators and problem solvers in whatever they’re doing. We want to keep them as Guardians, keep them in the team, and allow a smooth transition back and forth as we do that.
That’s what the Personnel Management Act, what we’re hoping it allows us to do as a service. Now the transition, later on in the summer, we’re hoping to open up the first tranche opportunity for currently serving reservists today to join the Space Force as full-timers. The reason that is because we know how to pay full-timers. The systems are there, we know how the benefits work. It’s easy, you’re just coming on full-time.
Where we have to work on is what does it mean to be defined part-time? Not only defining it, but also how do I pay you? How do the systems track you? We don’t have that built yet. The part-time capability, if you will, of the Personnel Management Act, may take us a year or so before we can implement that, before we can actually invite people over part-time to be a Guardian.
The full-time is much simpler to do, and we’re hoping to execute that first, get through that. As we continue to invest in the systems and infrastructure and figure out the part-time part, then we’ll have part-time Guardians out in the future. We’re excited about where that’s going to go.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Yeah. That’s going to be groundbreaking, really.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
That’s unique.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
When I talk to some of my counterparts from the other services they’re watching, because they’re like, “Hey, is that a model that’s applicable?”
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Yeah. Because they’re all full-time, part-time as well, just the whole total of the force.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
That’s right. That’s right.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
They’re going to be looking for the lessons you all learn.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
This is one of the benefits of being the size of the service that we are. Is that with about 9,800 uniformed Guardians at the end of the fiscal year, we’ll meet our retention goals. I’m not worried about that in recruitment.
But allows us to be maybe a little more dynamic, think outside the box when we can do that with 10,000, I suppose, or 300,000 or 400,000. We’re leveraging that as one of our advantages where one of our strengths is our size.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
As you take all of this in that we just discussed, there’s still being a military service.
How are you guys working through figuring out clear roles, responsibilities, and authorities for your officer, enlisted and civilian Guardians?
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah. When the service stood up, essentially what was at the time Air Force Space Command was picked up and said, “Okay, now you are the Space Force.” That was whatever billets and personnel that were in the MAJCOM at the time. Then there were other parts and pieces of organizations, whether from the intelligence community or other things, our training that was absorbed into the service.
But again, it was like whatever the billets, whatever was on the [inaudible 00:33:55] document at the time, which transitioned over. Where the broadest was, when you look at the service today, as we’re going through this review and evolution. I said about 9,800 uniformed Guardians at the end of the year, almost half of those are officers. When you think of other services, that ratio is off. It’s not the same.
Now, a lot of it’s because of the engineering and acquisition heavy that we have today in the model on the service. But specifically when you look at space operations, the 13S officers and the five Sierra, which are the enlisted space operators, still almost like a 50/50 split. As we looked at the force structure that we had, if you will, officers, enlisted and civilians.
Then looking at the needs of it as not a MAJCOM anymore, but as a service. I talked earlier about we need integrators and planners to go off into combatant commands and ally partners and do those things. Looking at the roles and responsibilities, how do we maximize the personnel that we have in the numbers, to let them do the things that the service needs to do at the service level?
Then what are the things that we can maybe pivot where, for example, we look at the enlisted cadre, where we look at the roles and responsibilities we outlined for officers, enlisted, civilian. Our enlisted cadre are the warfighters of the service. They’re probably going to be the preponderance of, we talked about the combat squadron, that unit of action.
It’ll probably be the preponderance of the enlisted warfighters that do that, responsible for readiness and training to happen there, which is a little bit of a pivot in how we’ve done things separately. This journey, this discussion that we’ve been on on, “Hey, what are the things we need to do as a service? How do we maximize the skills and talents of our officers, our civilians and our enlisted? How do we change those roles and responsibilities?”
I said officers really will be our planners and integrators, and that’s why the officer training course is going the way it is. Our enlisted cadre will be the warfighters, subject-matter experts on the weapon systems responsible for readiness for that unit of action and leading those organizations. Then, of course, our Guardian civilians. Just the depth of experience and the continuity that they bring for us is critical.
Especially when you think about how complicated the space is and where we’re going, all three together, what makes the service the strength of the service. That’s really when we talk about defining those roles, that’s a little bit of the journey that we’ve been on. It’s going to take a little time as we pivot to get there, but that’s the vision. That’s the journey that we’re going on.
As the lens with which we look through, we talk about what are the schools going to look like? When did they go to school? What does the school teach? What are the opportunities we expose our civilians, officers and enlisted to? All feed into that roles, responsibilities, and how do we field the service that we need?
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Oh, that’s fantastic, Chief. Okay, this is a personal thing for me.
I read a really interesting article recently, and it talked about how the Space Force is taking on fitness and overall wellness.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Can you talk about the Holistic Health Approach that you all are going through and how it’s being received and how you think it’s going? Because I find it fascinating and long overdue.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah. There’s been a lot of interest in it, because again, it is an outside-the-box way at thinking about health traditionally, especially from a military service. The Holistic Health Approach has three components to it. There’s the continuous fitness assessment, which is we’re in a study right now with Air Force Research Lab to do that. In fact, I’m wearing my watch right now.
What that allows, leveraging technology and wearables for the first component, the continuous fitness assessment, is what is that you like to do to get your heart rate up, get your blood flowing? For me, it’s biking. I like to bike. Some of my friends that like to run, others do CrossFit, some swim. But what are the exercise that, first of all, that you like to do, you enjoy doing?
But also because of injuries or whatever the case is, but still, you’re getting the benefits of having intensity minutes for cardiovascular and working out, and it’s something you enjoy to do.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Right.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
That’s one aspect of it is the continuous fitness assessment and with the wearables. The other part is human performance. How is it that we can get Guardians comfortable with, “Hey, I’m sore. Going to see maybe a physical therapist or a strength trainer”? Or I’m stressed, I’m struggling. I’m going to go talk to maybe a licensed mental health provider to help me through that. Holistically health, human performance.
That’s where our GRT Teams, our Guardian Resilience Teams come in. We’re fielding those, we’re really excited about those. They have the healthcare integrator that’s part of the GRT Team. We have a licensed mental health provider that’s part of the GRT Team. We have a strength coach and we have a physical therapist so that they’re embedded, they’re with the Guardians.
They teach them, help them through a healthy lifestyle, so that’s vitally important. We’re excited about the GRT Teams and the human performance aspect, which is the second pillar. Then the third is education. Whether it’s starting at OTS or basic military training, exposing Guardians to understand what health means. How do you look at health?
The benefits of lifelong, positive choices in your life, from what you eat to how often you exercise. Sleep hygiene, are you sleeping enough? All those things to expose the Guardians from education perspective, also vitally important as well. Those three pillars are continuous fitness assessment, the human performance, the fuel optimization, and then education.
Those are the three pillars, if you will, of the Holistic Health Approach and we’re excited on where we’re going with that.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Yeah, that sounds great. I’m looking forward to seeing how you all move that into the future.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
You mentioned in congressional testimony, back to what we opened with in the Military Spouse Day, that the availability of childcare, healthcare, suitable housing and spouse employment, they’re not issues unique to the Space Force.
But you do see some challenges because you have a 24/7 employed-in-place operations model. Can you address some of those issues that are so vitally important to our families out there?
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah. This is one of the points I emphasized, as I had a chance to engage with our elected officials on Capitol Hill. I was just on Capitol Hill earlier this week. I talk about that with our primarily employed-in-place forces, that you will have a Guardian in their commit phase in the SPAFORGEN model that is going to work.
You’re going to provide combat capability to the combatant commander in whatever mission set that you happen to be working in. But on your way to work, maybe you got to drop your kids off at school or at the CDC, and then you got to go do your wartime mission. You got to be in the zone. Then at the end of the day, after you do shift changeover, you got to maybe pick up your child, stop and maybe get milk at the grocery store.
Got to go home and do laundry, maybe fix a leaky faucet, all that while we’re asking you to be a warfighter in the commit phase. Where traditionally, when I deployed to do my warfighting mission, maybe I was at LUD and I was working focused on my mission set. But boy, at three o’clock in the morning, if I needed to pick up laundry, go to a movie, go to the library to get a book, I needed to stop by FSS and do something with my records.
The complete infrastructure was built around 24/7 operations in a deployed environment that allowed the warfighter to focus on their mission, but also I wasn’t doing homework. I wasn’t worried about fixing the leaky faucet. When we think about how we present forces as a service with primarily employed in place, those things are readiness issues, readiness concerns.
If Guardians, who are in their commit phase, have struggles or are trying to find childcare. That’s not if you’re working the day shift. If you’re working a midnight shift on a Saturday, either you’re a single parent or a mil-to-mil, those are challenges that we have to work through. It’s all about the Guardian experience. We ask them to serve, we ask them to serve in this kind of capacity.
How are we investing in the infrastructure and the services and the benefits to allow them to serve and take some of that worry, if you will, off the table? It’s not just childcare, it’s access to medical. It’s making sure that there’s faith and confidence in leadership that the records are up-to-date and taken care of. The housing is going to be safe and secure.
All those things are part of as a service, that we’re investing in and looking at very pointedly, because we look at it not as the glossy brochure this is what it means to serve. But as a direct readiness impact on our ability as a service to present forces. When I get a chance to talk to Congress or whether it’s meetings I’m having within the buildings of the Pentagon.
My senior enlisted advisor counterparts from across all the services feel the same way, all a little different in how we apply it, but we all agree. We all agree that these experiences that our service members and their families experience every single day, are vital to not only recruitment, but retention and allowing our warfighters to focus on the things that we need them to do. There’s been a lot of great work that we’ve done in this.
The secretary of defense is focused on taking care of people, and he’s put out policies that we’ve invested money. But I think there’s still some work for us to do to make sure that, first of all, families and members are knowledgeable. They understand what’s available to them. Then when they find a program that will be beneficial to them and their family, that the bureaucracy to get access to those benefits are easy.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Right.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
There isn’t a lot of paperwork, unnecessary paperwork, people answer the phones when you call. Those are the things we’re picking at a little bit to say, “Okay, the policies put in place. We’ve put millions of dollars towards something.”
You go talk to your Guardian and say, “Did you know about this? Can you get access to it? What is your experience at the tactical level every single day?” Bring that feedback back to the Pentagon and say, “Okay, this is working great. It’s a success, or we got some work to do on this.” But it’s all about readiness. It’s all about readiness.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Well, thanks for helping lead that charge.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
I appreciate it.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
And fixing those issues because they’re vital.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yes.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Okay. That’s all of our questions here, so what we’re going to do is we’re going to open this up to audience questions. As a reminder, please unmute yourself before you ask a question. We’ll go ahead and start with David Roza from Air & Space Forces Magazine. David, over to you.
I think is David not coming up? I’ll go ahead and do it then. David’s question is, “What concerns are you hearing from Guardians about the part-time, full-time shift that we discussed earlier? Are you hearing positive, negative, neutral feedback?”
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
I think a lot of the questions are based on us explaining our vision on the full-time and part-time and as we work through that. Now, I’ll give you an example. I think from a part-time perspective, the employed-in-place mission sets, when you have to be combat mission ready and the commit phase that we talked about. We don’t know whether or not that really is conducive to a part-time Guardian.
I think where we leverage part-time Guardians, and we talked about their immense experience. A lot of them are working in industry to begin with, or they’re problem-solving skills and leadership when they’re not in uniform. Where is it when we put them on orders and they’re putting on the Guardian uniform, where do we best leverage them?
The employed-in-place missions may not be there, but we talk about test, evaluation, training, planning on the staff. Those are things to leverage all that deep, subject-matter expertise and capability that the part-timer will bring to the table. We’re looking to maybe shift a little bit when we talk about what are the part-time roles and functions that we need Guardians to do?
It may not be if, “Well, I’m a crew dog and I work shift,” maybe that’s not part-time. Where the difference may be, where the part-time model really fits in is on our deployable capabilities. That’s a traditional model where, “Hey, you come on full-time orders from part-time. You spin up, you pack up your gear, you maybe go downrange someplace.” You do your six, seven months, you come back and reconstitute.
Then you go back to part-time. That’s a model that really is beneficial from a part-time Guardian perspective. But the employed-in-place mission sets are going to be a little different, I think, going forward. But at the end of the day, the message that I’ve been trying to articulate to my teammates, who especially traditional reservists today. Is the subject-matter expertise, the experience you bring to the table, we value that so greatly.
But we are asking as a service now trying to do all these things, not a MAJCOM anymore. We’re a service. How do we leverage that in the functions and the positions that we really could take advantage of what you bring to the table as a Guardian in that fashion? It’s questions because we’re changing things a little bit, but really it’s our ability to make sure that that story, what I just talked about.
We can cleanly communicate that and paint the vision where they can see themselves, “Hey, okay. I can go and do some tests and evaluation on the next weapon system, or I can become an aggressor. I know there’s a campaign. I’m going to go to Red Flag, or I’m going to go out to Fallon. I’m going to do something for a couple of weeks where they’re going to put me on orders from part-time to full-time and leverage that expertise.”
Those are the things I want to be able to tell those stories and get the part-timers, if you will, excited about where we really need them in the future under this Personnel Management Act division.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
That’s fantastic. Okay, question from Timothy Minor. “On General Saltzman’s LOE too, how is the Space Force amplifying the Guardian Spirit and teaching the unique core values during the joint training of BMT and OTS?”
I know you addressed a little bit about that, but this is a little bit different too. “It appears the new BMT dorm will be filled with AF core values, but the SF values are buried in the back corner. Is there still a struggle with two sets of core values within the department?”
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
I would say not necessarily a struggle, but for BMT as an example, and BMT is near and dear to my heart. I’ve been down there a couple of times talking to the phenomenal men and women that are down there. The Guardians that are helping civilians on their journey to becoming Guardians. It’s beautiful things that are happening down there. But the reality is, is that our Air Force teammates have been phenomenal.
But as a service when we stood up, we’re leveraging infrastructure so we’re moving into dorms that the Air Force said, “Hey, here’s some space you can move into.” There’s some need, maybe repaint some walls and put up some posters and things to create that Guardian environment, if you will, as they continue that journey. But if you go down there, we’re leveraging a preponderance of the ecosystem that is the Air Force, which is BMT at Lackland.
But there is additional hours of Guardian-focused, specific values, discussions, what it means to be Guardian identity that they experience while they’re at BMT. At every iteration, I think, we do six BMT cadres a year, builds upon another where we get more and more focused on what it means to be a Guardian. We identify, “Maybe this is a little more Airman centric, so let’s work on that and then focus on what it means as a Guardian.”
But again, we’re leveraging the infrastructure, everything that’s down there for BMT. Chief Flosi and General Allvin, they’re trying to create thousands upon thousands of Airmen down there. I think we’re going to send through in fiscal year ’24, less than 700 Guardians through BMT. There’s scale that we have to, but General Sejba and Chief Pogue from STARCOM, they have a vision.
They’re working with Colonel Norsky and Chief Norris from Delta 1 to figure out, “Okay, what does the vision look like going forward for BMT?” We have to make the investments, but little by little, each course, each cadre that goes through, we’re getting more focused on what it means to be a Guardian. Now, that’s on the enlisted side. From OTS side, I had a chance to go to Maxwell a couple months ago and speak to the officer trainees that were down there.
Again, I think we produce, we commission, I think, 88 Guardian officers at OTS every year, just 88. A small number when you think about how many Air Force officers they commission. But you go there and I read the curriculum and our values, and what it means to be a Guardian is embedded every morning. They play the Air Force song and the Space Force song, whether there’s Guardians in the OTS class or not.
Again, they’re really trying to open up and integrate what it means. It’s a DAF entity to represent Airmen and Guardians, but when it’s 88 a year, but they’re making Herculean efforts to incorporate us and make us feel like we’re part of that team and we’re doing there. But again, each iteration we have to, what are the investments we’re making?
How do we make sure that experience for those Guardians, whether they’re commissioning or whether they’re enlisting, is relevant to them and they feel part of the team? But it’s a journey that’s going to take us years to build out, but it’s going to take investment. Think about it smartly as we go through that, but BMT specifically is near and dear to my heart.
I’m trying to get General Saltzman down there to do a visit, but the schedule, it just keeps getting away from us.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Well, you guys are a little busy these days.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
A little bit.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Okay, from David Babcock. Related to resilience, Congressman Mike Turner, a Republican from Ohio, expressed concern regarding Russia’s offensive anti-satellite operation. It’s probably safe to assume China is working on something similar.
As best as can be explained in an unclassified environment, how can the United States or the US Space Force defend against this? Is our strategy closer aligned to the best defense is a good offense?
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Yeah. There’s been some concerning news that’s been out, and I think we have publicly acknowledged on the Russian front that they may be looking at putting a nuclear device on orbit. In the UN, we tried to re-ratify the Outer Space Treaty and Russia vetoed it, but we’re trying to talk about that. Earlier when we talked about what are norms of behavior in space, especially working with our allied nations?
Is that there’s so much benefit, not just from a warfighting perspective, but how we grow as a world, how we live our lives every single day. Weaponizing space is not the right way to go because we all lose from that perspective. But whether it be China or whether it be Russia, they are developing capabilities, whether on orbit or terrestrial, on the ground, that are specifically designed to deny our ability to leverage space.
Whether it be in a joint fight or whether it be how we just leverage it from the economy perspective. They’re actively looking to leverage technology to deny our ability to do that and it’s worrying. But when you think about offense and defense, General Saltzman says, “Systems in and of themselves aren’t necessarily inherently offensive or defensive, operations are.” We’re building capability as a service.
We’re partnering with our allies, so what are they producing? It’s going to take all of us together to deter, if you will, and counter the threats that our pacing nations are investing in to get after that. But also building in resiliency is critically important, and that almost goes back to the discussion we had on the Commercial Space Strategy. Whether when we integrate and operationalize not only commercial, but our allied nations.
They have such a resilient architecture and infrastructure, that the capabilities that they are investing in, can they really deny? It is a deterrent to them on we’re building this capability, putting on orbit or terrestrially, is the juice worth the squeeze? Because we’re partnered with nations, we’re integrated, we have resiliency.
But it is concerning because they’re moving at speed to build capabilities to try and deny and take away the advantages that space brings to us as a nation.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Yeah, it’s a terribly wicked problem.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
It is. It is.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Okay. How about Russ Reed? Why don’t you come up and ask the question you’re interested in?
Russ Reed:
Thank you, sir. I appreciate it very much. Yes. Chief, I’m Russ Reed with the National Guard Association. I work on the air programs over here, so a lot to do with both air and space capabilities in my portfolio. Wanted to ask you a really quick question going back to the Space Force Personnel Management Act.
We’ve been hearing from General Saltzman and leadership in the Space Force, that it’s going to take about maybe five years to spin that up, which obviously makes a lot of sense given that it’s a new initiative. That being said, as you’re probably aware, there’s currently a legislative proposal 480 being put forward, which would forcibly move air guardsmen performing space missions to the main component.
Unfortunately, we’ve got survey data that shows a majority of those Airmen would not transfer over, which would obviously create a capability gap. How do you all plan to address that and what do you see as the path forward? Thanks very much.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
No, thanks for the question. I appreciate it. For the Personnel Management Act, I think congressionally, we had five years to implement it. But we’re looking to move at speed that though we have five years to fully implement the part-time, full-time with the reserve coming over to the service. We really don’t want to take five years.
That’s what Congress gave us because they understand we got to build the systems. Like we talked about, part-time, what does that look like? We’re looking to move faster than five years. The other thing too is really important and to maybe note. Is that no member, whether they be a reservist or whether they were individuals from other services, are being forcibly told they have to come into the Space Force.
We’ve taken over capabilities from the Army, the JTAGs mission set, if you will. Also, the Wideband Satellite Operation Centers, those were traditional Army capabilities. Now, the kit and some of the infrastructure came over, that came to the service. But the soldiers and the sailors, whether they were doing MUOS at Point Mugu, they all had options. It was like, “Would you like to come join the Space Force?” We didn’t forcibly make anyone come over.
The same is true for Air Force members. That even for me, as a space operator almost my entire career, when the service stood up, I had an option whether I was going to join or not. So no one’s being forcibly told they have to do that. Now, on the Army as an example, we brought over the JTAGs. The decision between the Army and the Space Force at the time was that equipment was coming over, but there was no promise or guarantee that soldiers came with that.
We were able to, from a Guardian perspective, we had a smooth transition where the soldiers went back to core Army missions, and we generated and trained Guardians. It took several months, but the mission didn’t have an impact. It was a close collaboration with the Army and the Space Force, and now we’re executing that mission on our own as a service. But it took partnership between the Army and the Space Force to do that.
It’ll be the same thing on some of the Reserve missions that are being executed. As we go through that, it’ll be a close working relationship with the Reserve as we implement the Personnel Management Act. Especially when you talk about the units and capabilities at the 310th Space Wing, which is the Reserve wing executes today. I would envision, depending on what Congress decides to do with the Guard, and we’ve made our recommendations.
I think we submitted the report to Congress yesterday, if I’m not mistaken. Depending on what they decide, that they do bring those capabilities into the Space Force. The very similar model and everything we’ve learned with the Army and the Navy, and what we’re going through on the Reserve side, will be applied to the National Guard as well, if that is what our elected officials decide to do.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Well, thanks, Chief. Unfortunately, we’re out of time.
CMSSF John F. Bentivegna:
Wow, that was fast.
Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.):
Yeah, it was great. But thank you so much for joining us today and for all you’re doing for our nation and our enlisted Guardians and their families. For our audience members, I encourage everyone to join us next month for our next two Warfighters in Action.
We’re going to sit down with the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, General Dave Allvin on June 13th, and Lieutenant General Adrian Spain, the Air Force’s deputy chief of staff for operations on June 18th. To register, scan the QR code on your screen or go to afa.org. Thanks a lot, everybody.
