Rep. Rogers Requests GAO to investigate the USSPACECOM Basing Process

Washington D.C. –U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers (AL-03) chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, demanded for the Government Accountability Office (GAO) examine the process of basing to establish the U.S. Space Command (USSPACECOM) permanent headquarters. Chairman Rogers has asked that the GAO examine the process that took place between the conclusion of their report from June 2022 and President Biden’s decision to select from Colorado Springs as the permanent headquarters of USSPACECOM.

In the letter in the letter, Chairman Rogers wrote “National security decision-making of this scale and a significant economic impact require that the process be uniform and repeatable, as well as transparent and thoughtful. Based on the numerous statements of administration officials to the media The decision of President Biden is not the case. The President’s preference for decision-making in accordance with state laws has been widely reported as a significant aspect, but it was not considered in the base requirements.”

Chairman Rogers added, “Long-term, permanent basing decisions must stand up to scrutiny and should not be driven by the preferences of social policy or on the influence of Administration officials. Instead, this procedure should be analytical and focused on clearly defined standards and criteria that are open to scrutiny. A non-transparent process that was implemented as the decision was made to choose USSPACECOM’s headquarters under the current Administration. The public is entitled to an independent examination to determine the reasons why this basing decision ended up being a disaster and didn’t follow clear and repeatable steps that could have engendered confidence in the final base choice for USSPACECOM headquarters.”

The complete text of the letter can be found below:

Dear Comptroller General Dodaro:

I am writing to you today to request that you review your actions by the Department of Defense (DoD) in relation to the basing process used to establish the U.S. Space Command permanent headquarters following the conclusion of your work, which was released publicly in June 2022, as GAO-22-106055. As you may know there have been worries that unsavory interference from the political world played a significant factor in the decision to choose Colorado Springs by President Biden.

Security decisions for national security of this size and the significant economic stakes they represent will require the procedure to be consistent and repeatable, as well as transparent and conscious. Based on the numerous administration officials’ statements to the media and the President’s decision Biden seems to be far from. Preference decision-making by the President in accordance with state laws has been widely made public as a significant aspect, but it was not included in the criteria for determining base.

I respectfully ask GAO to get to the bottom of this potentially partisan process that is to be unstandardized that is repeatable, transparent, and conscious. We need to quickly address the unanswered questions that affect public of the trustworthiness of procedures such as headquarters-based decisions regarding combatant commands.

We require for your report to, at least, answer one of the following:

• What were the requirements that were used in the selection procedure to be used for USSPACECOM’s headquarters?
• Did the requirements change during the process of selection, either prior to the previous GAO work or afterward?

1. • If they did change what was the new factor?
   • What are the differences between them and their original specifications?
   • Who within DoD the leadership supervised these modifications, or was this modifications prompted by other people within the Administration?

In addition, because the report shows that the secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin presented final options to President

• How did the publicly documented process for naming to the secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall as the official in charge of the decision change in the last second?
• Why did Secretary Kendall’s choice not become the final one, as Secretary Kendall had stated publicly that it was his decision?
• Did Secretary Austin take this decision away from Secretary Kendall or was it was removed unilaterally by Secretary Kendall by the White House?
• In which ways did General Dickinson the SPACECOM Commander part of the decision-making process?
• Are there documents, emails or other documents that show how the process of basing was changed and who did it and what decision was made, which GAO can review when it reports on its findings?

Permanent, long-term basing decisions should be able to stand scrutiny and should not be motivated by the preferences of social policy or on the influence of Administration officials. Instead, this process should be a rigorous one and based on clearly stated guidelines and standards that are open to scrutiny. Any other method that is not transparent that was implemented during the end-of-the-line decision to establish the USSPACECOM headquarters under the current Administration. The public is entitled to an independent examination to determine the reasons why this basing decision was a mess and did not adhere to transparent and repeatable procedures that would have earned trust in the final decision on basing in the case of USSPACECOM headquarters.

If you have questions If you have any questions, reach out to for assistance. House Committee on Armed Services. Thank you for paying interest in this issue.

Sincerely,