But I would also add to that list of items the process itself as it relates to their ability to interact with the Pentagon.

I just commend that to you. I would suggest a summit meeting in San Jose about what are the issues and how do we improve this program.

Well, that is exactly the experience of the Air Force and to some extent the Navy of doing R&D while you are building.

I agree with you that it's no way to govern, and we shouldn't be even thinking about a further continuing resolution for the rest of the year.

I recognize the difficulty that many employers face in this area and the potential repercussions for vital industries across the country.

Despite the success of the TAA program, there still is a category of workers in my State who are older workers who are in many ways the forgotten story of this economic recovery.

Eighty percent solutions instead of 100 percent.

Now, has the Army made institutional structural changes to deal with these issues?

The first requirement would be that the requirements be expressed in no more than 10 pages.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Practicality and buildability is part of the requirements process.

I hope that you'll keep in touch with the committee on that project as it moves forward.

But you feel at this point the contract and the development is on track?

I commend--again, we've got to think very creatively about how we fill this shortfall.

Another opportunity--and I hate to raise the word 'joint' because it does not have a very good history in military procurement.

Where did it break down?

So basically what you're saying is if you don't have additional funding over and above what you had for last year, you'd run out of money and that's why you'd have to ground those squadrons.

What about that as an option?