[Senate Hearing 108-676]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 10, 2004
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10:02 a.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Ted Stevens (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Stevens, Cochran, McConnell, Burns, and
Inouye.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Navy
STATEMENT OF HON. GORDON R. ENGLAND, SECRETARY, UNITED
STATES NAVY
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR TED STEVENS
Senator Stevens. Good morning. This morning, we're pleased
to welcome the Secretary of the Navy, the Chief of Naval
Operations, and the Commandant of the Marine Corps to discuss
the fiscal year 2005 budget request.
Secretary England, we welcome you back after your time away
with the Department of Homeland Security.
Mr. England. Thank you.
Senator Stevens. Admiral Clark, this is your fourth time
before the committee, and we welcome you again. And, General
Hagee, we also welcome you, sir.
We would like to take this opportunity to thank the Navy
and Marine Corps for the extraordinary commitment and
dedication to duty. The ever-increasing demands placed upon the
men and women of the military do not go unnoticed here in
Congress, and we really hope that you'll convey our thanks to
all of the forces under your command. Our forces are deployed
to more locations around the world than ever before, and will
be called upon to return to some familiar places, like Haiti.
We've heard a lot recently about your efforts to reduce manning
and end strength. We've also heard about the new challenges
associated with the joint strike fighter, and are anxious to
hear about your shipbuilding initiatives.
Gentlemen, we look forward to hearing more about these
topics and your budget priorities. I thank you for your
personal visits in the past, and, as always, your full
statements are already a part of the record.
And I turn to my co-chairman, Senator Inouye, for his
remarks.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR DANIEL K. INOUYE
Senator Inouye. I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And,
gentlemen, thank you for being here with us to discuss your
fiscal year 2005 budget request.
The Navy and Marine Corps forces are performing
magnificently, as the chairman has stated, in difficult
environments, from Operations in Iraq to Afghanistan and, most
recently, in Haiti. The operational tempo is high, and forces
are stretched thin. I would like to hear from you today on the
impact that these operations have on the budget, and the effect
on the forces if no supplemental funding is requested this
fiscal year.
I also look forward to discussing how the fiscal year 2005
budget request continues to support the men and women serving
the Department of the Navy while, at the same time, balancing
the modernization of today's forces with the transformation of
tomorrow's fleet.
The Navy and Marine Corps each have a number of significant
investment programs underway. For the Navy, it's the E-2C
Advanced Hawkeye, the next generation of destroyer DD(X) and
carrier CVN 21, the Littoral combat ship and the Virginia class
submarine, to name a few. The Marine Corps is investing heavily
in the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, the Joint Strike
Fighter, and the V-22 Osprey.
This committee knows well, as do each of you, that these
major acquisition programs tend to experience significant cost
and schedule growth as many of the programs I just mentioned
have experienced over the course of their development. Although
the capabilities that these programs will bring to the naval
forces will surpass those of our adversaries, we still have an
obligation to modernize equipment for use in today's conflicts
and to ensure that the sailors, marines, and their families are
taken care of. As you know, this is a difficult balance to
strike. And so I look forward to working with each of you this
year as we review our budget, and your budget, for the fiscal
year 2005, and to hearing your remarks today on how to maintain
the finest naval and marine forces in the world.
And I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much.
Mr. Secretary?
Pardon me Senator Cochran.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR THAD COCHRAN
Senator Cochran. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I just----
Senator Stevens. I apologize. I didn't see you come in,
sir.
Senator Cochran. I'm happy to be here to help you welcome
this distinguished panel before our committee, Secretary
England, Admiral Clark, and General Hagee.
We understand the enormous strain that's been placed on the
Navy and Marine Corps team, with major operations all over the
world. It has already been mentioned by the chairman and the
distinguished Senator from Hawaii that operations are underway
in Iraq, Afghanistan, and in Haiti. You have deployed nine
aircraft carriers and 10 big-deck amphibious ships to these
areas of major operations, and it indicates that this team is
hard at work, and we are hopeful that we can find a way, within
the constraints of the budget that we have to operate under,
that we can provide the funds that you need to continue to
protect those who are deployed and to help ensure that they
carry out their missions successfully. I'm confident that
that's the purpose that we will bring to this process, and we
thank you for being here today to help acquaint us with the
challenges you face and let us know how we can be helpful to
you and to our country.
Thank you.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much, Senator. Again, I
apologize. I didn't see you come in. You were sort of stealthy
here this morning.
Mr. Secretary?
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. GORDON R. ENGLAND
Mr. England. Chairman Stevens, Senator Inouye, members of
the committee, it is a distinct privilege and a great honor to
appear before you again as Secretary of the Navy.
It is great to be back, back with the very best Navy and
Marine Corps in our Nation's history, and particularly to be
back with Admiral Vern Clark and General Mike Hagee. Admiral
Clark and General Hagee are both magnificent military leaders,
and I am distinctly privileged and proud to serve with them.
On behalf of all those great Americans in uniform, I thank
you for ensuring that we are properly resourced. And on behalf
of all our deployed men and women, and especially their
families, I also thank you for your personal visits to our
areas, both in combat and our home bases.
This is, indeed, a critical budget year for the Department
of the Navy. This year, we have established a future course for
our naval forces to quickly respond to and to quickly defeat
future threats. We have been working for the past 3 years to
develop this integrated program, a program where line items are
now linked to provide synergy and complementary capabilities.
The fiscal year 2005 proposal before you is more than just a
budget. This is a naval roadmap for the future, and it should
provide the foundation for many successive administrations.
Another critical aspect of the fiscal year 2005 proposed
budget is our people. People continue to be our most valuable
asset. We are a strong, well-trained, high-motivated and
combat-ready force. Retention is at record levels, and
recruiting continues to be robust. We have the best people, and
their morale is high.
One last comment. A guiding principle in all we do is
improving the effectiveness of our organization to also gain
efficiency. We are good stewards of the taxpayers' money. At
the same time, being a very lean organization makes us more
vulnerable to budget adjustments and modifications.
PREPARED STATEMENT
In summary, the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO), the
Commandant and I are confident that our proposed budget will
dramatically improve our ability to secure America in the
future while protecting our Nation today. And I thank you for
the opportunity to be here today with you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Gordon R. England
value to our nation--the navy/marine corps team
INTRODUCTION
During my last appearance before this Committee in February 2002
and as reported in that statement, the Navy and Marine Corps
contributions in the ``War Against Terrorism'' have been significant
and important in the overall success of U.S. military forces. This
continues to hold true today. Our Navy and Marine Corps Team projects
decisive, persistent, joint power across the globe, in continuing to
prosecute the war on terrorism.
Projecting power and influence from the sea is the enduring and
unique contribution of the Navy and Marine Corps to national security.
Operation IRAQI FREEDOM (OIF) demonstrated the strategic agility and
operational flexibility that forward deployed Naval expeditionary
forces provide. This committee's support has been vital for the Navy
and Marine Corps Team to exploit the access afforded by the seas and to
respond to the full spectrum of contingencies. Congressional support
has led to increased readiness which was proven in OIF, where dispersed
military forces, networked together, fought as a single, highly
coordinated joint team.
Naval warfare will continue its progression to operate in a joint
environment in responding to new threats and to the increased
asymmetric capabilities of our enemies. We will be bold and continue to
develop new capabilities and concepts, and fund them in quantities that
are relevant to tomorrow's emerging threats. We have embraced
transformation. We are addressing the challenge to operationalize our
vision, Naval Power 21, with technological, organizational, and
doctrinal transformation.
The following statement highlights key elements of the fiscal year
2005 President's Budget applicable to the Department of the Navy within
the Balanced Scorecard approach of managing Operational, Institutional,
Force Management and Future Challenges Risks.
fiscal year 2005 budget priorities--underway with naval power 21
The fiscal year 2005 Department of the Navy Budget fulfills our
essential warfighting requirements. We are resourced to fight and win
our Nation's wars and our number one priority, the war against
terrorism, is reflected across each allocation. Additionally, we
continue to invest in future technologies and capabilities that are
part of a broader joint warfighting perspective. The Navy and Marine
Corps are continuously working with other Services to draw on the
capabilities of each Service, to eliminate redundancy in acquisition,
and create higher levels of military effectiveness. A prime example is
our agreement with the Department of the Air Force to merge our two
Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) programs into a single program that
will produce a common family of radios for use aboard our ships,
submarines, and aircraft. The following summarizes the fiscal year 2005
Budget request priorities for the Department of the Navy:
Personnel Salary and Benefits.--Smart, motivated and capable people
are a key element to any successful transformation effort. Our Navy and
Marine Corps are increasingly a technologically advanced maritime force
and we are in competition with the private sector to attract and retain
the best men and women we can find. Accordingly, our budget includes a
3.5 percent basic pay raise for all military personnel. Additionally,
housing allowances have been increased to buy down out-of-pocket
housing expenses for our military personnel. Concurrent with this
commitment to provide an appropriate level of pay and benefits to our
Sailors, Marines, and their families is a responsibility to operate
this Department as efficiently and effectively as possible. While we
want the best people we can get to serve in the Navy and Marine Corps,
we don't want a single person more than we need to properly operate the
force. Job satisfaction comes not only just from compensation, but also
from meaningful service--we owe it to our people to ensure that they
are given duties and equipment appropriate to a volunteer force.
Operations and Maintenance.--The operations and maintenance
accounts are funded with over a $2 billion increase. The present
environment requires Naval forces to be both forward deployed and
capable of surging when called. This account will help develop the
transformational Fleet Response Plan (FRP). This is the means to
institutionalize the capability to maintain a more responsive force
that is ready to surge, more efficient to maintain, and able to
reconstitute rapidly.
Shipbuilding Account.--The Department's shipbuilding plan supports
our transformational vision and increases the number of new
construction ships from seven in fiscal year 2004 to nine in fiscal
year 2005 plus one SSBN Engineered Refueling Overhaul (ERO). Initial
LCS and DD(X) platforms are funded from the RDT&E account.
Additionally, the Navy's fiscal year 2005 spending plan completes the
purchases of the last three DDG-51 Class ships for a total of 62 ships.
Aviation Account.--The Department's fiscal year 2005 Budget request
is structured to maintain the continued aviation superiority of the
Navy and Marine Corps. The Naval aircraft procurement plan emphasizes
replacing costly stand-alone legacy platforms with more efficient and
capable integrated systems. The number of aircraft requested increases
from 99 in fiscal year 2004 to 104 in fiscal year 2005 which includes
five VXX helicopters. The budget continues to maximize the return on
procurement dollars, primarily through the use of multi-year
procurement (MYP) for the F/A-18E/F, the E-2C, the MH-60S and the KC-
130J programs. Development funding is provided for Joint Strike Fighter
(JSF), MV-22, AH-1Z/UH-1Y, CH-53X, EA-18G and the Multi-mission
Maritime Aircraft (MMA). The budget reflects an amended acquisition
strategy for the V-22 to fund interoperability issues and cost
reduction initiatives.
Munitions Account.--During OEF and OIF, the Department expended
less precision ordnance than projected. In this environment, the
precision munitions purchases for fiscal year 2005 have been decreased
for JDAMs and LGBs. This decrease in procurement provides no increased
risk to the DON but merely reflects the lower utilization rates of
expended ordnance.
RDT&E Account.--An increase of $1.4 billion reflects our commitment
to future transformational capabilities and technology insertion for
major platforms including DD(X), LCS, CVN-21, V-22, Joint Strike
Fighter (JSF), Advanced Hawkeye (AHE), and MMA. As demonstrated in
recent operations, our Naval forces have been able to project
overwhelming combat power because they are technologically superior. We
continue to sustain a robust RDT&E effort as we transform the Navy and
Marine Corps to the next generation of combat systems.
Effectiveness and Efficiency.--A guiding principle in all we do is
improving effectiveness to gain efficiency. The very best organizations
are the most efficient organizations. If you are very efficient, you
incorporate technology more quickly, you can develop new systems and
capabilities, and you can bring them on line faster. Underlying all of
the previous accounts and our execution of them is a continuing and
concerted focus to achieve the most efficient organization. The Fleet
Response Plan, TacAir Integration, and establishment of the Commander
Naval Installations are a few of our initiatives to improve
effectiveness within the Department.
Our objective for the fiscal year 2005 Budget request is to move
forward with Naval Power 21. This budget builds upon the foundation
laid in the fiscal year 2004 program and reaffirms our commitment to
remain globally engaged today while developing future technology to
ensure our future military superiority. We are also continuing to
emphasize the Department's commitment in the areas of combat
capability, people, technology insertion and improved business
practices. With our fiscal year 2005 Budget request we are committed to
executing this vision.
CY 2003 OPERATIONAL SUCCESSES (A NATION AT WAR)
The extraordinary capability of our joint forces to project power
around the world in support of vital national objectives was
demonstrated over the last year. The maritime contribution to our
success in the defeat of Saddam Hussein's Baathist forces, as well as
in support of other joint engagements in the Global War on Terrorism,
was significant. The rapid deployment and the warfighting capability of
your Naval force in the liberation of Iraq provided an example of the
importance of readiness and the responsive capabilities to support our
Nation's objectives in an era of unpredictability and uncertainty. The
demonstrated importance of our multi-dimensional Naval dominance, our
expeditionary nature, our ability to deal with complex challenges, and
adaptability of our forces are illustrative of the high level of return
on investment of your Naval force.
The accomplishments of this past year tell the Naval forces
readiness story and its return on investment. The ships, aircraft,
weapon systems, and readiness you funded provided our Sailors and
Marines the tools necessary to remain the premiere maritime and
expeditionary combat ready force. In preparing for and conducting
operations in the Iraq Theater, speed of expeditionary operations and
sustainment were important military competencies. Naval forces applied
dominant, persistent, decisive and lethal offensive power in support of
coalition warfighting objectives. The speed, agility, flexibility and
persistence of Naval combat capability helped end a regime of terror
and liberate a people during OIF.
The past year has been one of significant accomplishment. Our men
and women operating in the air, on and under the sea, and on the ground
are at the leading edge in the Global War on Terrorism. As in OEF, we
once again have demonstrated Naval forces' unique value in contributing
to the security of our Nation and our friends and allies.
--During OIF, more than 50 percent of our force was forward deployed.
The deployment of seven Carrier Strike Groups (CSGs) and eight
large deck amphibious ships proved our ability to be both a
surge and a rotational force demonstrating our flexibility and
responsiveness.
--Navy and Marine Corps aircraft flew more than 8,000 sorties and
delivered nearly 9,000 precision-guided munitions.
--Over 800 Tomahawk cruise missiles were fired from 35 coalition
ships, one-third of which were launched from submarines. The
highest number of TLAM's launched in one day occurred on March
21, 2003--nearly 400 Tomahawks.
--Navy Special Forces, MCM, EOD and coalition counterparts cleared
more than 900 square miles of water, ensuring the safe passage
of critical humanitarian relief supplies to the Iraqi people.
--Marines from the I Marine Expeditionary Force (I MEF), supported by
Sea Basing concepts, made one of the swiftest combat advances
in history. They fought 10 major engagements, destroying nine
Iraqi divisions in the 450 mile advance into Iraq.
--Eleven Maritime Prepositioned Force (MPF) ships provided equipment
and sustainment for over 34,000 Marines and Sailors and
fourteen amphibious ships embarked and delivered another 12,000
Marines and Sailors and their equipment.
Since the end of major combat operations, Naval forces have been
instrumental in supporting the coalition's goals of security,
prosperity and democracy in Iraq. Coalition maritime forces have
diligently supported the United Nations Security Council Resolution
1483. They have queried over 6,000 vessels, boarded close to 3,500 and
diverted approximately 430. These forces have confiscated and returned
to the Iraqi people approximately 60,000 barrels of fuel. Additionally,
seaward protection of the Al Basara Oil Terminal (ABOT) is enabling the
generation of critically needed oil revenue. Since re-opening, the ABOT
has pumped 261,500,000 barrels of oil valued at over $7.5 billion.
Navy Seabees and Marine Engineers, as the I MEF Engineer Group,
undertook construction initiatives that built and repaired major
roadways and bridges, and completed major utility restoration projects.
In all, 150 projects valued at $7.1 million were completed.
Naval Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) forces are working with
Army counterparts in support of the coalition forces and Iraqi Police
and are collecting over 2,000 pounds of unexploded ordnance per week.
NAVY AND MARINE CORPS TODAY (CURRENT READINESS)
Today's Naval forces exist to control the seas, assure access, and
project power beyond the sea to influence events and advance American
interests. Navy and Marine Corps forces continue to lead the way to
secure the peace by responding with speed, agility, and flexibility.
The value of Naval forces continues to be demonstrated through the
projection of decisive, persistent, joint power across the globe. The
investment in training, maintenance, parts, ordnance, flying hours,
steaming days, and combat ready days coupled with our forward presence
and our ability to surge has positioned Naval forces as the most
effective and efficient military force.
Congress' investment in readiness over the past several years has
paid large dividends for Naval forces during OIF. With combat forces
operating in two fronts in the GWOT our readiness investments have
resulted in enhanced Naval forces ready to strike on a moment's notice,
anywhere, anytime. Our success in deploying 9 out of 12 aircraft
carriers and 10 out of 12 big deck amphibious ships to major combat
areas of operation in demanding environments is attributable to the
continued improvements in current readiness.
The Department is in the process of re-deploying Navy and Marine
forces in preparation for Operation IRAQI FREEDOM II. Navy and Marine
Forces will deploy in two seven-month rotations with the first
beginning this month. This initial ground rotation will include about
25,000 Marines, 3,500 Marine Reservists, over 5,000 active duty Navy
and 800 Naval Reservists.
Since the return of our forces from OIF we have invested heavily in
constituting the Navy and Marine Corps Team for the next fight.
Continued successful programmed investment will ensure we have the most
capable forces to face the unique challenges ahead. The fiscal year
2005 Budget continues a broad range of modernization and readiness
initiatives for Naval forces.
Acquisition Programs
The Fleet and Marine forces continue to take delivery of the most
sophisticated weapon systems in the world. In 2003, the Navy launched
the first of two new classes of ships, USS VIRGINIA (SSN 774) and USS
SAN ANTONIO (LPD 17), commissioned the aircraft carrier USS RONALD
REAGAN (CVN 76), and continued timely delivery of the ARLEIGH BURKE
Class guided missile destroyers and F/A-18 E/F Super Hornets.
We are continuing to build on previous budgets to ensure we equip
and train our forces to help us continue to meet the challenges of the
future. What the DON budget will buy to advance our vision in Naval
Power 21:
Shipbuilding.--The fiscal year 2005 to fiscal year 2009
shipbuilding rate of 9.6 battle force ships per year is up from 8.4
battle force ships per year for the same period in fiscal year 2004.
The fiscal year 2005 Budget request closes the procurement gap and with
the exception of a slight reduction in fiscal year 2006, provides an
upward trend through the FYDP, procuring 17 battle force ships by
fiscal year 2009. The fiscal year 2005 to fiscal year 2009 investment
is an average of $13 billion per year in new construction. The fiscal
year 2005 to fiscal year 2009 plan also procures three Maritime Pre-
positioned Force (Future) (MPF(F)) ships and a MPF(F) aviation variant.
While our build rate drops to six in fiscal year 2006, this is a
reflection of a shift to the next generation surface combatants and sea
basing capabilities.
The Navy has nine new ships and one SSBN refueling requested in the
fiscal year 2005 budget, as well as substantial shipyard/conversion
work. This investment includes:
--3 DDG's ($3.4 billion)
--1 VIRGINIA Class submarine SSN-774 ($2.5 billion)
--1 LPD-17 ($967 million)
--2 T-AKE ($768 million)
--1 DD(X) ($221 million) (RDT&E funded)
--1 Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) ($108 million) (RDT&E funded)
--1 SSBN conversion/refueling ($334 million).
Fiscal year 2005 marks the final year of DDG 51 procurement,
bringing to closure a 10-ship fiscal year 2002 to fiscal year 2005 MYP
contract awarded in fiscal year 2002. The Navy will move to the DD(X)
and LCS hulls as quickly as possible. In addition to vitally needed new
capability, these ships will increase future shipbuilding rates.
Investment in these platforms will also help maintain critical
industrial bases.
The Department is modernizing its existing submarine with the
latest technology while, at the same time, continuing to replace aging
fast attack submarines with the new VIRGINIA Class submarine. The
VIRGINIA Class design is complete and the lead ship (SSN 774), will
commission on schedule. Fiscal year 2004 funded the first of five
VIRGINIA Class submarines under a MYP contract. The second submarine of
the MYP contract is funded in fiscal year 2005. Consistent with
Congressional approval of five year-five ship MYP authority (fiscal
year 2004 to fiscal year 2008) for SSN 774, the Navy is maintaining one
submarine per year through fiscal year 2008.
The DON accelerated one LPD from fiscal year 2006 to fiscal year
2005 leveraging fiscal year 2004 advanced procurement resources
provided by Congress. The lead ship detail design has been completed
and lead ship construction is over 80 percent complete with a
successful launch in July 2003. Production effort is focused on a
November delivery. The LPD 17 Class ship represents our commitment to a
modernized expeditionary fleet.
The fiscal year 2005 Budget request also provides for procurement
of two auxiliary cargo and ammunition ships (T-AKEs) in the National
Defense Sealift Fund. These will be the seventh and eighth ships of the
class. Lastly, the fiscal year 2005 Budget request accelerates the lead
MPF(F) from fiscal year 2008 to fiscal year 2007 to reflect an emphasis
on sea basing capabilities.
DD(X) is a centerpiece to the transformational 21st Century Navy
and will play a key role in the Naval Power 21 strategic concept. This
advanced warship will provide credible forward Naval presence while
operating independently or as an integral part of Naval expeditionary
forces. The DD(X) lead ship design and initial construction contract
will be awarded in fiscal year 2005.
Conversion and Modernization.--The fiscal year 2005 Budget request
proposes advanced procurement funds for the USS CARL VINSON (CVN 70)
Refueling Complex Overhaul (RCOH), now scheduled to begin in fiscal
year 2006. CVN 70 has sufficient reactor fuel for one additional surge
deployment.
Funding for the TICONDEROGA Class cruiser modernization effort
began in fiscal year 2004 and continues in fiscal year 2005. The
cruiser modernization effort will substantially increase the service
life and capability of CG 47 Class ships. The conversion will reduce
combat system and computer maintenance costs, replace obsolete combat
systems, and extend mission relevance service life. Fiscal year 2005
will fund advanced procurement items for the first cruiser
modernization availability in fiscal year 2006.
Funding is included in fiscal year 2005 to complete the conversion
of the third and the overhaul of the fourth hull of four OHIO Class
SSBNs to SSGNs. The SSGN conversion provides a covert conventional
strike platform capable of carrying up to 154 Tomahawk missiles. The
fiscal year 2006 Budget request will complete the conversion of the
last SSGN. All four of these transformed platforms will be operational
by CY 2007.
Aircraft Production.--Consistent with the fiscal year 2004 program,
the fiscal year 2005 Budget request reflects continued emphasis on re-
capitalizing our aging aircraft. Our focused efforts to aggressively
``shore up'' operational readiness by providing requisite funding for
our Flying Hour Program, Ship Depot Maintenance, Ship Operations, and
Sustainment, Re-capitalization and Modernization accounts continue.
While we continue to make substantial investments in readiness accounts
and working capital accounts, we identified the resources to procure
104 aircraft in fiscal year 2005. The Department's aircraft procurement
plan emphasizes replacing costly legacy platforms with more efficient
and capable integrated systems. This has resulted in significant
investments in transformational aircraft and program investments across
the spectrum of aviation capabilities. Such valuable investments in
more capable aircraft have allowed a reduction of 40 aircraft from
fiscal year 2005 to fiscal year 2009.
During the past year, we continued to enjoy the fruits of our
aviation investments with the successful first deployment and
operational employment of the F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet in support of
OIF. Highly praised for tactical capability and platform reliability,
the F/A-18 E/F program has been funded to provide a transformational
radar, helmet mounted sight, advanced targeting pod and integrated
weapons system improvements. Additionally, we recently awarded a second
MYP contract that includes the EA-18G airframe to replace the Navy's
aging EA-6B beginning in fiscal year 2009.
All helicopter missions continue to be consolidated into the MH-60R
and MH-60S airframes. These helicopter platforms are the cornerstone of
Navy helicopter concept of operations designed to support the CSG and
ESG in various mission areas.
The Department significantly increases the funding requested for
MMA. MMA will provide the Navy with strategic blue water and littoral
capability by re-capitalizing the P-3 Maritime Patrol Aircraft broad
area anti-submarine, anti-surface, maritime and littoral Intelligence,
Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) capability.
Progress continues towards delivering a high-quality aircraft to
the Marines and Special Forces including increasing capability and
interoperability of the aircraft, investing to reduce production costs,
and maximizing production efficiency. Since the resumption of V-22
flight-testing, in May 2002, the V-22 is satisfying the threshold
levels for all its key performance parameters and reliability and
maintainability measures. V-22 test pilots have recorded more than
1,100 flight hours since that time. The V-22 program will continue Low
Rate Initial Production (LRIP) until the Milestone III decision
expected late CY 2005.
The Department will continue to procure the AH-1Z/UH-1Y. These
aircraft meet the Marine Corps' attack and utility helicopter
requirements by providing increased aircraft agility, airspeed, range,
and mission payload. They provide numerous capability improvements for
the Marine Corps, including increased payload, range and time on
station, improved sensors and lethality, and 85 percent component
commonality. The KC-130J MYP is funded and supported in this budget.
The advantages include an all digital cockpit that reduce aircrew
manning requirements, a new propulsion system that provides more cargo
capability, and increased fuel delivery.
Mine Warfare Programs.--In keeping with the Department's goal to
achieve an organic mine warfare capability in 2005, the budget request
supports the development and procurement of five organic airborne
systems integrated into the MH-60S helicopter: the AQS-20A Mine-hunting
System, the Airborne Laser Mine Detection System (ALMDS), the Airborne
Mine Neutralization System (AMNS), the Rapid Airborne Mine Clearance
System (RAMICS), and the Organic Airborne and Surface Influence Sweep
(OASIS) system. The fiscal year 2005 Budget request also supports the
development and procurement of the Remote Minehunting System (RMS)
integrated into DDG-51 hulls 91-96, and the Long-term Mine
Reconnaissance System (LMRS) integrated into SSN-688. The ALMDS, AQS-
20A, and RMS will reach an initial operating capability in fiscal year
2005. The budget request supports the transition of assault breaching
technologies into acquisition, which will provide a capability to
detect, avoid, and defeat mines and obstacles in the surf and craft
landing zones. In fiscal year 2005, we will continue with our Surface
Mine Countermeasures (MCM) mid-life upgrade plan. We have initiated a
product improvement program for the engines of the MCM-1 AVENGER Class
mine countermeasure ships to enhance their reliability and
availability. We are upgrading our minesweeping capability with new
acoustic generators and magnetic sweep cables, and have programmed
resources to replace our maintenance-intensive mine neutralization
system (AN/SLQ-48) with an expendable mine neutralization system.
Munitions.--The Standard Missile (SM) program replaces ineffective,
obsolete inventories with the procurement of more capable SM-2 Block
IIIB missiles. The Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) program continues
procurement of the improved guided missile launching system and the
upgraded Block I missile, providing an enhanced guidance capability
along with a helicopter, air and surface mode. In addition to SM and
RAM, the fiscal year 2005 Budget request provides funding to continue
production of the Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) and will support
the first Full Rate Production (FRP) contract award of 82 United States
and 288 international missiles. We have committed to replenish our
precision munitions inventories and to do so, we will utilize a five-
year MYP to maximize the quantity of Tomahawk missiles procured.
Marine Corps Expeditionary Capability.--The Expeditionary Fighting
Vehicle (EFV), formerly the Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle (AAAV),
will provide surface assault elements the requisite operational and
tactical mobility to exploit opportunities in support of joint
operations. The EFV will be capable of carrying a reinforced Marine
rifle squad at speeds in excess of 20 nautical miles per hour from over
the horizon in sea state three. Once ashore, the EFV will provide
Marine maneuver units with a world-class armored personnel carrier
designed to meet the threats of the future. Production representative
vehicle procurement occurred in fiscal year 2003 and will deliver in
fiscal year 2005. IOC will be released in fiscal year 2008 and FOC in
2018.
Also critical to Marine Corps transformation efforts is the Joint
Lightweight 155 mm Howitzer (LW-155). This system will enter FRP in
fiscal year 2005, and our budget includes a request for a Joint Marine
Corps--Army MYP. Another transformational component of the fiscal year
2005 Budget, the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS), will
continue LRIP delivery.
Alignment
The DON is transforming to dramatically reduce operating and
support costs. Changes will embrace efficiency and result in increased
effectiveness and a higher readiness standard in concert with the
overarching goals of the President's Management Agenda. We have made
several fleet and shore organizational changes that have shown great
potential in maximizing the way forces can be employed and supported.
Fleet Response Plan (FRP).--FRP provides a model for a new joint
presence concept that will transform how the U.S. military is employed.
It refines maintenance, training, and readiness processes in order to
increase the number of combat ready ships and aircraft throughout the
Fleet. FRP ensures six employable Carrier Strike Groups (CSGs) always
are ready to respond to a crisis, plus two additional CSGs capable of
deploying to the fight within 90 days of notification (``6+2''). With
the implementation of FRP, half of the Fleet either could be deployed
or postured to surge, able to arrive swiftly with the overpowering
combat power needed either to deter or defeat the hostile intentions of
an adversary, or to win decisively in combat against a significant
enemy.
TacAir Integration.--The Navy and Marine Corps Team embarked on a
Tactical Aircraft Integration plan that will enhance our core combat
capabilities and provide a more potent, cohesive, and affordable
fighting force. The culmination of a long-term effort to an increased
level of readiness from the resources given to us, TacAir integration
seeks to generate a greater combat capability from Naval TacAir.
Through TacAir integration, the Department will reduce the number of
tactical aircraft (JSF and F/A-18) from 1,637 to 1,140 aircraft by
2021. This integration will provide increased combat capability forward
and is in concert with enhanced sea basing concepts. A cornerstone of
this plan is the global sourcing of the Department's TacAir assets and
the funding and maintenance of legacy aircraft at the highest level of
readiness until they are replaced by the JSF and the Super Hornet (F/A-
18 E/F).
Training Resource Strategy (TRS).--TRS was developed to provide
high quality training to our deploying combat forces. The training of
our high technology force in modern warfare has shifted to a network of
existing ranges and installations stateside. Fully implemented, TRS has
resulted in more training options, reduced pre-deployment training
transit time, and has increased productive training days. The USS
ENTERPRISE was the first CSG to deploy under the TRS, utilizing six
training ranges, each unique to the successful completion of her
qualification. TRS supports the FRP and will quickly respond to surge
requirements by delivering and bringing to bear a capable fighting
force.
Current and future readiness requirements underscore the continued
need for realistic training and maximized use of training and testing
ranges. While we continue to find ways to enhance readiness through
increased use of information technology and simulation, live training
on actual ranges and training areas remains critical during the
essential phases of the training cycle. Maintaining training realism
and access to these ranges has been of keen concern to our Naval
forces. We continue to balance the need to maintain a ready and capable
force with the need to be sensitive to environmental and encroachment
issues.
For the last two years, Congress has addressed critical Navy needs
regarding encroachment. Readiness-specific changes to the Marine Mammal
Protection Act (MMPA), Endangered Species Act, and Migratory Bird
Treaty Act will help the Navy meet training and operational needs. The
Navy and Marine Corps has and will continue to demonstrate leadership
in both its military readiness role and as an environmental steward of
the oceans we sail and the lands we train upon. We are pursuing
opportunities for acquiring land buffers adjacent to our training
lands. We are implementing the Integrated Natural Resources Management
Plans prepared under the Sikes Act to address endangered species
concerns in lieu of designating critical habitats. We will continue
operational actions to minimize harm to marine mammals, as we continue
investments in research into marine mammal biology and behaviors. The
Marine Mammal Protection Act is due for reauthorization in this
legislative cycle. To maintain our military readiness, your support is
necessary to retain the proper balance between environmental protection
and military readiness during the reauthorization debate.
Carrier Strike Group (CSG)/Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG).--CSG
alignment is complete and the first Pacific Fleet Expeditionary Strike
Group (ESG-1), centered on the USS PELELIU Amphibious Ready Group and
the embarked Marines of the 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit (Special
Operations Capable), is completing an eight month deployment. The Navy
deployed an Atlantic Fleet ESG, the USS WASP Amphibious Ready Group,
last month.
The ESG adds to the ARG/MEU, a robust strike, anti-air, anti-
surface, and anti-subsurface capability of a cruiser, destroyer,
frigate and attack submarine and for the first time, the Advanced
Swimmer Delivery System (ASDS). These combined capabilities give the
Combatant Commander a wider variety of options and enables independent
operations in more dynamic environments.
Vieques/NSRR closure.--The former training ranges on Vieques have
been closed and the property has been transferred to the Department of
the Interior (DOI), Fish and Wildlife Service. We have active clean-up
and range clearance programs underway at disposal sites on both East
and West parcels. We are working with the appropriate agencies to
negotiate a Federal Facilities Agreement governing clean-up activities.
We are refining costs to complete clean-up estimates for range areas
and resolve litigation issues filed by the residents of Vieques. We
will close Naval Station Roosevelt Roads by March 31, as directed by
the Fiscal Year 2004 Defense Appropriations Act. Naval Activity Puerto
Rico will serve as the caretaker organization following operational
closure. Puerto Rico has established a Local Redevelopment Authority,
and we will proceed quickly to property disposal.
Commander Navy Installations Command (CNI).--We have aligned all
Navy shore installations under a single command that will allow us to
make better decisions about where to invest limited funds. By
consolidating all base operations worldwide and implementing common
support practices the Navy expects to save a substantial amount of
money over the next six years.
Communications
FORCEnet will provide the overarching framework and standard
communication mechanism for future combat systems. Navy Open
Architecture, in conjunction with the FORCEnet standards, will provide
a common open architecture for warfare systems aboard surface,
subsurface and selected airborne platforms such as the E-2C Advanced
Hawkeye. A critical subset application already being procured is the
Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC), which will be installed on 38
ships and 4 squadrons (16 aircraft) by fiscal year 2006. CEC includes
robust data communication capability among cooperating units in support
of sensor netting. In the future, CEC will also include a Joint Track
Manager to create a single integrated air picture of sufficient quality
to support fire control application for each combat control system.
Navy Marine Corps Internet (NMCI) is operational and providing
commercial IT services for more than 300,000 DON employees and two
Combatant Commanders. To date, we have ordered 330,000 of the expected
345,000 fiscal year 2004 seats. Implementing NMCI has enabled us to
increase the security posture of our networks and has given
unprecedented visibility into IT costs. As we roll out NMCI we are
doing away with the over 1,000 separate networks that the Navy used to
run. We have reduced the number of legacy applications in the Navy's
inventory from 67,000 to about 31,000 and begun further efforts to
reduce this number to around 7,000--an almost 90 percent reduction. As
we proceed with NMCI, we anticipate other opportunities for progress in
areas such as enterprise hosting, software release management, IT
resource analysis and technology insertion.
We have designed the NMCI Operational Evaluation to provide
critical information necessary to determine how well NMCI is supporting
mission of the user and to judge how well service level agreement
metrics measure the service. As part of the spiral development process,
NMCI worked with the testing community to segment the testing effort
into a local evaluation of Network Services and a higher-level
assessment of other Enterprise Services. Testing was completed December
15, 2003; the Final Report is due in April.
NAVY AND MARINE CORPS IN TRANSFORMATION (FUTURE READINESS)
The Chief of Naval Operations and Commandant of the Marine Corps
consider the culture of transformation integral to the development of
future combat capabilities. Innovative capabilities will result in
profound increases in military power, maintaining the Navy and Marine
Corps Team as the preeminent global Naval power. We are now at the
point of delivering on many of our transformational goals.
We have embraced a vision in how Naval forces will contribute to
joint warfighting in the future. This vision can only be implemented
with the support of Congress. This section describes the principal
components of Naval Vision 21.
Acquisition Programs
The fiscal year 2005 Budget request supports continued funding for
accelerated development of several critical technologies into the CVN
21 lead ship. This transformational 21st Century ship, the future
centerpiece of the Navy Carrier Strike Group, will bring many
significant changes to the Fleet. These changes include a new
electrical power generation and distribution system, the electro-
magnetic aircraft launching system, a new enlarged flight deck, weapons
and material handling improvements, and a crew reduction of at least
800. Construction of the CVN 21 remains on track to start in fiscal
year 2007.
Critical components of Sea Power 21 are the DD(X) and LCS. These
ships, designed from the keel up to be part of a netted force, are the
centerpieces of the 21st Century surface combatant family of ships.
DD(X) will be a multi-mission combatant tailored for land attack. LCS
is envisioned to be a fast, agile, relatively small and affordable
combatant capable of operating against anti-access, asymmetric threats
in the littorals. The FYDP includes $2.76 billion to develop and
procure modular mission packages to support three primary missions of
mine countermeasures, anti-submarine warfare, and anti-terrorism and
force protection. Detail design and construction of the first LCS is
planned to begin in fiscal year 2005.
The V-22 Osprey, a joint acquisition program, remains a top
aviation acquisition priority. The V-22's increased capabilities of
range, speed, payload and survivability will generate truly
transformational tactical and operational opportunities. With the
Osprey, Naval forces operating from the sea base will be able to take
the best of long-range maneuver and strategic agility, and join it with
the best of the sustainable forcible-entry capability. LRIP will
continue until the Milestone III decision is made late CY 2005. We
expect to move from LRIP to FRP in CY 2006.
Another important joint program with the Air Force, the JSF has
just completed the second year of a 10-11 year development program. The
program is working to translate concept designs to produce three
variants. This is a complex process requiring more initial development
than we predicted. JSF development is experiencing typical challenges
that affect System Development and Demonstration (SDD) program schedule
and cost. LRIP was deferred and research and development increased to
cover SDD challenges. The current issues are solvable within the normal
process of design fluctuation, and have taken prudent steps necessary
to meet these challenges.
The plan to re-capitalize the P-3 Maritime Patrol Aircraft with the
MMA was further refined this past year in collaboration with the Broad
Area Maritime Surveillance-Unmanned Aerial Vehicle or BAMS-UAV program.
With a MMA IOC of fiscal year 2013, we also developed a robust
sustainment plan for the current P-3 that includes special structural
inspections and kits that extend the platform service life by a minimum
of 5,000 hours. Additionally, the Department has decided to join the
Army's Aerial Common Sensor (ACS) program as the replacement platform
for the aging EP-3.
In order to maintain Electronic Warfare (EW) superiority, the
Department is pursuing both upgrades in current Airborne Electronic
Attack (AEA) capability as well as a follow-on AEA aircraft to replace
the aging EA-6B. The Navy has selected the EA-18G as its follow-on AEA
aircraft and will begin to replace Navy EA-6Bs in fiscal year 2009.
Continuing an emphasis on transformational systems, the Department
has budgeted R&D funding through the FYDP for several aviation
programs. The Advanced Hawkeye (previously known as E-2 Radar
Modernization Program (RMP)) is funded through the FYDP with the first
production aircraft in fiscal year 2009. A fully automated digital
engine control and improved generators have been incorporated into the
aircraft to improve performance and reliability. Additionally, the
Department has included funding to support procurement of required
capabilities in the Fleet, such as Advanced Targeting Forward Looking
Infra-Red and the Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing Systems.
The fiscal year 2005 Budget continues to demonstrate the
Department's commitment to developing, acquiring and fielding
transformational UAV technologies for Intelligence, Surveillance and
Reconnaissance and tactical missions. The budget includes funding for a
second Joint Unmanned Combat Air System (J-UCAS) demonstrator and
continues development of the BAMS. The Navy's Unmanned Combat Air
Vehicle (UCAV-N) is incorporated into J-UCAS under a DOD joint program
office.
Helicopters.--The fiscal year 2005 Budget request includes an
incremental approach to developing a replacement for the current aging
Presidential helicopter. The Presidential Helicopter Replacement
Aircraft (VXX) will enhance performance, survivability, communications,
navigation and executive accommodations inherent in the existing fleet
of Presidential airlift helicopters.
Ballistic Missile Defense.--The fielding of a National Ballistic
Missile Defense capability is critical to protecting the U.S. homeland
against the evolving ballistic missile threat. As part of the
President's Directive to accelerate the fielding of a BMD Initial
Defensive Operations capability by September 2004, the Navy will
deploy, on a continuous basis, a DDG to serve as a Long-Range
Surveillance and Tracking (LRS&T) platform. Additionally, Aegis
Ballistic Missile Defense (ABMD) continues its development and testing
of the SM-3 missile in order to support deployment of a sea-based mid-
course engagement capability by December 2005. Since November 2002,
ABMD had two of three successful intercepts with the SM-3 Block
missile. The Navy is also evaluating the benefits associated with
developing a Sea-based Terminal Missile Defense capability. A viable
regional and terminal sea based ballistic missile defense system is
important to ensure the safety of U.S. forces and the flow of U.S.
forces through foreign ports and air fields when required.
FORCEnet/Navy Open Architecture/Space/C\4\I.--FORCEnet is the
operational construct and architectural framework for Naval warfare in
the Information Age which integrates warriors, sensors, networks,
command and control, platforms and weapons into a networked,
distributed combat force, scalable across the spectrum of conflict from
seabed to space and sea to land. FORCEnet is the core of Sea Power 21
and Naval Transformation, and is the USN/USMC vehicle to make Network
Centric Warfare an operational reality. It is being implemented in
coordination with transformation initiatives in the Army, Air Force,
and Coast Guard--enhancing efficiency, joint interoperability, and
warfighting effectiveness. DD(X), LCS, CVN-21, SSGN, VIRGINIA Class
SSN's, SAN ANTONIO Class LPD's, and MMA are examples of platforms that
are being designed from inception to perform in the netted environment
of the future. Systems being procured and produced under the FORCEnet
concept are CEC, Naval Fires Network (NFN) and Airborne/Maritime/Fixed
(AMF) Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS).
The Navy is engineering a single open architecture for all warfare
systems called Navy Open Architecture. Future systems will be designed
to this architecture while legacy systems will be migrated to that
single architecture where it is operationally and fiscally feasible.
This integrates the Command and Control and Combat systems information
flow using open specifications and standards and open architecture
constructs, to support FORCEnet and other global information networks.
Further, this significantly reduces the development and maintenance
costs of computer programs. The Navy and its Joint Service partners
continue to jointly engineer the Joint Track Manager and plan to
implement it into Navy Open Architecture as the Open Architecture Track
Manager. This joint focused application will be populated in all Naval
warfare systems that conform to the single OA warfare system
architecture.
The Navy and Marine Corps continues to pursue the maximum use of
space to enhance our operational capabilities. We look to leverage
existing systems and rapidly adapt emerging technology. For example,
the Navy has long been the leader in ultrahigh frequency (UHF)
satellite communications (SATCOM). The Navy is the executive agent for
the next generation UHF SATCOM system. This program, the Mobile Users
Objective System, will be the system used by all DOD components for
their UHF communications needs.
Sea Basing and Strategic Sealift.--Sea Basing is a transformational
operating concept for projecting and sustaining Naval power and a joint
force, which assures joint access by leveraging the operational
maneuver of sovereign, distributed, and networked forces operating
globally from the sea.
The Sea Basing concept has been endorsed by the other military
services and its importance was confirmed when DOD announced a Joint
Sea Basing Requirements Office will soon be established. Central to the
staying power of Naval forces will be the Maritime Pre-positioned
Force-Future MPF(F). The fiscal year 2005 Budget accelerates the lead
MPF(F) from fiscal year 2008 to fiscal year 2007 to reflect an emphasis
on Sea Basing capabilities.
Infrastructure
Prior Rounds of Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC).--The
Department of the Navy completed the closure and realignment of
activities from the 1988, 1991, 1993 and 1995 rounds of BRAC. All that
remains is to complete the environmental cleanup and property disposal
on all or portions of 23 of the original 91 bases. We have had
significant successes on both fronts. We are successfully using
property sales as a means to expedite the disposal process as well as
recover the value of the property for taxpayers. We sold 235 acres last
year at the former Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin, California on the
GSA internet web site for a net $204 million. We sold 22 acres at the
former Naval Air Facility Key West, Florida in January 2004 for $15
million. The City of Long Beach, California opted to pre-pay its
remaining balance on a promissory note, and gave us $11 million to
conclude its purchase of the former Naval Hospital Long Beach,
California. We are applying all funds to accelerate cleanup at
remaining prior BRAC locations. More property sales are planned that
will be used to finance remaining prior BRAC cleanup actions. Of the
original 161,000 acres planned for disposal from all four prior BRAC
rounds, we expect to have less than seven percent (or about 11,000
acres) still to dispose by the end of this fiscal year.
BRAC 2005.--The Fiscal Year 2002 Defense Authorization Act
authorized another round of BRAC in 2005. We will scrupulously follow
the process laid out in the law. We will treat each base equally and
fairly, whether considered for closure or realignment in the past or
not. In no event will we make any recommendations concerning any
closures or realignment of our bases until all the data has been
collected, certified and carefully analyzed within the overall BRAC
2005 statutory framework.
BRAC 2005 gives us the opportunity to transform our infrastructure
consistent with the significant changes that are, and will be,
happening with the transformation of our force structure. The Secretary
of Defense is leading a process to allow the military departments and
defense components to closely examine joint use opportunities. Military
operations in Afghanistan and Iraq demonstrated the force multiplier
benefits of joint operations. We will apply those approaches to our
shore infrastructure. We will look beyond the traditional stovepipes of
Navy bases and Marine Corps bases in BRAC 2005 and take a joint
approach matching military requirements against capacity and
capabilities across the Department of Defense.
The added benefit is the opportunity to eliminate excess capacity
and seek greater efficiencies in our shore infrastructure. Continuing
to operate and maintain facilities we no longer need diverts precious
resources from our primary mission. Resources freed up as a result of
this process will be used to re-capitalize our ships, aircraft,
equipment and installations for the future.
Better Business Practices.--The DON has implemented several
continuous improvement initiatives consistent with the goals of the
President's Management Agenda that enable realignment of resources in
order to re-capitalize.
Specific initiatives include: converging our Enterprise Resource
Planning (ERP) pilots into an end-to-end operating system;
incorporating proven world class efficiency methodologies such as Six
Sigma and Lean concepts into our day-to-day operations; and
implementing additional Multi-Ship/Multi-Option (MSMO) repair contracts
and Performance Based Logistics (PBL) agreements. Of note, Lean
efficiency events that concentrate on increasing velocity and
productivity in our Aviation Intermediate Maintenance Departments
(AIMD) were initiated on USS GEORGE WASHINGTON (CVN 73) and USS HARRY
TRUMAN (CVN 75). The outcome of these events will allow us to improve
our afloat AIMD processes and influence our future manning requirements
on CVN 21 Class carriers. These are the first Lean events conducted on
Navy warships.
These continuous improvement initiatives enable us to increase our
combat capabilities with the expectation that we become more efficient,
agile, flexible and reliable at a reduced cost of doing business.
OUR TOTAL FORCE (SAILORS, MARINES, AND CIVILIANS)
Today more than other time in recent history our Sailors and
Marines have a greater understanding and appreciation for service to
country. In time of war they have shown the Nation the highest
standards of military professionalism and competence. The heaviest
burdens in our war on terror fall, as always, on the men and women of
our Armed Forces. We are blessed as a Nation to have a 228-year legacy
where magnificent men and women volunteer to protect and defend
America. Sailors and Marines--along with our civilian workforce--remain
the strong and steady foundation of our Naval capabilities.
Active Duty
The Navy and Marine Corps again met enlisted recruiting and
accession goals in 2003, and continue to attract America's finest young
men and women to national service. The Navy achieved recruiting goals
for a fifth consecutive year and in February completed the 31st
consecutive month of attaining goals for accessions and new contracts.
The Marine Corps met its eighth year of meeting monthly and annual
enlisted recruiting goals and its thirteenth year of success in officer
recruiting. Both Services are well positioned for success in meeting
2004 officer and enlisted accession requirements.
During 2003, the Navy implemented a policy requiring 94 percent of
new recruits be high school diploma graduates (HSDG), and Navy
recruiters succeeded by recruiting 94.3 percent HSDG. Navy Recruiting
continued to seek the best and brightest young men and women by
requiring that 62 percent of recruits score above 50 on the AFQT; Navy
recruiters excelled with a rate of 65.7 percent. Navy recruiting also
sought to increase the number of recruits with college experience in
fiscal year 2003, recruiting more than 3,200 applicants with at least
12 semester hours of college.
The Marine Corps accessed 97.1 percent High School Diploma
Graduates in fiscal year 2003, exceeding their annual goal of 95
percent and ensured the Marine Corps recruited the highest quality
young men and women with 70.3 percent of Marine Corps recruits scoring
over 50 on the AFQT. This achievement exceeded their annual goal of 60
percent of accessions scoring above 50 on the AFQT. The Marine Corps
began fiscal year 2004 with a 58.8 percent starting pool in the Delayed
Entry Program and has continued to achieve its monthly recruiting goals
during the second quarter of fiscal year 2004. The Marine Corps Reserve
achieved fiscal year 2003 recruiting goals, assessing 6,174 Non-Prior
Service Marines and 2,663 Prior Service Marines. Navy Recruiting was
also successful in Naval Reserve recruiting by exceeding the enlisted
goal of 12,000 recruits for fiscal year 2003.
Retention.--Retaining the best and brightest is as important as
recruiting them. Military compensation that is competitive with the
private sector provides the flexibility required to meet that
challenge.
The Marine Corps has achieved first-term reenlistment goals over
the past nine years. They have already achieved 79.8 percent of their
first term retention goal and 59.8 percent of second tour and beyond
goals. Officer retention is at a 19 year-high.
Retention in the Navy has never been better. For the third straight
year, we experienced the highest retention in history. Retention goals
for all categories were exceeded. As a result, at-sea personnel
readiness is exceptional and enlisted gaps at sea are at an all-time
low.
Notwithstanding our current success in retention, we are constantly
on alert for indicators; trends and developments that might affect our
ability to attract and retain a capable, trained and talented
workforce. We are aware that we need to compete for the best, and
ensure continuing readiness, through a variety of means including
effective compensation and bonus programs.
The Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) remains the primary tool
available to the Navy and Marine Corps for retaining our best and
brightest enlisted personnel. SRB represents an investment in the
future of our Navy and Marine Corps. The Department of the Navy has a
proven track record in the judicious management of this program and
other continuation pays used to keep the right force mix to meet the
nations requirements. Your continued support of the SRB program as a
proven and highly effective tool is important and appreciated.
Attrition.--Navy leaders reduced attrition 10 percent from a year
ago and 33 percent from fiscal year 2000, while Marine Corps First-Term
Post Boot Camp attrition continues the favorable downward trend begun
in fiscal year 1999. For the Marine Corps, fiscal year 2003 attrition
was at a historical low, down 1,773 from the previous year. This drop
is due largely to a reduction in misconduct and incidents of desertion.
The Department's ``Zero Tolerance'' drug-use policy continues to be
strictly enforced, widely disseminated, and supported throughout the
leadership. Through a comprehensive random drug testing program,
educational programs, and Command support, the Navy and Marine Corps
Team achieved an 18 percent reduction in attrition even while testing
rates increased.
Training.--The Navy and Marine Corps have defined their respective
strategies for advancing into the future as part of a Joint Force. The
Services have developed strategies that clearly define how Navy and
Marine forces of the 21st Century will be equipped, trained, educated,
organized and used in our continued efforts to control the seas, to
project American military influence abroad, and to protect our borders.
Marine Corps' Strategy 21 defines as its vision and goal the
development of enhanced strategic agility, operational reach and
tactical flexibility and enabled joint, allied and coalition
operations.
Navy's Sea Power 21 defines its commitment to the growth and
development of its Service members. Sea Warrior is the ``people'' part
of Sea Power 21. Its focus is on growing individuals from the moment
they walk into a recruiting office through their assignments as Master
Chiefs or Flag Officers, using a career continuum of training and
education that gives them the tools they need to operate in an
increasingly demanding and dynamic environment. Transformation for the
future, leveraging technology and tapping into the genius of our people
to make them more efficient and effective--creating a single business
process for the range of human resource management activities is
exactly what Sea Warrior is all about. Our goal remains attracting,
developing, and retaining the more highly skilled and educated
workforce of warriors that will lead the 21st Century Navy.
Reserves
Reserves remain an integral part of our Navy and Marine Corps Team.
The Department of Defense is undergoing a transformation to a more
responsive, lethal and agile force based on capabilities analysis
rather than threat analysis. Last July, Secretary Rumsfeld issued a
memorandum, Rebalancing Forces, in which he directed the Services to
promote judicious and prudent use of rebalancing to improve readiness
of the force and to help ease stress on units and individuals. Three
areas of focus of the Services are: Enhance early responsiveness;
resolve stressed career fields; and employ innovative management
practices.
The Navy recently completed a study focused on redesigning the
Naval Reserve so that it is better aligned with, and operationally
relevant to, active forces. Working groups have been chartered to
implement key points of the study. Implementation has commenced and
will continue through this year and next. The three main areas of focus
are Personnel Management, Readiness and Training, and Organizational
Alignment. The Navy is transforming the Naval Reserve so that it is
fully integrated with active forces. Reservists are shifting away from
thinking of ``Naval Reserve requirements'' to ``Navy requirements''--a
shift that includes goals, capabilities and equipment. The Navy mission
is the Naval Reserve mission. One Navy, one team, is the message.
Naval and Marine Corps reservists are filling critical joint and
internal billets along with their active counterparts. Naval and Marine
Corps Reserve mobilization is a requirements-driven evolution and
reservists, trained and ready, are making significant contributions.
While the numbers of mobilized reservists can fluctuate as GWOT
requirements dictate, our objective is to keep the number of mobilized
personnel at a minimum.
Since September 11, 2001, the Navy has mobilized over 22,000
reservists with a peak of just over 12,000 during OIF. This is from a
Selected Reserve population of just over 87,000. Mobilized commissioned
Naval units include Coastal Warfare, Construction Battalion and
Aviation communities, while individuals were mobilized primarily from
Security Group, Naval Intelligence, Law Enforcement and Physical
Security augment units. We anticipate a steady state of approximately
2,500 mobilized Naval Reservists this year.
The Marine Corps has mobilized over 22,000 reservists from an
authorized Selected Reserve end strength of 39,600 and just over 3,500
from the Individual Ready Reserve. Currently mobilized reservists
number just under 6,500. With OIF II requirements, the number of
mobilized Marine Reservists is expected to increase by approximately
7,000. OIF II Marines will deploy in two rotations of approximately
seven months each, augmenting Marine Corps capabilities in Infantry,
Armor, Aviation, Command, Control, Computers and Intelligence, Military
Police and Civil Affairs.
Civilian Personnel
A large part of the credit for the Navy's outstanding performance
goes to our civilian workforce. These experienced and dedicated
craftspeople, researchers, supply and maintenance specialists, computer
experts, service providers and their managers are an essential part of
our total Naval force concept.
In the past, our ability to utilize these skilled human resources
to accomplish the complex and fast-developing missions of the 21st
Century has been limited by the requirements of a 19th Century
personnel system. The fiscal year 2004 Defense Authorization Bill now
allows DOD to significantly redesign a National Security Personnel
System (NSPS) for the civilian workforce. This change represents the
most significant improvement to civilian personnel management since the
1978 Civil Service Reform Act.
The DON has volunteered to be in the first wave of conversions to
NSPS later this year. The Department expects to transition as many as
150,000 of our dedicated, hard-working civilians to the new system this
year. We will work closely with DOD to ensure we meet this aggressive
timeline. We are also working Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement
Act streamlining initiatives alongside NSPS to ensure we use these
tools to produce a robust and capable workforce.
The reforms will provide supervisors and managers greater
flexibility in managing our civil service employees, facilitate
competition for high quality talent, offer compensation competitive
with the private sector, and reward outstanding service. It will build
greater pride in the civilian workforce and attract a new generation of
civilians to public service. Properly executed, these changes also will
assist us in better utilizing the active duty force by making it easier
to employ civilians in jobs currently filled by uniformed military
personnel.
NSPS legislation will have a transformational effect on
organizational design across the Department. NSPS will improve
alignment of the human resources system with mission objectives,
increase agility to respond to new business and strategic needs, and
reduce administrative burden. The NSPS Act authorizes a more flexible
civilian personnel management system that allows us to be a more
competitive and progressive employer at a time when our national
security demands a highly responsive system of civilian personnel
management. The legislation also ensures merit systems principles
govern changes in personnel management, whistleblowers are protected,
discrimination remains illegal, and veterans' preference is protected.
The process for the design of NSPS is specified by statue and covers
the following areas: job classification, pay banding, staffing
flexibilities, and pay for performance.
The foundation for NSPS is a more rigorous tie between performance
and monetary awards for employees and managers. Basic pay and
performance incentives should be tied directly to the performance
measurement process--supervisory personnel are also rewarded for
successfully performing managerial duties. Implementation of this
system will be a significant step forward by linking employees'
performance to mission accomplishment and enabling better management of
scarce resources throughout the DON.
We are faced with a monumental change in how we will do business
and an even larger cultural change from one of entitlement to one that
has a performance-based compensation. This will be a huge effort and we
are determined to ensure successful implementation. We will continue to
scrutinize our human resource business methods. As we implement the
bold initiatives in NSPS, we will take a hard look at our
administrative policies with a specific eye on those that are
burdensome or add no value.
Quality of Service
We will continue to provide an environment where our Sailors and
Marines, and their families have confidence in themselves, in each
other, in their equipment and weapons, and in the institution they have
chosen to serve. This year, with your help, we continued the
significant advances in compensation, in building the structure to
realize the promise of the revolution in training, in improving
bachelor and family housing, and in strengthening our partnership with
Navy and Marine families.
The Department remains committed to improving living conditions for
Sailors and Marines, and their families. Our policy is to rely first on
the private sector to house military families. As a result, along with
the initiative to increase Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH), the need
and consequently the inventory for military family housing is going
down. Additionally, we are partnering with the private sector in
Public/Private Ventures (PPV) to eliminate inadequate housing.
At the top of nearly any list put together in our partnership is
the promise of medical care for Sailors, Marines, and their families.
Naval medicine is a force multiplier, ensuring our troops are
physically and mentally ready to whatever challenges lie ahead. High
quality care and health protection are a vital part of our ability to
fight the Global War on Terrorism and execute other worldwide mission.
Naval medicine today is focused on supporting the deployment readiness
of the uniformed services and promoting, protecting and maintaining the
health of all those entrusted to Naval Medicine care--anytime,
anywhere.
Safety
The Navy and Marine Corps are working to meet the Secretary of
Defense's goal of reducing mishaps by 50 percent from fiscal year 2002
to the end of fiscal year 2005. We have many initiatives in place and
planned for the near future. We have seen real progress in reducing
private motor vehicle fatalities, which are down 20 percent from the
fiscal year 2002 baseline. We have begun applying technologies now used
in commercial aviation to provide a visual and quantitative feedback
loop to pilots and mechanics when either the pilot or aircraft has
exceeded specific safety of flight parameters. We will continue to
press forward with safety both to take care of people, our most
precious asset, and to allow us to invest elsewhere.
Shaping the Force
The Navy is making an effort to reduce its active duty manpower as
part of the DON transformation program. This is the first step and an
integral part of our strategy to properly shape both the officer and
enlisted force. Today, as the Navy moves to a more efficient and surge-
ready force, maintaining the correct skill sets is more important than
ever. We are convinced we can get the job done with fewer people; by
eliminating excess manpower we can focus better on developing and
rewarding our high-performing forces. Additionally, reducing manpower
gradually today will ensure the Navy is properly manned when a new
generation of optimally manned ships joins our force, with completely
revised maintenance, training, and war-fighting requirements. We will
ensure any manpower reductions will be preceded by reductions in
functions.
SUMMARY
Naval forces remain a critical and unique element of our national
security strategy. The Navy and Marine Corps Team answers the
President's call to duty by being the first on station--with staying
power. Our forces exploit the open oceans and provide the Combatant
Commander with persistent sovereign combat Naval forces. This is the
value that credible forward deployed Naval forces provide our Nation.
The fiscal year 2005 Budget unifies many of our innovative and
transformational technologies with Naval Power 21. Sustaining
investment in Naval forces continues to protect and promote American
interests by allowing the forward deployed Navy and Marine Corps Team
to shape the international security environment and to respond to the
full spectrum of current and future crises.
With our fiscal year 2005 Budget request we focus on people, combat
capability, technology insertion, and improved business practices.
Additionally, we continue to work with our Joint Service partners in
organizing, equipping and training to fight jointly. With continued
Congressional support the Department of the Navy will position the Navy
and Marine Corps Team as part of the most formidable military force in
the 21st Century.
Senator Stevens. Admiral Clark.
STATEMENT OF ADMIRAL VERNON CLARK, CHIEF OF NAVAL
OPERATIONS
Admiral Clark. Chairman Stevens, Senator Inouye, and
distinguished members of the committee, good morning. I, like
Secretary England, consider it an honor to be with you here
today, representing all the sailors, both active and reserve,
and the civilians who are serving in our Navy today.
I am particularly happy, also, to be here at the table with
leaders like Secretary England and General Mike Hagee. I'd like
to report to you that this group has a great partnership,
working together, leading our Navy and Marine Corps team to the
future. That's what we see as our task, and we are set out to
do it.
Today, and I believe appropriately so, America's focus is
primarily on the Army and, more so, soon to be the Marine
Corps, as they execute their missions in Operation Iraqi
Freedom II. Having said that, I want to report to you that your
Navy continues to be out and about. And while the Army
dominates Operation Iraqi Freedom today, we have two carriers
and three Expeditionary Strike Groups, and fundamentally one-
third of the Navy, still deployed around the world. Ships and
submarines, forward deployed on the point representing the
United States of America. And that includes two of our large-
deck amphibious ships, the Boxer and the Bataan, who are now
returning home, after surging forward just a few weeks ago to
carry Marine Corps aviation assets forward for Operation Iraqi
Freedom II.
A year ago this time when I appeared before this committee,
we were an important part of the joint team that conducted
major combat operations last spring in Iraq. Lifting the joint
force, projecting power ashore, and fully 55 percent--Senator
Cochran, mirroring the numbers that you talked about--55
percent of our Navy deployed in support of the conflict. No
other Navy in the world can deliver this kind of decisive
combat capability. It highlights our fundamental mission, and
that is to take credible, persistent combat power to the far
corners of this earth anywhere, anytime we need to do so,
without a permission slip.
I appreciate the opportunity, Mr. Chairman, to be here
today, to appear before you, and to talk about this great Navy,
and to thank you on behalf of all of our outstanding men and
women in the uniform, and those that are wearing civilian
clothes, too, that are working to make our Navy better every
day. And we are all grateful for the continued strong support
that is being provided by the Congress that is making our Navy
ready to respond, ready to act anytime the Nation needs us to
do so, but also helping us create the Navy of the future, which
is our fundamental task, also.
As the Secretary said, our budget request this year is a
solid and balanced investment plan, the roadmap, as he has
called it, that focuses on three areas. First, it accelerates
our investment in Sea Power 21 capability. Second, it delivers
the right readiness at the right cost, and that's been a key
factor in our ability to respond this past year. And it
continues to shape the 21st century workforce. This budget
includes the next steps in our journey to the future.
A much more capable Navy is what we're talking about. It
includes funding for the Littoral combat ship, the DD(X), CVN
21, the Joint Strike Fighter, unmanned vehicles in the air and
on the surface and under the sea, the Virginia class submarine
and the modifications to Trident SSGNs, among others.
And maybe most importantly today, it lays the foundation
with LHA(R) and maritime pre-positioned forces, the future for
the Navy/Marine Corps team. That future is laid down in this
budget request. And this is a very exciting concept, the next
step in expeditionary warfare. We stand at the threshold of
creating the next generation Navy/Marine Corps team, a team
that will deliver the kind of quick-response, global-reach
capability that this Nation needs. This budget will help us
deliver a more responsive Navy. The Fleet Response Plan and a
readiness assessment process that we are now using has allowed
us to better assess risk, and allowed us to present a budget
that delivers the right readiness at the right cost.
And what this means, unlike previous submissions that I
have been involved in, is that we have taken more risk--we have
assessed the risk, and we have taken risk where we believe that
it is prudent so that we can invest in the new acquisition that
is required for us to have the Navy of the future. And so I ask
for your support in this year's readiness request. It will
deliver the right readiness at the right cost for the Nation.
Lastly, our request continues to sharpen our investment in
our people so that we can shape them into the workforce that we
need for the future. And, of course, in the Navy we recognize
that every single thing that is good that is happening in the
Navy is happening because we have been winning the battle for
people. For all of our advanced technology--and our advanced
technology is incredible--for the readiness that we have
achieved, it is still our people that bring our capabilities to
bear whenever and wherever the Nation needs them.
But, at the same time, Mr. Chairman, we do recognize the
cost of manpower. We know that manpower is not free. And I am
committed to building a Navy that can maximize the capability
of our people and minimize the total number of people on the
payroll. And as you can see from this request, and as Senator
Inouye has indicated, this budget request reduces our end
strength. Our strategy for doing this is straightforward,
Senator. We are investing in the growth and the development of
our people. We are improving training and our maintenance
processes. We are leveraging technology. We are decommissioning
older, more manpower-intensive platforms that have less
capability for the future, and we are rebalancing our reserve
and active forces. And as we deliver more high-tech ships and
aircraft, our workforce will intentionally get smarter, but we
intend for it also to get smaller.
Your support, over the years, of incentive pay, re-
enlistment bonuses, and the kind of training and information
tools that make our people more productive, has been critical
to our success in the past and is crucial to our ability to
attract and retain and shape the kind of workforce we need for
the future.
I want to report to you that your support for these
initiatives has been working. We have the highest retention
that we ever had in the history of the Navy, and we have an
extraordinarily competitive and talented group of people in our
Navy. I ask you to continue to give us the tools that we need
to shape this force for the future. And I look forward to
discussing this with you in the minutes and hours ahead, and
the months ahead, as we move toward this budget.
I close by saying that we have a higher quality Navy and
Marine Corps team today than at any time that I've witnessed in
my career, and I believe it's so for a very important reason.
It is because our sailors feel the support and the confidence
that is being placed in them by the citizens of the United
States of America.
Mr. Chairman, this is a very proud team. They believe in
the importance of what they are doing. And each of you have
seen them on the point, and you know how they are reacting to
the challenges that are being presented to them. And they are
responding to the signals of support that are being sent to
them by the citizens of America.
PREPARED STATEMENT
I thank you for your support, and the citizens of America
for their support, and I look forward to your questions this
morning.
Thank you very much.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much, Admiral.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Admiral Vern Clark
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I appreciate this
opportunity to appear before you. I want to express my gratitude for
the substantial investment you have made in making this Navy the best
Navy the nation has ever seen.
Your Navy is built to take credible combat power to the far corners
of this earth, taking the sovereignty of the United States of America
anywhere we need to take it and at anytime we choose to do so. It is
capable of delivering the options this nation needs to meet the
challenges of today and it is committed to the future capabilities the
joint force will need to win throughout the 21st century.
It is a wonderful time to be a part of this Navy and a great
privilege to be associated with so many men and women--active and
reserve, uniformed and civilian--committed to the service and defense
of this nation. I speak for all of our men and women in thanking you
for your exceptional and continuous support.
YOUR NAVY TODAY--PROJECTING DECISIVE JOINT POWER ACROSS THE GLOBE
Your Navy's performance in Operations ENDURING FREEDOM (OEF) and
IRAQI FREEDOM (OIF) last year proved--more than anything else--the
value of the combat readiness in which you have invested. It
demonstrated the importance of the latest technology in surveillance,
command and control and persistent attack. It highlighted our ability
to exploit the vast maneuver space provided by the sea. Most
importantly, it reaffirmed the single greatest advantage we hold over
every potential adversary: the genius of young Americans contributing
their utmost in their service to this nation.
This past year, the fleet produced the best readiness levels I've
seen in my career. We have invested billions of dollars to training,
maintenance, spare parts, ordnance, flying hours and steaming days
accounts these last few years, and that investment resulted in the
combat ready response of more than half the Navy to operations
worldwide.
Seven aircraft carriers and nine big deck amphibious ships were
among the 164 U.S. Navy ships forward deployed last spring in support
of OEF and OIF and contingencies worldwide. The Military Sealift
Command sailed and chartered more than 210 ships and moved 94 percent
of the nation's joint and combined capability to the fight. We also
deployed three Fleet Hospitals, a Hospital Ship, 22 P-3 aircraft, 25
Naval Coastal Warfare detachments and we mobilized more than 12,000
reservists.
OIF and OEF were the most joint operations in our history and they
have provided the best possible opportunity to dissect, study and
analyze some of the limiting factors and effects of how we fight.
Beyond the mere numbers, these operations confirmed that we should
continue to pursue the capabilities that enhance our power projection,
our defensive protection and the operational independence afforded by
the sea.
While we recognize that we must continue to challenge all of our
assumptions in a variety of scenarios, our lessons learned indicate
that the capabilities-based investment strategies, new war fighting
concepts and enabling technologies we are pursuing in our Sea Power 21
vision are on the right vector. Let me give you some examples.
--The reach, precision and persistence of our Sea Strike capability
added lethality to ground combat engagements in Afghanistan and
Iraq. The joint surveillance and attack technologies and
processes that we have already put in place forced enemy combat
formations to either disband and desert or be destroyed in
place by precision weapons. Navy aviation generated more than
7,000 combat sorties in support of OIF, sometimes flying joint
missions with land-based Air Force tankers more than 900 miles
from their carriers. Surface combatants and submarines struck
targets throughout Iraq with more than 800 Tomahawk missiles.
The initial deployments of new F/A-18E/F Super Hornet squadrons
greatly extended our range, payload, and refueling options. And
we will realize more of these capabilities in the future
through the conversion of the first of four Trident SSBNs into
the SSGN conventional strike and Special Operations Forces
platform.
--USS HIGGINS (DDG 76) provided early warning and tracking to joint
forces in Kuwait and southern Iraq to help warn forces and
defend against the threat of theater ballistic missiles. This
tracking-only capability demonstrated the initial potential of
extending Sea Shield defenses to the joint force. In a sign of
things to come, we advanced our missile defense capability with
another successful flight test of our developmental sea-based
defense against short-to-medium range ballistic missiles. USS
LAKE ERIE (CG 70) and USS RUSSELL (DDG 59) combined to acquire,
track and hit a ballistic test target in space with an SM-3
missile in support of the Ballistic Missile Defense program.
This was the fifth success in six tests.
Our OIF mine warfare efforts cleared 913 nautical miles of water
in the Khor Abd Allah and Umm Qasr waterways, opening 21 berths
in the Umm Qasr port and clearing the way for operations in the
littoral areas of the Northern Persian Gulf and for
humanitarian aid shipments into Iraq. These operations included
the use of the High Speed Vessel X1 (JOINT VENTURE), Navy
patrol craft and six unmanned, autonomous underwater vehicles
(AUV) directly from our science and technology (S&T) program in
the littoral for special operations and mine clearance
operations, and gave us important insights into our vision for
both future littoral and mine warfare concepts and
capabilities.
--We projected joint combat forces across the globe with greater
speed and agility than we have ever done in the past. Along
with our number one joint partner, the United States Marine
Corps, we put more than 60,000 combat-ready Marines ashore in
Kuwait in 30 days. The Navy's Military Sealift Command
delivered more than 32 million square feet of combat cargo and
more than one billion gallons of fuel to the nation's war
fighters in Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. We
were able to sustain the strategic and operational flexibility
afforded by Sea Basing to generate a three-axis attack on Iraq
from our dispersed aircraft carriers, surface combatants and
submarines in the Red Sea, the Mediterranean Sea and the
Persian Gulf.
We forged ahead in our shipbuilding investments. We awarded three
preliminary design contracts for the Littoral Combat Ship
(LCS), leading to the construction of the first LCS in fiscal
year 2005. We selected the baseline design for the DD(X) 21st
Century multi-mission destroyer, launched SAN ANTONIO (LPD 17),
christened VIRGINIA (SSN 774) and began fabrication of MAKIN
ISLAND (LHD 8) and LEWIS AND CLARK (T-AKE 1).
--In OIF, we were able to know more, decide faster and act more
decisively than ever before. Our three-axis, multi-platform
attack from the Persian Gulf, Red Sea and Mediterranean Sea--as
well as the geometric increases in striking power, defensive
protection and speed of maneuver generated by our joint
forces--is made possible by the power of joint command,
control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance
and reconnaissance (C\4\ISR). Fully eighty percent of targets
struck with precision ordnance were unknown at aircraft launch.
We developed and installed CENTRIX and COWAN networks to
enhance joint and coalition interoperability on all of our
deploying ships, and we also promulgated the FORCEnet campaign
plan, defining the architecture and standards that will help us
further integrate warriors, sensors, weapons, and platforms.
These accomplishments this past year have taught us more about who
we are and where we're headed. We know that the combat power of the
truly joint force is much more than the sum of the services'
contributions. We understand the value of readiness and the importance
we must place on improving the fleet's ability to respond and surge
with decisive combat power. We relearned the lesson that over flight
and basing is not guaranteed; our dominance of the maritime domain and
our consequent ability to quickly deliver an agile combat force is a
priceless advantage for our nation. And we reaffirmed that our people
are now, and always will be, the root of our success.
YOUR NAVY TOMORROW--ACCELERATING OUR ADVANTAGES
Readiness, advanced technology, dominance of the maritime domain,
and the genius of our people--these are our asymmetric advantages. They
are the core of our Sea Power 21 Navy and we intend to accelerate these
advantages over the coming year. We are in a position to continue to
build upon and recapitalize these strengths, to innovate and
experiment, and to push the envelope of operational art and
technological progress. Our ability to project persistent, sovereign
combat power to the far corners of the earth now and in the future
depends on it.
In last year's statement, I discussed principally the advantages
brought by advanced technology and the vast maneuver area of the sea in
our Sea Power 21 vision.
This year, I'd like to spend a few moments on the efforts we've
taken to improve our other advantages: our readiness to respond to the
nation's defense needs and the tools we'll need to ensure the right
people for our Sea Power 21 Navy.
Today's naval forces and personnel are superbly trained and well
provisioned with ordnance, repair parts and supplies. They are ready
earlier--for a longer period of time--and they are deploying at a
higher state of readiness than ever before. In short, the Navy the
nation has paid for is truly ready to accomplish its missions and it is
more ready to do so than I've ever seen it in my career.
I mentioned the results; in OIF, we surged more than half the fleet
to fight half a world away. The combined power of our forward presence
forces and those that we were able to surge overseas helped keep our
enemies on the run. This conflict and our analysis of future campaign
scenarios make it apparent that the readiness of both our forward
forces and the forces that must surge forward will be critically
important to our future. It is no longer good enough to be able to
surge just once every ten years or so.
The war on terrorism and the unpredictability of the global
security environment make this an immediate imperative. The nation
needs a Navy that can provide homeland defense and be both forward and
ready to surge forward to deliver overmatching and decisive combat
power whenever and wherever needed. We are committed to do so.
With this in mind, we launched the Fleet Response Plan (FRP) this
past year. The FRP resets the force in a way that will allow us to
surge about 50 percent more combat power on short notice and at the
same time, potentially reduce some of the personnel strain of forward
rotations.
In simplest terms, rather than having only two or three CSGs
forward-deployed and properly equipped at any one time--and an ability
to surge only a maximum of two more--the FRP enables us to now
consistently deliver six forward deployed or ready to surge Carrier
Strike Groups (CSGs) almost immediately, plus two additional CSGs in
the basic training phase in 90 days or less. This FRP capability is
commonly known as six plus two.
To do this, we have fundamentally reconfigured our employment
policy, fleet maintenance, deployment preparations and fleet manning
policies to expand the operational availability of non-deployed fleet
units. We have shifted the readiness cycle from one centered solely on
the next-scheduled-deployment to one focused on returning ships to the
right level of readiness for both surge and deployed operations. The
net result is a fleet that is more ready, with more combat power--more
quickly--than was possible in the past.
Our forward rotations remain critically important to our security,
to strengthening alliances and coalitions, and to the global war on
terrorism. But it is clear we must make these rotations with purpose,
not just to fill the calendar.
For example, implementing the new Proliferation Security Initiative
to counter weapons of mass destruction as a tool for terrorists and
their sponsors is likely to involve the use of forward naval forces in
maritime interdiction. Additionally, we plan to be ready to establish
Initial Missile Defense operations using forward-deployed ARLEIGH BURKE
class guided missile destroyers and their AEGIS systems in Long-Range
Tracking and Surveillance roles. And of course, we will continue to
provide Combatant Commanders with the combat-credible, rapidly
employable forward forces required for the nation's defense.
But at the same time, we recognize that our ability to rapidly
surge significant additional combat power and provide a range of joint
employment options is critically important to the swift and decisive
combat operations that must be our future. The FRP allows us to do just
that.
We have an obligation to accurately assess the readiness needs and
create the resources necessary to support this FRP capability. This has
also been a major focus this past year.
Readiness is a complex process. It is much more than a count of our
end strength, our ordnance and spares, and the number of hours and days
spent training. It is the product of our ability to deliver the
required effects needed to accomplish the mission. We know too that
readiness at any cost is unacceptable; as leaders we must achieve and
deliver the right readiness at the right cost.
The Integrated Readiness Capability Assessment (IRCA) was developed
for the fiscal year 2005 budget to more carefully examine our readiness
processes. Starting with our new FRP operating construct, we took a
hard look at everything that we needed to have on hand and what we
needed to do to deliver the required combat readiness for the nation's
needs.
The IRCA assessment helped us understand the collective
contributions of all the components of readiness, accurately define the
requirements, align the proper funding and provide a balanced
investment to the right accounts. It improved our visibility into the
true requirements and it gave us a methodology to assess and understand
both acceptable and unacceptable risks to our current readiness
investments.
The end result is this: we have carefully defined the readiness
requirement. We have identified areas where we can streamline or cease
activities that do not add to readiness. And we have requested the
funds our commanders need to create the right readiness for fiscal year
2005. I ask for your support of this year's current readiness request
as we've re-defined these processes and already taken acceptable risks.
We will deliver the right readiness at the right cost to the nation.
These improvements to our operational availability of forces and
the associated readiness elements will not be made on the backs of our
people.
We have a smart, talented cadre of professionals who have chosen a
lifestyle of service. Our ability to challenge them with meaningful,
satisfying work that lets them make a difference is part of our
covenant with them as leaders.
A new operating concept like the Fleet Response Plan could not be
made if we still had the kind of manpower-intensive mindset to problem
solving we had even five years ago. But today, thanks to your sustained
investment in science and technology among others, we have already
realized some of the advancements in information technology,
simulators, human system integration, enterprise resource planning,
web-enabled technical assistance and ship and aircraft maintenance
practices that can reduce the amount of labor intensive functions, the
training and the technical work required to ensure our readiness.
These advances speak to our larger vision for our Sea Power 21 Navy
and its Sea Warrior initiative. Our people are today's capital assets.
Without them, all the advanced weaponry in the world would sit dormant.
But at the same time, it is the effects they deliver that are the true
measure of their contribution to readiness and capability.
We have long had a force stove-piped into active and reserves,
uniformed and civilian, sea and shore, and enlisted and officer
components, all with work driven largely by the limits of industrial
age military capabilities, personnel practices, technology and the
organizational models of the day.
In today's era, when we have whole corporations bought or sold just
to capture the intellectual capital of an organization, we recognize
that our human resource strategy must capture the talents and efforts
of our capital as well. Our vision for the future is a more truly
integrated workforce wholly committed to mission accomplishment. This
must include a total force approach that can functionally assess
missions, manpower, technology and training and produce an enterprise-
wide resource strategy.
The principles of this strategy are clear. We will capture the work
that contributes to mission accomplishment. We will define enterprise-
wide standards. We will leverage technology to both enhance and
capitalize on the growth and development of our people. We will
streamline organizational layers. We will instill competition. And we
will incentivize the talents and behaviors needed to accomplish the
mission.
There is still much to study and discuss as we develop our total
force approach in the months and years ahead, but we can already see
that the application of these principles will help us more accurately
define our manpower requirement and lead us to a smaller workforce in
the future.
The benefits are enormous. Our people will be powerfully motivated
and better educated and more experienced in the coming years. They will
be properly equipped to maintain, operate and manage the higher
technology equipments that are our future. Our combat capabilities will
continue to grow.
We must be committed to building a Navy that maximizes the
capability of its people while minimizing the total number in the
manpower account. Manpower is never free; in fact, manpower we do not
truly need limits both the true potential of our people and the
investments needed to transform our combat capability for the future.
Our developing human resource strategy will likely require changes
in the way we recruit, assess, train, manage and balance the workforce
in the years to come. Sea Warrior of course, is crucial here. Last
year's authorization of the National Security Personnel System (NSPS)
is very important to such an effort as well. The NSPS Act authorized a
more flexible civilian personnel management system that allows DOD to
be a more competitive and progressive employer. The Navy has
volunteered to be in the first wave of conversions to NSPS because it
will facilitate the kind of competition and performance we need in the
21st century.
In the near future, we will need to look at improving the two-way
integration of our active and reserve force. At a time when our ability
to surge is more important to the nation than ever, we must ensure our
Navy reserves have the kind of future skills, front-line equipment,
training standards and organizational support that will facilitate
their seamless integration into required combat and support structures.
Most importantly, I believe we will need the kinds of flexible
authorities and incentive tools that will shape the career paths and
our skills mix in a way that lets us compete for the right talent, not
just within the Navy, but with all the nation's employers as well.
In the months ahead, I will continue to discuss with you our
developing human resource strategy and the kinds of authorities we'll
need to deliver on it.
We are beginning to realize the powerful war fighting capabilities
of Sea Power 21. Our culture of readiness and our commitment to
developing a 21st Century workforce will help us employ those
transformational capabilities to achieve unprecedented maritime power.
OUR FISCAL YEAR 2005 BUDGET REQUEST
This past year our Navy's budget request continued our effort to
sustain our current readiness gains, deepen the growth and development
of our people and invest in our transformational Sea Power 21 vision
while harvesting the efficiencies needed to fund and support these
three critical priorities. This year we intend to:
--Deliver the right readiness at the right cost to support the war on
terror and the nation's war fighting needs,
--Shape the 21st century workforce and deepen the growth and
development of our people,
--Accelerate our investment in Sea Power 21 to recapitalize and
transform our force and improve its ability to operate as an
effective component of our joint war fighting team.
At the same time, we will continue to pursue the Sea Enterprise
improvements that make us a more effective Navy in both fiscal year
2005 and beyond. Our Navy budget request for fiscal year 2005 and the
future supports this intent and includes:
--Nine new construction ships in fiscal year 2005, including
construction of the first transformational destroyer (DD(X))
and the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS), the acceleration of a SAN
ANTONIO Class Amphibious Transport Dock Class ship from fiscal
year 2006 to fiscal year 2005, and one SSBN conversion and
refueling. Our request this year includes the following ships:
--3 ARLEIGH BURKE Class Guided Missile Destroyers (DDG)
--1 VIRGINIA Class submarine (SSN)
--1 SAN ANTONIO Class Amphibious Transport Dock (LPD)
--2 Lewis and Clark Class Dry Cargo and Ammunition ships (T-AKE)
--1 21st Century Destroyer (DD(X))
--1 Littoral Combat Ship (LCS), and
--1 SSBN conversion/refueling
The investment plan across the future year's defense plan (FYDP)
also includes three Maritime Prepositioned Force (Future) (MPF
(F)) ships and advanced procurement for an MPF (F) aviation
variant. While our build rate dips to six ships in fiscal year
2006, this is a reflection of a shift in focus to the next
generation surface combatants and sea basing capabilities. We
have also assessed the risks and divested several assets that
have high operating costs and limited technological growth
capacity for our transformational future; this includes
decommissioning two coastal mine hunter ships, and the
accelerated decommissioning of the remaining SPRUANCE-class
destroyers, SACRAMENTO Class Fast Combat Store Ships and the
first five TICONDEROGA-class guided missile cruisers in the
future year's plan.
--Procurement of 104 new aircraft in fiscal year 2005, including the
F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet, the MH-60 R/S Seahawk and Knighthawk
Multi-mission Combat Helicopter, the T-45 Goshawk training
aircraft and the Marine Corps MV-22 Osprey among others. We
continue to maximize the return on procurement dollars through
the use of multi-year procurement (MYP) contracts for
established aircraft programs like the Super Hornet and we have
increased our research and development investment this year in
the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), the EA-18G Airborne Electronic
Attack (AEA) aircraft and the broad area anti-submarine, anti-
surface, maritime and littoral intelligence, surveillance and
reconnaissance (ISR) capable Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft
(MMA).
--Investment in transformational unmanned underwater vehicles (UUV)
like the Long-Term Mine Reconnaissance System, and unmanned
aviation vehicles (UAV) such as the Broad Area Maritime
Surveillance UAV and the Joint-Unmanned Combat Air System. The
budget also requests funding for experimental hull forms like
the X-Craft, and other advanced technologies including the
Joint Aerial Common Sensor (JACS).
--A 3.5 percent basic pay raise, and a reduction in average out-of-
pocket housing costs from 3.5 percent to zero, allowing Sailors
and their families more of an opportunity to own their own
homes and have more of a stake in their communities.
--Investment in housing and Public-Private Ventures that will help
eliminate inadequate barracks and family housing by fiscal year
2007 and enable us to house shipboard Sailors ashore when their
vessel is in homeport by fiscal year 2008.
--Readiness investment that supports the Fleet Response Plan (FRP),
including sustained funding for ship and aircraft operations,
aviation depot maintenance, and precision guided munitions.
This includes improvements in ship maintenance and training
scheduling to maximize surge capabilities.
Delivering the Right Readiness at the Right Cost
To me, the ``right readiness'' is the return on your investment in
the Navy. Readiness is the catalyst that brings combat power to bear
whenever it is needed. Achieving readiness at any cost however is not
good for the nation. This year's request accurately defines our
readiness needs, assesses the risks to our investment and--as
requested--will deliver the resources necessary for leaders in the Navy
to create the required readiness.
--Ship Operations and Flying Hours requests funds for ship operations
OPTEMPO of 51.0 days per quarter for our deployed forces and 24
days per quarter for our non-deployed forces. We have properly
funded the flying hour account to support the appropriate
levels of readiness and longer employability requirements of
the FRP. This level of steaming and flying hours will enable
our ships and air wings to achieve the required readiness over
the longer periods defined by the Fleet Response Plan, and as a
result, it will improve our ability to surge in crisis and
sustain readiness during deployment.
--Ship and Aviation Maintenance. We have made significant
improvements these last few years by reducing major ship depot
maintenance backlogs and aircraft depot-level repair back
orders; improving aircraft engine spares; adding ship depot
availabilities; ramping up ordnance and spare parts production;
maintaining steady ``mission capable'' rates in deployed
aircraft; fully funding aviation initial outfitting; and
investing in reliability improvements.
Our fiscal year 2005 request continues to improve the
availability of non-deployed aircraft and meets our 100 percent
deployed airframe goals. Our ship maintenance request continues
to ``buy-down'' the annual deferred maintenance backlog and
sustains our overall ship maintenance requirement. We are
making great strides in improving the visibility and cost
effectiveness of our ship depot maintenance program, reducing
the number of changes in work package planning and using our
continuous maintenance practices when changes must be made.
--Shore Installations. Our Facilities Sustainment, Restoration and
Modernization (SRM) program remains focused on improving
readiness and quality of service for our Sailors. While our
fiscal year 2005 Military Construction and Sustainment program
reflects difficult but necessary trade-offs between shore
infrastructure and fleet recapitalization, the majority of the
SRM trends are very good. Facilities sustainment has increased
in fiscal year 2005. Our budget request keeps us on a course to
achieve the DOD goal of a 67-year recapitalization rate by
fiscal year 2008, achieve DON goals to eliminate inadequate
family and bachelor housing by fiscal year 2007 and provides
Homeport Ashore Bachelor Housing by fiscal year 2008. We are
exploring innovative solutions to provide safe, efficient
installations for our service members, including design-build
improvements, and BRAC land sales via the GSA Internet.
Additionally, with the establishment of Navy Installations
Command, we have improved our capability to manage our
dispersed facility operations, conserve valuable resources,
establish enterprise-wide standards and continue to improve our
facility infrastructure.
--Precision Guided Munitions receive continued investment in our
fiscal year 2005 request with emphasis on increasing the Joint
Stand-Off Weapon (JSOW) baseline variant, Joint Direct Attack
Munition (JDAM), and Tactical Tomahawk (TACTOM) inventory
levels, while the JSOW penetrator variant enters full-rate
production. We have also entered into a Common Missile program
with the U.S. Army to replace the aging inventory of TOW,
Maverick and Hellfire missiles. Joint partnerships with the Air
Force and Army in several of our munitions programs continue to
help us optimize both our inventories and precious research and
development investments and will remain a focus for us in the
future.
--Training Readiness. We continue to make significant strides in this
critical area. In fiscal year 2004, the Congress supported two
important programs to advance our training readiness. First,
you endorsed the Training Resource Strategy (TRS), to provide
more complex threat scenarios and to improve the overall
realism and value of our training. Additionally, you funded the
Tactical Training Theater Assessment and Planning Program to
provide for a comprehensive training range sustainment plan.
Our fiscal year 2005 budget continues this work. We are working
to make the Joint National Training Capability a reality. We
have established a single office to direct policy and
management oversight for all Navy ranges as well as serve as
the resource sponsor for all training ranges, target
development and procurement, and the Navy portion of the Major
Range Test Facility Base (MRTFB).
--Environmental Readiness. In the last two years, Congress has
provided significant legislative relief from encroachment and
environmental requirements by amending the Endangered Species
Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Marine Mammal
Protection Act. These amendments help to balance environmental
stewardships and realistic military training. We will continue
to focus the use of our ranges on military training, and remain
committed to our environmental obligations through integrated
natural resource management plans. We will make every effort to
protect marine mammals while ensuring our Sailors are properly
trained and our transformational systems are properly tested.
We look forward to demonstrating our ongoing commitment to
environmental stewardship.
Shaping the 21st Century Workforce
At the heart of everything good in our Navy today is this: we are
winning the battle for people. Higher quality recruits, historic
retention rates, innovative incentive pay pilots, reduced attrition,
competitive reenlistments and detailing, and outstanding leadership in
the ranks has made this the highest quality workforce the Navy has ever
seen.
In 2003 specifically, we exceeded all of our aggregate retention
goals for the third straight year; our recruiters reached their quotas
for the 28th consecutive month; we reduced attrition another 10 percent
from fiscal year 2002 levels; and, through decommissioning older,
manpower-intensive platforms, improving training and employment
processes, and more efficient infrastructure organization, we have
reduced gaps at sea to less than 1,000, down from 18,000 gaps just six
years ago.
These accomplishments will help us develop the 21st Century
workforce we'll need for our Sea Power 21 Navy. As our Navy becomes
more high tech, so must our workforce. Our people will be a more
educated and experienced group of professionals in the coming years,
and we must properly employ their talents. We will spend whatever it
takes to equip and enable these outstanding Americans, but we do not
want to spend one extra penny for manpower we do not need.
As part of that effort, we continue to pursue the kind of new
technologies and competitive personnel policies that will streamline
both combat and non-combat personnel positions, improve the two-way
integration of active and reserve missions, and reduce the Navy's total
manpower structure. To that end, we are proposing a fiscal year 2005
Navy end strength reduction of 7,900 personnel.
We will use existing authorities and our Perform to Serve program
to preserve the specialties, skill sets and expertise needed to
continue the proper balancing of the force.
We intend to build on the growth and development momentum of the
last three record-breaking years. We are fully committed to ensuring
every Sailor has the opportunity and resources to successfully compete.
Our goal remains attracting, developing, and retaining the most highly
skilled and educated workforce of warriors we have ever had, to lead
the 21st century Navy.
As I testified last year, Sea Warrior is designed to enhance the
assessment, assignment, training and education of our Sailors.
Our fiscal year 2005 budget request includes the following tools we
need to enhance mission accomplishment and professional growth:
--Innovative personnel employment practices are being implemented
throughout the fleet. Optimal manning experiments in USS BOXER
(LHD-4), USS MILIUS (DDG 69) and USS MOBILE BAY (CG 53)
produced revolutionary shipboard watch standing practices,
while reducing overall manning requirements and allowing
Sailors to focus on their core responsibilities. The fleet is
implementing best practices from these experiments to change
Ship Manning Documents in their respective classes. Optimal
manning means optimal employment for our Sailors.
We have our fourth crew aboard USS FLETCHER (DD 992) and our
third crew aboard USS HIGGINS (DDG 76) in our ongoing Sea Swap
initiative. This has saved millions of dollars in transit fuel
costs and increased our forward presence without lengthening
deployment times for our Sailors. FLETCHER and HIGGINS will
return to San Diego this year after a period of forward
deployed operations of 22 months and 17 months respectively. We
will continue to assess their condition and deep maintenance
needs to develop and apply lessons learned to future Sea Swap
initiatives.
--Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB). Targeted bonuses such as SRB
are critical to our ability to compete for our highly trained
and talented workforce both within the Navy and with employers
across the nation as well. Proper funding, adequate room for
growth and the flexible authorities needed to target the right
skills against the right market forces are important to the
shape of the workforce. This program specifically targets
retention bonuses against the most critical skills we need for
our future. We ask for your continued support and full funding
of this program.
--Perform to Serve (PTS). Last year, we introduced PTS to align our
Navy personnel inventory and skill sets through a centrally
managed reenlistment program and instill competition in the
retention process. The pilot program has proven so successful
in steering Sailors in overmanned ratings into skill areas
where they are most needed that the program has been expanded.
More than 2,400 Sailors have been steered to undermanned
ratings and approved for reenlistment since the program began
last February and we will continue this effort in 2005.
--Assignment Incentive Pay (AIP) is a financial incentive designed to
attract qualified Sailors to a select group of difficult to
fill duty stations. AIP allows Sailors to bid for additional
monetary compensation in return for service in these locations.
An integral part of our Sea Warrior effort, AIP will enhance
combat readiness by permitting market forces to efficiently
distribute Sailors where they are most needed. Since the pilot
program began last June, more than 1,100 AIP bids have been
processed resulting in 238 Sailors receiving bonuses for duty
in these demanding billets. We ask for continued support of
this initiative.
--Professional Military Education (PME). We are taking a more
comprehensive approach to the education of our people than we
have done in the past. We are in the process of developing a
PME continuum that integrates general education, traditional
Navy-specific Professional Military Education (NPME), and Joint
Professional Military Education (JPME) curricula. This will
allow us to develop a program that fully incorporates all
aspects of our professional and personal growth and development
training needs. Improvements so far include establishing
networks with civilian educational institutions, developing new
degree programs, and establishing partnerships with other
services' institutions. We are also expanding opportunity
through distance learning and the Internet. We are committed to
broadening the professional and intellectual horizons of both
our officers and our enlisted men and women to prepare them to
operate tomorrow's fleet and assume key naval and joint
leadership roles.
--Human Performance Center (HPC) has been established to apply Human
Performance and Human System Integration principles in the
research, development and acquisition processes. In short, the
HPS will help us understand the science of learning. They will
ensure training is driven by Fleet requirements and they will
focus requirements on the performance needed to carry out our
missions. This will eliminate potential performance and
training deficiencies, save money and help us improve our
readiness.
--The Integrated Learning Environment (ILE) is the heart of our
Revolution in Training. ILE is a family of systems that, when
linked, will provide our Sailors with the ability to develop
their own learning plans, diagnose their strengths and
weaknesses, and tailor their education to support both personal
and professional growth. They will manage their career
requirements, training and education records. It will match
content to career requirements so training is delivered at the
right time. Most importantly, these services will be provided
anytime, anywhere via the Internet and the Navy-Marine Corps
Intranet (NMCI).
We are taking advantage of every opportunity to accelerate the
tools we need to develop our 21st Century workforce. The improvements
and pilots that Congress has supported--including bonuses, pay table
adjustments, retirement reforms, better medical benefits, and our Sea
Warrior initiatives--are having the desired impact.
Your support of our fiscal year 2005 request for a 3.5 percent
basic pay raise, for our efforts to transform our manpower structure in
some fundamental ways, and for a reduction in average out-of-pocket
housing costs from 3.5 percent to zero will have a direct effect on our
ability to properly size and shape the 21st century workforce that is
our future.
Accelerate Our Investment in Sea Power 21
As I testified last year, Sea Power 21 defines the capabilities and
processes that the 21st century Navy will deliver. We now have an
opportunity to accelerate the advantages that our vision for a joint,
netted and sea-based force provides this nation, thanks to the
tremendous investments that you have made in our battle for people, in
the quality of service for each of our Sailors, and in readiness.
This year, we will pursue distributed and networked solutions that
could revolutionize our capability. We will focus on the power of Sea
Basing and our complementary capability and alignment with our number
one joint partner, the U.S. Marine Corps. We will sustain a robust
science and technology program, and we will exploit investments made in
joint research and development wherever possible.
For example, we are urgently pursuing technical advances to support
our Sailors, Soldiers, Airmen and Marines in Iraq. The Naval Sea
Systems Command and the Office of Naval Research are working closely
with all services, government agencies, industry, and academic and
government laboratories to identify, test, and deploy promising
technologies that can counter improvised explosive devices (IEDs),
snipers, suicide bombers and other force protection threats. We are
also pursuing other quick-reaction technology initiatives such as
persistent wide-area surveillance using small Unmanned Aerial Vehicles,
blue force tracking technology, body armor and extremity protection. We
are committed to ensuring that the joint force on the ground is as
equipped as they possibly can be to accomplish their mission.
Our highest priority programs within each of the core capability
sets that define our Sea Power 21 vision.
Sea Basing is the projection of operational independence. Our
future investments will exploit the largest maneuver areas on the face
of the earth: the sea. Sea Basing serves as the foundation from which
offensive and defensive fires are projected--making Sea Strike and Sea
Shield a reality. Sea Basing capabilities include, Joint Command and
Control, Afloat Power Projection and Integrated Joint Logistics.
Our intent is to maximize our sea basing capability and minimize as
much as possible our reliance on shore-based support nodes. To do this,
we will make doctrinal, organizational and operational changes mandated
by this concept and by the underlying technology that makes it
possible. We have an opportunity here, along with the U.S. Marine Corps
and the U.S. Army, to reexamine some of the fundamentals of not only
how we move and stage ground forces, but how we fight ashore as well.
Our highest priority Sea Basing investments include:
--Surface Combatant Family of Ships. As I've already testified, the
power of joint forces in OIF was in the synergy of individual
service strengths. The same concept holds true within the Navy
itself. We seek the synergy of networks, sensors, weapons and
platforms that will make the joint force greater in combat
power than the sum of the individual parts. Development of the
next generation of surface combatants as ``sea frames''--
analogous to ``air frames''--that are part of a modular system
is just such an endeavor.
The surface combatant family of ships allows us to dramatically
expand the growth potential of our surface combatants with less
technical and fiscal risk. To bring these concepts to life and
to take them--and the fight--to the enemy, we have decided upon
three entirely new ship classes. The first to premier will be
the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) in 2007. The advanced strike
destroyer (DD(X)) will follow in about 2011. And just a few
years after the first DD(X), the keel will be laid on the first
CG(X), the next class of cruiser designed from the keel up for
theater air and ballistic missile defense.
Our research and development efforts and experimentation with
high speed and theater support vessels like SWIFT, and the X-
Craft later this year, are helping us reduce our technical risk
and apply important lessons in hull design and mission
modularity to the development of the surface combatant family
of ships. DD(X) is the heart of the family and will spiral
promising technologies to both CG(X) and LCS in the future. I
will discuss each one of these ships in more detail below.
--CVN 21 is the centerpiece of the Navy Carrier Strike Group of the
future. It will bring transformational capabilities to the
fleet, including a new electrical generation and distribution
system, the electro-magnetic aircraft launching system (EMALS),
a new/enlarged flight deck, weapons and material handling
improvements, and a crew reduction of at least 800 personnel.
It will be able to generate higher daily and sustained sortie
rates than our NIMITZ-class aircraft carriers. Our fiscal year
2005 request of $979 million in research and development and
procurement funding continues the development of CVN 21 and
several critical technologies in the lead ship, including the
EMALS prototype and testing already ongoing in Lakehurst, New
Jersey. Construction of the CVN 21 remains on track to start in
fiscal year 2007.
--CVN 70 RCOH. The fiscal year 2005 budget provides advanced
procurement funds for the USS CARL VINSON (CVN 70) RCOH, now
scheduled to begin in fiscal year 2006. CVN 70 has sufficient
reactor fuel for one additional deployment. This action makes
the best possible use of CARL VINSON's remaining fuel capacity
and improves shipyard work loading.
--MPF(F). These future Maritime Prepositioning Ships will serve a
broader operational function than current prepositioned ships,
creating greatly expanded operational flexibility and
effectiveness. We envision a force that will enhance the
responsiveness of the joint team by the at-sea assembly of a
Marine Expeditionary Brigade that arrives by high-speed airlift
or sealift from the United States or forward operating
locations or bases. These ships will off-load forces, weapons
and supplies selectively while remaining far over the horizon,
and they will reconstitute ground maneuver forces aboard ship
after completing assaults deep inland. They will sustain in-
theater logistics, communications and medical capabilities for
the joint force for extended periods as well. Our fiscal year
2005 request accelerates the lead MPF(F) from fiscal year 2008
to fiscal year 2007 to reflect our emphasis on Sea Basing
capabilities.
Sea Strike is the projection of precise and persistent offensive
power. The core capabilities include Time Sensitive Strike;
Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance; Ship to Objective
Maneuver; and Electronic Warfare and Information Operations.
We are already investing in impressive programs that will provide
the capabilities necessary to support Sea Strike; these include the
following fiscal year 2005 priorities:
--DD(X). The technology engine for the Fleet, DD(X) is the
centerpiece of a surface combatant family of ships and will
deliver a broad range of capabilities. This advanced multi-
mission destroyer will bring revolutionary improvements to
precise, time-critical strike and joint fires and our
Expeditionary Strike Groups of the future.
Transformational and leap ahead technologies include an electric
drive and integrated power system; an Advanced Gun System with
the high rate of fire and precision to reach almost 8 times
farther and command more than 110 times the area of our current
five inch capability; the new Multi-Function Radar/Volume
Search Radar suite; optimal manning through advanced system
automation, stealth through reduced acoustic, magnetic, IR, and
radar cross-section signature; and enhanced survivability
through automated damage control and fire protection systems.
DD(X) is an enabler both technically and operationally. This
seaframe will also reduce our seagoing manpower requirements
and will lower total ownership costs.
This program will provide a baseline for spiral development of
technology and engineering to support a range of future
seaframes such as (CG(X)). It will also enable the
transformation of our operations ashore. Imagine an Army or
Marine rifleman on the ground and Navy Petty Officer at sea
looking at the same real-time picture of enemy troops encamped
at a municipal airport. With the push of a button, the rifleman
sends targeting coordinates to the Petty Officer in a DD(X)
more than 50 miles offshore. Within a few minutes, rounds from
the AGS start falling on the airport with incredible accuracy.
That kind of on-demand, persistent time-critical strike will
revolutionize our joint fire support and ground maneuver
concepts of operation and it will free our strike fighter
aircraft for more difficult targets at much greater ranges.
DD(X)'s all-electric drive, called the Integrated Power System
(IPS), will not only drive the ship through the water, but will
also generate the kind of power capacity that will enable
eventual replacement of the Advanced Gun System (AGS). When
combined with the physical capacity and volume of the hull
form, DD(X) could lead us to revolutionary technologies from
the naval research enterprise like the electromagnetic rail gun
and directed energy weapons. The fact that rail guns do not
require any explosives will free up magazine space for other
mission areas. This capability is projected to be a reality in
the 2015 to 2018 timeframe. DD(X) will be in service for
decades after that; having the kind of growth potential to
install those kinds of technologies dramatically lowers our
future development costs.
The funding profile for DD(X) supports the 14,000-ton design and
the S-Band Volume Search Radar (VSR). Lead ship detail design
and construction are planned to start in fiscal year 2005.
--JSF. The Joint Strike Fighter will enhance our Navy precision with
unprecedented stealth and range as part of the family of tri-
service, next-generation strike aircraft. It will maximize
commonality and technological superiority while minimizing life
cycle cost. The JSF has just completed the second year of a 10-
11 year development program, and is experiencing a variety of
typical challenges that affect System Development and
Demonstration (SDD) program schedule and cost. Additional
design work is required to address technical issues, primarily
weight projections. The budget therefore realigns $5 billion
from procurement appropriations in fiscal year 2005 through
fiscal year 2009, and Low Rate Initial Production was deferred
one year to fiscal year 2007. The JSF remains vital to our
future. It will give us the range, persistence and
survivability needed to keep our strike fighters viable for
years to come.
--SSGN. Funding is included in fiscal year 2005 to continue the SSGN
conversion program. Our future SSGN capability will provide
covert conventional strike platforms capable of carrying 150
Tomahawk missiles. The SSGN will also have the capacity and
capability to support Special Operations Forces for an extended
period, providing clandestine insertion and retrieval by
lockout chamber, dry deck shelters or the Advanced Seal
Delivery System, and they will be arrayed with a variety of
unmanned vehicles to enhance the joint force commander's
knowledge of the battlespace. The inherently large capacity of
these hulls will enable us to leverage future payloads and
sensors for years to come. We still expect our first SSGN to be
operational in 2007.
--EA-18G. Last year, you initiated funding at our request to replace
the aging EA-6B Prowler with the EA-18G Airborne Electronic
Attack aircraft. Increased EA-6B usage in 2003 has resulted in
wing center section or outer wing panel fatigue for some 43 EA-
6B aircraft, making your support last year critical to our
ability to dramatically accelerate the recapitalization of the
nation's only joint electronic attack capability. Using the
demonstrated growth capacity of the F/A-18E/F, the EA-18G will
quickly recapitalize our Electronic Attack capability at lower
procurement cost, with significant savings in operating and
support costs; all while providing the growth potential for
future electronic warfare (EW) system improvements. It will use
the Improved Capability Three (ICAP III) receiver suite and
provide selective reactive jamming capability to the war
fighter. This will both improve the lethality of the air wing
and enhance the commonality of aircraft on the carrier deck. We
begin purchasing airframes in fiscal year 2006 and will achieve
initial operating capability in 2009.
Sea Shield is the projection of layered, global defensive power.
Sea Shield will enhance deterrence and war fighting power by way of
real-time integration with joint and coalition forces, high speed
littoral attack platforms setting and exploiting widely distributed
sensors, and the direct projection of defensive power in the littoral
and deep inland. Sea Shield capabilities include, Homeland Defense, Sea
and Littoral Control, and Theater Air and Missile Defense. Our highest
priority Sea Shield programs this year include:
--Mine Warfare Programs. We intend to field a set of unmanned,
modular Mine Counter-Measure (MCM) systems employable from a
variety of host platforms or shore sites to minimize our risk
from mines and sustain our national economic and military
access to every corner of the globe. Our future MCM capability
will be faster, more precise and organic to both Expeditionary
and Carrier Strike Groups and will ultimately remove both the
man and our mammals from the minefield. Within the FYDP, we
expect to reduce the time that it takes to render sea mining
ineffective by at least half of the time that it takes us
today.
Our fiscal year 2005 budget request includes funding to realize
organic mine warfare capabilities in one Strike Group this
year, while maintaining the funding necessary for a potent and
dedicated Mine Countermeasure (MCM) force. We have also
requested an increase of $167 million across the FYDP for mine
warfare programs, to include unmanned vehicles such as the
Long-Term Mine Reconnaissance System (LMRS) to provide a
clandestine mine reconnaissance capability from our LOS
ANGELES-class submarines, and the Remote Minehunting System on
ARLEIGH BURKE-class destroyers (DDGs 91-96). Both of these
programs are scheduled to reach Initial Operating Capability
(IOC) milestones this year. Future introduction of the Littoral
Combat Ship (LCS) with mine warfare mission modules will
improve the ability of Strike Groups to neutralize mine threats
in parallel with--not in sequence before--other operations.
--Littoral Combat Ship (LCS). The role of LCS is to provide access to
joint forces in the littorals; a capability gap we identified
as a result of the 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review. During the
past year and a half, considerable campaign analysis and fleet
battle experiments have demonstrated that naval forces need
better ways to fight mines; small, fast, highly armed boats;
and quiet diesel and advanced air-independent propulsion
submarines operating in shallow waters. The performance of U.S.
Navy Patrol Craft and the experimental HSV-X1 JOINT VENTURE in
the Iraqi littoral was critical to the early detection and
destruction of the Iraqi mine threat. The same kind of
capability needs to be delivered in a fast, maneuverable,
shallow-draft platform that has the survivability to operate
independently. LCS will have these characteristics, along with
self-defense, navigation, and command-and-control systems.
LCS will be built from the keel up to be a part of a netted and
distributed force, and will be the first ship designed with
FORCEnet as a requirement. The main battery of LCS will be its
off-board systems: manned helicopters and unmanned aerial,
surface and underwater vehicles. It is the off-board vehicles--
with both sensors and weapons--that will enter the highest
threat areas. Its modular design, built to open-systems
architecture standards, provides flexibility and a means to
rapidly reconfigure mission modules and payloads. As technology
matures, the Navy will not have to buy a new LCS platform, but
will upgrade the mission modules or the unmanned systems.
LCS also will have an advanced hull design and be significantly
different from any warship that has been built for the U.S.
Navy. Detail design and construction of the first LCS Flight 0
ship is planned in fiscal year 2005. The LCS requirements
process is tailored to support the rapid delivery of two
flights (Flight 0 and 1) of ships, using an evolutionary,
``spiral'' acquisition approach. The spiral development process
allows time-phased capability improvement for ship and mission
systems. This incremental development and delivery strategy
supports the ship's accelerated acquisition schedule, diverse
threat and capability requirements, and dynamic levels of
technology push/pull. The ship's modular, open design will also
enable lifecycle adaptability and affordability. Four LCS's
have been added since last year's budget plan was submitted.
--Missile Defense. Our Navy is poised to contribute significantly in
fielding initial sea based missile defense capabilities to meet
the near-term ballistic missile threat to our homeland, our
deployed forces, and our friends and allies. We are working
closely under the authority of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA)
to deliver this much-needed capability to the nation's
Combatant Commanders. Our sea-based missile defense programs
experienced tremendous success on the test range this year,
scoring two of three intercepts. Continued development and
testing will support Initial Defensive Operations beginning in
the fall of 2004, with select ARLEIGH BURKE-class destroyers
providing Long Range Surveillance and Tracking to the nation's
capability late this year.
--Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft (MMA)--Broad Area Maritime
Surveillance (BAMS). We significantly increased this year's
research and development funding for the Multi-Mission Aircraft
to recapitalize our 1950's-era Lockheed ``Electra'' based P-3
force. Our acquisition plan was further refined this past year
with the integration of the Broad Area Maritime Surveillance-
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (BAMS-UAV) program into the overarching
Maritime Patrol and Armed Reconnaissance requirement. This
lethal combination of manned and unmanned reconnaissance
aircraft will recapitalize our maritime patrol anti-submarine
warfare, anti-surface warfare and armed intelligence,
surveillance and reconnaissance capability. We also developed a
robust sustainment plan for the current P-3 fleet that includes
special structural inspections (SSI) and kits that extend P-3
service lives by a minimum of 5,000 hours. This SSI program
will replace, correct or modify our current P-3 force to ensure
that they do not prematurely reach the end of their fatigue
life before we achieve Initial Operating Capability (IOC) of
the MMA in 2013.
--VIRGINIA-class submarine (SSN-774). The first ship of this class
was christened last year and will commission in 2004. This
class will replace LOS ANGELES-class (SSN-688) attack
submarines and will incorporate new capabilities, including
unmanned vehicles, and the ability to support Special Warfare
forces. It will be an integral part of the joint, networked,
dispersed 21st Century Fleet. Our fiscal year 2004 budget
funded the first of five submarines under the multi-year
procurement (MYP) contract authorized by Congress last year.
The second submarine of the MYP contract is funded in fiscal
year 2005. Approximately $240 million in economic order
quantity advance procurement is funded in fiscal year 2005 in
support of this contract.
--CG Modernization. Funding for the TICONDEROGA-class cruiser
modernization continues in fiscal year 2005. The Cruiser
Modernization Program is a mid-life upgrade for our existing
AEGIS cruisers that will ensure modern, relevant combat
capability well into this century and against evolving threats.
These warships will provide enhanced area air defense to the
joint force commander. These modifications include
installations of the Cooperative Engagement Capability, which
enhances and leverages the air defense capability of these
ships, and an ASW improvement package. These converted cruisers
could also be available for integration into ballistic missile
defense missions when that capability matures. Our first
cruiser modernization begins in fiscal year 2006.
FORCEnet is the operational construct and architectural framework
for naval warfare in the joint, information age. It will allow systems,
functions and missions to be aligned in a way that will transform our
situational awareness, accelerate speed of decisions and allow naval
forces to greatly distribute its combat power in a unified, joint
battlespace. FORCEnet provides the world-class IT tools that we need to
continue to be the world-class Navy.
Programs that will enable the future force to be more networked,
highly adaptive, human-centric, integrated, and enhance speed of
command include:
--Navy Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI). NMCI is operational and
providing commercial IT services for more than 300,000 DON
employees and two Combatant Commanders. This initiative, as
part of our FORCEnet strategy, is providing a single, secure
shore-based network and will link with our tactical networks to
provide end-to-end collaboration within the DON and across the
joint community. Fiscal year 2005 funding of $1.6 billion
provides for NMCI operations and, at the same time, continues
transition of the remaining legacy IT networks to NMCI
enterprise network services. This past year, with the help of
the authorizing language you provided, the NMCI program
finalized a full partnership agreement with the Defense
Information Systems Agency for operations and provisioning.
--Mobile User Objective System (MUOS). The new MUOS Satellite
Communications (SATCOM) program will increase DOD Narrowband
UHF SATCOM capacity by roughly 1,300 percent over current
capabilities. MUOS is a $6.4 billion joint interest program,
and it supports a particularly important ``Comms-on-the-Move''
capability for handheld terminals, aircraft, missiles, and UAVs
in urban and heavily wooded terrain. We plan to reach the
Initial Operating Capability milestone in 2009, with Full
Operational Capability in 2013.
--Joint Aerial Common Sensor (JACS). We have partnered with the Army
in the Joint Aerial Common Sensor development program in our
pursuit of a replacement for the aging EP-3 airborne
information warfare and tactical signals intelligence (SIGINT)
aircraft. JACS will provide multi-intelligence strike targeting
data and Signals Intelligence capabilities, and will include a
Synthetic Aperture Radar, Ground Moving Target Indicator,
Electro-Optical and Infrared Sights, and Measurements and
Signature capabilities. These will be coupled with automatic/
manual data fusion. Our fiscal year 2005 request includes $25
million for this program.
--Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS). JTRS will be the wireless
``last tactical mile'' component of the Global Information Grid
(GIG) and will transform Navy's tactical communications systems
by incorporating Internet Protocol (IP) communications over
multi-spectral radio frequency (RF) media. JTRS is a software
programmable, multi-band, multi-mode family of net-workable
radios, capable of simultaneous voice, data, video
communications and mobile ad hoc networking. Our fiscal year
2005 request includes $56 million for JTRS.
--Deployable Joint Command Control System (DJC\2\). DJC\2\ is the
SECDEF and CJCS priority C\2\ transformation initiative. DJC\2\
will provide a standing, fully deployable, scaleable, and
standardized command and control (C\2\) capability to the
Regional Combatant Commanders (RCC) and Joint Force Commanders.
DJC\2\ responds to the need for joint, deployable C\2\
capability, with first RCC delivery to PACOM in fiscal year
2005. DJC\2\ is an enabler for the Standing Joint Force
Headquarters concept being developed by Joint Forces Command
(JFCOM). DON is Lead Component for the acquisition program, and
we ask your support for the $81 million we've requested in
fiscal year 2005.
Improving Effectiveness
As I've testified, your Navy today is the most capable and most
ready Navy in our history, thanks in large part to the support of the
Congress and of the American people. But, I believe that we can do
better--that, in fact, we must do better--as stewards of the public
trust in determining not just how much we should spend on programs, but
how those defense dollars are spent. This is especially true today
because of the strategic challenges posed by the ongoing global war on
terrorism, because of our need to recapitalize aging, Cold War-era
infrastructure and capability, and because of the burgeoning
technological and operational changes that will dramatically alter the
way we fight. Revolutionizing the way in which our defense dollars are
spent presents opportunities to increase our effectiveness, both now
and in the future.
Sea Enterprise is focusing headquarters leadership on outputs and
execution, and is creating ideas that will improve our productivity and
reduce our overhead costs. Its key objectives are to:
--Leverage technology to improve performance and minimize manpower
costs.
--Promote competition and reward innovation and efficiency.
--Challenge institutional encumbrances that impede creativity and
boldness in innovation.
--Aggressively divest non-core, under-performing or unnecessary
products, services and production capacity.
--Merge redundant efforts.
--Minimize acquisition and life-cycle costs.
--Maximize in-service capital equipment utilization.
--Challenge every assumption, cost and requirement.
Department of the Navy senior leadership is actively engaged in
tracking the execution of ongoing Sea Enterprise initiatives totaling
approximately $40 billion, and identifying $12.4 billion in cost
savings and requirements mitigation across the Future Years Defense
Program (FYDP). We are committed to efficiency and productivity
improvements that will generate the savings necessary to augment our
investment stream and implement our Sea Power 21 vision--delivering the
right force, with the right readiness, at the right cost. Specific
highlights of these fiscal transformation initiatives include:
--Right Readiness. Along with the Fleet Response Plan, we have also
initiated processes ashore that will generate a more effective
force. As just one example, we have established a single shore
installation management organization, Commander, Navy
Installations (CNI), to globally manage all shore
installations, promote ``best practices'' development, and
provide economies of scale, increased efficiency,
standardization of polices, and improved budgeting and funding
execution. This initiative is anticipated to save approximately
$1.2 billion across the FYDP.
--Right Cost. We've taken a hard look at our ``level of effort''
programs to maximize return on taxpayer investment. This year's
effort generated $2 billion in future savings in programs not
supported by specific performance metrics in force structure,
readiness or cost benefit. In addition, we focused on
streamlining our organizations and processes as a means to
harvest efficiencies and control costs. Innovative programs
like SHIPMAIN and the Naval Aviation Readiness Integrated
Improvement Program are aiding in developing and sharing best
practices, streamlining maintenance planning and improving
performance goals in shipyards, aviation depots, and
intermediate maintenance activities. We also reorganized the
Navy Supply Systems Command, including the establishment of the
Naval Operational Logistics Support Center to consolidate
transportation, ammunition and petroleum management. We will
continue to look for additional opportunities in this area
while leveraging the gains already made.
--Right Force. We believe transformation to our future force must
include improving our buying power. To improve upon our force
structure, we're divesting non-core, redundant, under-
performing, and outdated products and services. We are using
multi-year procurement contracts and focusing where possible on
economic order quantity purchase practices to optimize our
investments. An excellent example lies in the F/A-18E/F multi-
year procurement contract that anticipates procurement of 210
aircraft while saving us in excess of $1.1 billion across the
FYDP. We also recognize the need to transform our single
greatest asymmetric advantage, our people. The upcoming year
will focus on ensuring we not only have the right number, but
the right mix of military, civilian, and contractor personnel
to accomplish the mission at the lowest possible cost. You've
given us a tremendous tool to enhance our flexibility in this
area, the National Security Personnel System, and we plan to
take full advantage of it.
Building on prior efforts, I'm dedicating a significant amount of
personal time to conducting execution reviews with leadership at the
major commands across the Navy because, as I see it, leadership
engagement in execution is an essential step to achieving our Sea
Enterprise objectives. These reviews have provided me the opportunity
to focus on the intricate details of the organizations while ensuring
commanders are aligned with the vision and direction in which we are
steaming. We focus on ways to swiftly move from strategy to
implementation, as well as innovative ways to reduce costs and return
resources to the enterprise for reinvestment.
In 2005, the Navy will continue to pursue product and process
efficiencies and the opportunities to be more effective while improving
our war fighting capability. Harvesting the savings for
recapitalization is a vital part of that effort, and we will continue
to balance the benefits of new productivity initiatives against
operational risks. Our intent is to foster a culture of continuous
process improvement, reduce overhead, and deliver the right force
structure both now and in the future.
CONCLUSION
For us, winning the Global War on Terrorism remains our number one
objective--and victory is the only acceptable outcome. To achieve this,
we are accelerating the advantages we bring to the nation.
The Fleet Response Plan will improve upon the operational
availability of fleet units, providing forward deployed forces for
enhanced regional deterrence and contingency response, while at the
same time, retaining the ability to rapidly surge in times of crisis.
We are investing in enhanced war fighting capability for the joint
force, using the extended reach of naval weapons and sensors to reach
farther and more precisely with striking power, and deliver broader
defensive protection for joint forces ashore and fully leverage our
command of the sea.
We are creating a personnel environment that attracts, retains and
relies upon creative, effective and competitive people. We are
investing in the tools, the information technology and the training
that delivers more meaningful job content to them because it is they
who offer us our greatest advantage.
The support of Congress is vital to our readiness today and to
building the Navy of tomorrow--I thank you for your dedicated efforts
and support.
STATEMENT OF GENERAL MICHAEL W. HAGEE, COMMANDANT,
UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
General Hagee. Chairman Stevens, Senator Inouye, and
distinguished members of this committee, it is my privilege to
report on the state of your Marine Corps.
First, like Admiral Clark and Secretary England, I would
like to thank you for your visits to our servicemen and women
within and outside the United States. These trips always have a
positive effect on individual morale. I would also like to
thank this committee for its support of your marines and their
families over the past few years. This support is critical to
ensuring that we remain the expeditionary force that is most
ready when the Nation is least ready.
After we withdrew from Southern Iraq, in September of last
year, we continued to have significant numbers of marines
deployed to Afghanistan, Horn of Africa, Philippines, Japan,
the Republic of Georgia, and other regions in support of the
global war on terrorism. With these ongoing deployments, and in
the midst of reconstituting our force and equipment, we were
directed to have approximately 25,000 marines trained and
prepared to deploy to Iraq within 4 months. Today, we have
nearly completed, almost 2 weeks ahead of schedule, the
movement of these marines and sailors to Kuwait and Iraq in
support of Operation Iraqi Freedom II.
Simultaneous with this major deployment, we have executed a
short-notice deployment of over 1,400 marines and sailors to
Haiti to conduct security and stability operations there. The
immediate responsiveness, speed, flexibility, and adaptability
of your marines demonstrate the continued relevance of naval
expeditionary capabilities to our Nation's security.
Your sustained commitment and support of the American
people have been indispensable in my ability to report to you
that your marines are well trained, well equipped, and highly
motivated to meet the challenges vital to maintaining the
Nation's security today and in the future.
Let me assure you that the Marine Corps' first priority is
and will continue to be warfighting readiness and excellence in
support of our Nation. In the near term, the Marine Corps is
focused on readiness to provide capable forces that meet the
demanding needs of our Nation. For the long term, the Marine
Corps and Navy are committed to developing a new
transformational sea-basing capability that will provide a
critical joint competency for assuring access and projecting
combat power ashore worldwide.
During Operation Iraqi Freedom, we used a combination of
forward-deployed marine expeditionary units, maritime pre-
positioning squadrons, two large amphibious task force, and
strategic air- and sealift to deploy a combat-ready and
sustainable force of almost 70,000 marines and sailors in less
than 60 days. No other fighting force in the world can do that.
Exploding the operational speed, reach, and inherent
flexibility of sea power, your Navy/Marine Corps team, closely
integrated with joint and coalition partners and special
operating forces, engaged in 26 days of sustained combat
operations, fought ten major engagements, destroying eight
Iraqi divisions before stopping north of Baghdad, in Tikrit,
almost 500 miles inland.
Today, marines are relieving the United States (U.S.) Army
units in Western Iraq. In preparation for this deployment, we
work closely with the U.S. Army in and out of Iraq, focusing on
equipment, tactics, techniques, and procedures. We drew on
analysis of our experiences in conducting security and
stability operations last year in Southern Iraq, the tactics of
the British, and our own extensive small-wars experience. We
have assimilated these lessons through a comprehensive training
package that includes rigorous urban operations and language
and cultural education. We are paying particular attention to
individual protective equipment, enhanced vehicle and aircraft
hardening, and aviation survival equipment and procedures.
However, we also continue to plan for the future. In close
cooperation and collaboration with the U.S. Navy, as Admiral
Clark has mentioned, we have developed operational concepts
that will deliver increased capabilities for the Nation and the
regional combatant commanders in 10 to 14 days for major
contingencies, and 0 to 4 days for smaller contingencies, an
increase in over 50 percent response time.
The MV-22 Osprey, Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, Joint
Strike Fighter, Littoral combat ship, LHA(R), DD(X), and the
Maritime Pre-positioning Force Future are in the 5-year defense
plan and are critical to this effort. These platforms will
comprise a system of systems that will significantly improve
our warfighting capabilities by leveraging advancements in
technology. The integration and interdependence of these
transformational programs will enable us, as part of the joint
force, to project more combat power ashore in less time with
the same number of marines. We ask for your continued support
of these important complementary and transformational programs
and concepts.
Your support for quality-of-life issues has been critical
in our ability to recruit and retain the best young men and
women America has to offer. The success in these programs is
reflected in our ability to continue to meet our recruiting and
retention goals even in these demanding times.
PREPARED STATEMENT
Mr. Chairman, Senator Inouye, members of this committee, I
would like to emphasize the magnificent performance of your
individual marine, the most agile and lethal weapons system on
today's battlefield. On behalf of all marines, I thank this
committee for its steadfast support, and I look forward to your
questions.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of General Michael W. Hagee
Chairman Stevens, Senator Inouye, distinguished members of the
Committee; it is my honor to report to you on the state of readiness of
your United States Marine Corps. Your Marines are firmly committed to
warfighting excellence, and the support of the Congress and the
American people has been indispensable to our success in the Global War
on Terrorism. Your sustained commitment to improving our Nation's armed
forces to meet the challenges of today as well as those of the future
is vital to the security of our Nation. On behalf of all Marines and
their families, I thank this Committee for your continued support.
INTRODUCTION
In the near-term, the Marine Corps' top priorities are to maintain
our high state of readiness and to provide capable forces that meet the
demanding needs of the Unified Combatant Commanders in order to
prosecute the Global War On Terrorism in support of the Nation. For the
long-term, the Marine Corps and Navy are committed to developing a
Seabasing capability that will provide a critical joint competency for
assuring access and projecting power that will greatly improve the
security of the United States. The marked increase in our warfighting
capability will be apparent as we introduce new systems such as the MV-
22 Osprey, the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, the Joint Strike
Fighter, and the Lightweight 155 mm howitzer into our force structure,
using them to enhance the already potent combat power of our Marine
Air-Ground Task Forces as integral elements of our Nation's joint
force.
The Navy-Marine Corps team continues to play a critical role in the
Global War On Terrorism and in the establishment of stability and
security throughout the world. During this past year, the Marine Corps,
both active and reserve, was engaged in operations from Afghanistan, to
the Arabian Gulf, the Horn of Africa, Liberia, the Georgian Republic,
Colombia, Guantanamo Bay, and the Philippines. Most prominent in
highlighting the value and power of the Nation's naval expeditionary
capability was the Marine Corps' participation in Operation IRAQI
FREEDOM. Success in this operation underscored the unique contributions
of our multi-dimensional naval dominance, our expeditionary nature, our
flexibility to deal with complex situations and challenges, and the
adaptability of our forces and individuals in order to defeat the
challenges posed by adaptive, asymmetric enemies and long-term threats.
Early last year, the I Marine Expeditionary Force deployed a combat
ready force of almost 70,000 Marines and Sailors in less than 60 days
using the full array of our complementary power projection
capabilities. Forward deployed Marine Expeditionary Units (Special
Operations Capable) again demonstrated their proven value for immediate
response. Eleven strategically located Maritime Prepositioned Force
ships were unloaded in 16 days to provide the equipment and sustainment
for two Marine Expeditionary Brigades. A seven ship amphibious force
from each coast embarked a total of 11,500 Marines, Sailors, and their
equipment and within thirty days these fourteen ships began to arrive
and offload in Kuwait. Strategic sea and air lift was also vital to our
success in this effort. Exploiting the operational speed, reach, and
inherent flexibility of seapower, the Navy-Marine Corps team achieved a
rapid buildup of sustained warfighting power that was combat ready to
support U.S. Central Command on March 1, 2003.
Closely integrated with our joint and coalition partners, as well
as Special Operations Forces, the I Marine Expeditionary Force provided
the Combatant Commander with a potent combined arms force comprising a
balance of ground, aviation, and combat service support elements all
coordinated by a dynamic command element. This teamwork--the product of
demanding and realistic Service and joint training--presented a multi-
dimensional dilemma for the Iraqi regime's forces and loyalists. It
also greatly increased the range of options available to our leadership
as they addressed each unique and complex situation. The integration of
the 1st United Kingdom Division within the I Marine Expeditionary Force
provides outstanding lessons for achieving merged coalition
capabilities and consistent goals in the future.
The combat power of I Marine Expeditionary Force generated an
operational tempo that our enemy could not match. With short notice
that operations would commence early, the Marines and their joint and
coalition partners rapidly secured key strategic objectives. The I
Marine Expeditionary Force then engaged in 26 days of sustained combat
operations. Using the tenets of maneuver warfare, they executed four
major river crossings, fought ten major engagements, and destroyed
eight Iraqi divisions before stopping in Tikrit--almost 500 miles
inland. In support of Joint Special Operations Forces Northern Iraq,
the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit inserted a Marine-Air Ground Task
Force from the Eastern Mediterranean into Northern Iraq--almost 1,200
miles distance. The sustained resources of the Marine force, which were
derived primarily from our seaborne logistics, provided us unrivaled
advantages. While our logistics were stretched by the operational
commanders, our combat service support units demonstrated flexibility
and resourcefulness.
Highlighting the expeditionary mindset of Marines, our combined
arms force successfully operated in desert, urban, swamp, and rural
environments while effectively conducting combat, peacekeeping, and
humanitarian operations--at times simultaneously. Marines also
demonstrated the ability to re-task and reorganize to conduct
unanticipated missions like the taking of the city of Tikrit. Following
major combat operations, I Marine Expeditionary Force assumed
responsibility for security and stability in five Central Iraq
provinces until they were relieved of the last province by coalition
forces this past September. Flexibility and adaptability are key
characteristics of an expeditionary force, and they are critical
advantages that we must seek to optimize for the future, particularly
in this era of global uncertainty.
Recent operations also emphasize the increased importance of access
to key regions for projecting our Nation's power. With global
interests, the United States must retain the capability to secure
access as needed. Power projection from the sea greatly increases the
range of options available to avert or resolve conflicts. A credible
naval forcible-entry capability is critical to ensure that we are never
barred from a vital national objective or limited to suboptimal
alternatives.
Since the end of major combat operations, the Marine Corps has been
setting the force in order to enhance warfighting readiness for future
contingencies. We are reloading combat equipment and materiel on the
ships of the Maritime Prepositioned Squadrons while also ensuring that
the requirements for Operation IRAQI FREEDOM II are fulfilled. We are
using provided funding to repair, refurbish, and where necessary,
replace equipment. During this period, Marines have continued to
forward deploy. Marine Corps units are supporting Operation ENDURING
FREEDOM in Afghanistan, operations in the Horn of Africa, exercises
critical to supporting the Combatant Commanders' Theater Security
Cooperation Plans, and counter-drug operations in support of joint and
joint-interagency task forces. In addition, we have conducted a major
program to identify and analyze lessons learned from the Iraqi
campaign. We have also begun to assimilate these lessons and determine
where and how our force should be rebalanced.
As the last few years have demonstrated, the Marine Corps Reserve
is a full partner in our total force. Reserve units participated in all
aspects of the war in Iraq, providing air, ground, and combat service
support as well as a large number of individual augmentees to Marine
and joint staffs. Mobilized Marine reserve infantry battalions have
also served as ready reaction forces, ``on call'' to support the
Federal Emergency Management Agency's role in homeland security.
BUILDING ON SUCCESS FOR IMMEDIATE OPERATIONS
We continue to execute global operations and exercises with our
joint and coalition partners. The Marine Corps is beginning to relieve
the 3d Armored Cavalry Regiment and the 82d Airborne Division in
Western Iraq in support of Operation IRAQI FREEDOM II. These forces
will be deployed in two rotations of seven months each. This rotation
policy will result in the least disruption for the long-term health of
the Marine Corps, precluding stop-loss/stop-move and unnecessary
interruptions in recruit training, career progression and development,
professional military education, and other deployment requirements. The
first rotation, from March until September 2004, will include 25,000
Marines and their equipment and includes almost 3,000 reserve component
Marines. A second rotation--of like size and composition--will overlap
the first and ensure a smooth and stable transition.
In preparation for Operation IRAQI FREEDOM II, I Marine
Expeditionary Force has analyzed lessons learned from their experiences
in conducting security and stability operations from March to September
2003, and recent Army lessons learned. As they did last year, I Marine
Expeditionary Force is working closely with the Army forces in Iraq;
they have conducted a number of liaison visits with the Army units they
will relieve. They have drawn from procedures used by the Los Angeles
Police Department for neighborhood patrolling in gang dominated areas,
the tactics of the British in Iraq--which reflect years of experience
in low intensity conflicts and peacekeeping operations, as well as the
Marine Corps' own extensive ``Small Wars'' experience. We have
assimilated these lessons through a comprehensive training package that
includes tactics, techniques, procedures for stability and counter-
insurgency operations. We have conducted rigorous urban operations
training and exercises. Over 400 Marines are receiving Arabic language
immersion training, and all deploying Marines and Sailors are receiving
extensive cultural education. Our supporting establishment is focused
on the equipment, logistics, and training requirements of this force--
paying particular attention to individual protective equipment,
enhanced vehicle and aircraft hardening, and aviation survival
equipment and procedures. This training and support are critically
important as we send Marines back to war in a volatile, dangerous, and
changing situation.
During this next year Marine Expeditionary Units will still deploy
as part of Naval Expeditionary Strike Groups in support of Combatant
Commander requirements. Units will continue to rotate to Okinawa and
Iwakuni Japan, and some of those forces will further deploy in support
of Operation IRAQI FREEDOM II. While the operational tempo remains
high, recruiting and retention continue to exceed our goals. We are
monitoring the health of our Service, and we are focused on ensuring
that the Marine Corps remains ready for all current and future
responsibilities.
TAKING CARE OF OUR OWN
Events of the past year continue to highlight the value of the
individual Marine over all other weapon ``systems.'' While we always
strive to provide our Marines with the best equipment and weapons, we
never forget that people and leadership are the foundations of the
Marine Corps' readiness and warfighting capabilities. Operation IRAQI
FREEDOM demonstrated that the Marine Corps' recruiting, training, and
education of the force are extremely successful in maintaining the high
standards of military readiness our Nation requires. The Marine Corps
remains committed to taking care of our Marines, their families, and
our civilian Marines.
Marines
End Strength.--The Marine Corps is assimilating the Congressionally
authorized increase in Marine Corps end-strength to 175,000. The
increase of 2,400 Marines previously authorized by Congress addressed
an urgent need to train and maintain enough Marines for the long-term
requirements associated with the Global War on Terrorism. It has been
particularly important in enabling us to provide the Nation with a
robust, scalable force option specifically dedicated to anti-
terrorism--the 4th Marine Expeditionary Brigade (Anti-Terrorism).
The Marine Corps is expeditionary by nature and therefore
accustomed to deploying in support of contingency and forward presence
missions. We are structured in such a way as to satisfy our enduring
requirements and meet operational contingencies as long as the
contingencies are temporary in nature. While the force is stretched, we
are meeting our current challenging operational commitments. Our high
operational and personnel tempos have not negatively impacted
accessions or retention efforts; however, we continue to monitor both
very closely.
Recruiting.--Sustaining our ranks with the highest quality young
men and women is the mission of the Marine Corps Recruiting Command.
Recruiting Command has consistently accomplished this mission for more
than eight years for enlisted recruiting and thirteen years for officer
recruiting. This past year the Marine Corps recruited over 100 percent
of its goal with over 97 percent Tier I High School graduates. In order
to continue attracting America's finest youth, Recruiting Command
provides its recruiters the best tools available to accomplish their
mission.
The Marine Corps Reserve achieved its fiscal year 2003 recruiting
goals with the accession of 6,174 Non-Prior Service Marines and 2,663
Prior Service Marines. With regard to our reserve component, officer
recruiting and retention to fill out the requirements of our Selected
Marine Corps Reserve units remains our most challenging concern. This
is primarily due to the fact that we recruit Reserve officers almost
exclusively from the ranks of those who have first served a tour as an
active duty Marine officer and currently the Corps is experiencing a
low attrition rate for company grade officers in our active force. We
are attempting to alleviate this challenge. Two successful methods
include increasing awareness of the benefits of service in the Reserves
to the company grade officers who are leaving the active ranks and
reserve officer programs for qualified enlisted Marines.
Retention.--Retaining the best and the brightest Marines is a
constant goal; history has proven that superb leadership in the staff
noncommissioned officer ranks is a major contributor to the Corps'
combat effectiveness. The ranks of this elite group of leaders can only
be filled by retaining our best enlisted Marines. The Marine Corps has
two retention measures and both clearly indicate healthy service
continuation rates. Our First Term Alignment Plan (first tour) has
consistently achieved its reenlistment requirements over the past nine
years. With under one-half of the current fiscal year completed, we
have achieved 82 percent of our first-term retention goal. Furthermore,
our Subsequent Term Alignment Plan (second tour and beyond) reveals
that we have already retained 66 percent of our goal for this fiscal
year.
Current officer retention is at a nineteen year high, continuing a
four-year trend of increasing retention. Despite the increased
retention overall, certain Military Occupational Specialties
perennially suffer high attrition. We are attempting to overcome this
challenge by offering continuation pay for those Marines with Military
Occupational Specialties that include special qualifications and
skills. Military compensation that is competitive with the private
sector provides the flexibility required to meet the challenge of
maintaining stability in manpower planning.
Marine Corps Reserve.--In 2003, the Marine Corps Reserve rapidly
mobilized combat ready Marines to augment and reinforce the active
component. Marine Corps Reserve activations in support of Operation
IRAQI FREEDOM began in January 2003, and peaked at 21,316 Reserve
Marines on active duty in May 2003. This represented 52 percent of the
Selected Marine Corps Reserve (SMCR). Of the over 5,400 Reservists
currently on active duty, almost 1,300 Individual Mobilization
Augmentees, Individual Ready Reserves, and Retirees fill critical joint
and internal billets. As of January 2004, the Marine Corps Reserve
began activating approximately 7,000 SMCR Marines in support of
Operation IRAQI FREEDOM II. Judicious employment of Reserve Marines
remains a top priority of the Marine Corps to ensure the Marine Corps
Reserve maintains the capability to augment and reinforce the active
component. Marine Corps Reserve units and individuals are combat ready
and have rapidly integrated into active forces commands demonstrating
the effectiveness of the Total Force Marine Corps.
A strong Inspector-Instructor system and a demanding Mobilization
and Operational Readiness Deployment Test program ensured Marine Corps
Reserve units achieved a high level of pre-mobilization readiness.
Marine Reserve Units continuously train to a C1/C2 readiness standard,
eliminating the need for post-mobilization certification. Ninety-eight
percent of SMCR Marines called up for duty reported for mobilization
and less than one percent requested a deferment, delay, or exemption.
The Marine Corps Reserve executed a rapid and efficient mobilization
with units averaging six days from notification to being deployment-
ready, and 32 days after receiving a deployment order they arrived in
theater. Many activated Marine Reserve units were ready to deploy
faster than strategic lift could be provided.
Building on the important lessons of the last year, the Marine
Corps is pursuing several transformational initiatives to enhance the
Reserves' capabilities as a ready and able partner with our active
component. These pending initiatives include: increasing the number of
Military Police units in the reserve component; establishing a Reserve
Intelligence Support Battalion to include placing Reserve Marine
Intelligence Detachments at the Joint Reserve Intelligence Centers;
returning some of our Civil Affairs structure to the active component
to provide enhanced planning capabilities to the operational and
Service Headquarters; and, introducing an improved Individual Augmentee
Management Program to meet the growing joint and internal requirements.
When called, the Marine Corps Reserve is ready to augment and
reinforce. Our Reserve Marines are a vital and critical element of our
Total Force. The training, leadership, and quality of life of our
reserve component remain significant Marine Corps priorities.
Marine For Life.--The commitment to take care of our own includes a
Marine's transition from active service back to civilian life. The
Marine For Life Program's mission is to provide sponsorship for our
more than 27,000 Marines who honorably leave active service each year.
The program was created to nurture and sustain the positive, mutually
beneficial relationships inherent in our ethos, ``Once a Marine, Always
a Marine.'' In cities across the United States, Reserve Marines help
transitioning Marines and their families get settled in their new
communities. Sponsorship includes assistance with employment,
education, housing, childcare, veterans' benefits, and other support
services needed to make a smooth transition. To provide this support,
Marine For Life taps into the network of former Marines and Marine-
friendly businesses, organizations and individuals willing to lend a
hand to a Marine who has served honorably.
Initiated in fiscal year 2002, the program will reach full
operational capability in fiscal year 2004. In addition to 110 Reserve
Marines serving as ``Hometown Links,'' an enhanced web-based electronic
network, easily accessed by Marines worldwide, will support the
program. The end state of the Marine For Life Program is a nationwide
Marine and Marine-friendly network available to all Marines honorably
leaving active service, that will improve their transition to civilian
life.
Civilian Marines
Civilian Workforce Campaign Plan.--Recognizing that our Civilian
Marines are integral to the success of military operations, General
James L. Jones, the 32nd Commandant of the Marine Corps, charged our
senior Marine Corps officials with the development and implementation
of a strategic 5-year plan for the recruitment, development, and
retention of our Civilian Marines. The Civilian Workforce Campaign Plan
(CWCP) consists of six strategic goals: (1) nurture, build, and grow
Civilian Marines; (2) provide flexible career opportunities; (3) create
leaders at all levels; (4) improve the performance evaluation system;
(5) strengthen workforce management expertise; and (6) establish an
integrated Total Force management approach. As Commandant, I have
provided the following additional implementing guidance.
Our vision is to make the Marine Corps the employer of choice for a
select group of civilians imbued with the Marine Corps values of honor,
courage, and commitment. Through implementation of the CWCP, we will
not only define what the Marine Corps will offer its Civilian Marines,
but what the Corps expects from them. We will attract, nurture, build,
and grow Civilian Marines by providing innovative recruitment,
development, retention, reward, and acculturation programs throughout
the work-life cycle.
National Security Personnel System.--We want to take this occasion
to thank again the committee and the Congress for enacting the National
Security Personnel System (NSPS) in the Fiscal Year 2004 National
Defense Authorization Act. The Act authorized a more flexible civilian
personnel management system for the Department that allowed the
Department to be a more competitive and progressive employer at a time
when our national security demands a highly responsive system of
civilian personnel management. The legislation ensures that merit
system principles govern any changes in personnel management,
whistleblowers are protected, discrimination remains illegal, and
veterans' preference is protected. The Department will collaborate with
employee representatives, invest time to try and work out our
differences, and notify Congress of any differences before
implementation. In January, Department officials met with union
representatives to begin the development of a new system of labor-
management relations. Later this year, following an intensive training
program for supervisors, managers, human resources specialists,
employees, as well as commanders and senior management, the Department
plans to begin implementing NSPS. The Marine Corps, along with the
entire Department of the Navy, expects to be in the first wave of
implementation.
Military-Civilian Conversions.--The Marine Corps will continue to
actively pursue a review of all functional areas within the Marine
Corps in an effort to return more Marines to the operating forces.
Through fiscal year 2003, we have returned over 2,000 manned structure
spaces to the operating forces, and we will return approximately 650
more Marines in fiscal year 2004. The fiscal year 2005 President's
Budget converts roughly an additional 1,400 more billets from Marines
to Civilian Marines, which will provide us more options to increase
manning in the operating forces.
Education
Amid today's uncertain, volatile security environment, our most
effective weapon remains the individual Marine who out-learns, out-
thinks, and out-fights any adversary. Such warfighting competence is
secured only through intellectual development. Recent events
demonstrated how quality education instills confidence in Marines. Our
educational standards and programs produce innovative leaders who take
initiative and excel during challenging situations involving
uncertainty and risk. These high educational standards are inculcated
by the Marine Corps University and are designed to target every rank in
both our active and reserve forces. Each year the Marine Corps
University student population includes members of the other armed
services, various government agencies as well as dozens of
international military officers from over thirty different countries.
The Marine Corps endeavors to provide its Marines with ``lifelong
learning'' opportunities through a variety of educational programs,
college courses, and library services on our bases and stations.
Furthermore, distance learning programs through the Marine Corps
University make continuing education available to Marines regardless of
their location. In addition, the Marine Corps will continue to fully
fund the Tuition Assistance Program in accordance with the Department
of Defense guideline--funding for 100 percent of tuition cost up to
$250 per semester hour with a maximum of $4,500 per year. In fiscal
year 2003, there were 25,454 Marines enrolled in almost 80,000 courses
with the help of the Tuition Assistance Program.
Joint Initiatives.--The Marine Corps synchronizes its educational
objectives with those of the other armed services in order to provide
Regional Combatant Commanders with the most capable joint force. We
support the proposal for a Joint Advanced Warfighting School (JAWS) and
for broadening Joint Professional Military Education (JPME)
opportunities for the Total Force. By working closely with Joint Forces
Staff College and our sister services, JAWS has the potential to
empower future combatant commanders with talented officers who are
experienced in campaign planning. Intent on broadening our joint
experience base, the Marine Corps is pursuing an accredited advanced
joint curriculum (JPME Phase II) at the Marine Corps War College and
will continue to work to provide JPME opportunities for both active and
reserve components.
Senior Leader Development Program.--The Senior Leader Development
Program was developed last year to address General Officer and Senior
Executive Service career development and to link education
opportunities to career progression. A study was commissioned to
identify the competencies required in each of our general officer
billets in an effort to link core and complimentary curriculum with the
assignment process. Within the core curriculum, senior leaders will
attend the Joint Warfare series of courses as prerequisites by rank and
billet while they study innovation, business transformation, and
resource management through complementary courses.
Quality of Life/Quality of Service
The Marine Corps works to improve the quality of life for Marines
and their families in order to continue the success of the all
volunteer force. We provide excellent quality of life programs and
services, while also helping new Marines to better understand what to
expect in the military lifestyle. We continuously assess, through a
variety of means, the attitudes and concerns of Marines and their
families regarding their quality of life expectations. With 67 percent
of our Marines deployed away from their home installations at the
height of Operation IRAQI FREEDOM, we carefully captured lessons
learned to ensure quality of life programs meet the needs of deployed
Marines and families who remain at home. Community and Family
Assistance Centers were established at Camp Lejeune, Camp Pendleton,
Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, and Marine Corps Base Twentynine
Palms to provide Marine family members and loved ones access to
relevant information and referral services.
To further help Marines and their families before, during, and
after deployments, the Marine Corps implemented Marine Corps Community
Services (MCCS) One Source, a Marine Corps-conducted, Department of
Defense funded pilot program providing around-the-clock information and
referral services. MCCS One Source is especially useful to our
activated Marine Reserves and their families as they negotiate the
requirements and procedures associated with utilization of military
programs such as TRICARE and other benefit services. In recognition of
the importance of the transition home after deployments for both
Marines and their families, the Marine Corps developed a standardized
return and reunion program consisting of a mandatory warrior transition
brief for returning Marines, a return and reunion guidebook for Marines
and family members, a caregiver brief, and briefs designed for spouses.
We greatly appreciate the supplemental appropriations bills during
2003, that contained additional help for deployed Marines and their
families. In 2004, quality of life efforts will continue to focus on
issues related to supporting deployed forces and their families.
Safety
Safety programs are vital to force protection and operational
readiness. Marine leaders understand the importance of leadership,
persistence, and accountability in the effort to reduce mishaps and
accidents. The fiscal year 2003 off duty and operational mishap rates
were driven upward by the mishaps that occurred during and post
Operation IRAQI FREEDOM, while the aviation mishap rate decreased. To
meet the Secretary of Defense's challenge to all Services to reduce
mishaps by 50 percent in two years, the Marine Corps is focusing on
initiatives that deal particularly with the development of strategies
and specific interventions to reduce all mishaps. Our leadership at
every level understand the challenge, and we are actively involved in
the effort to safeguard our most precious assets--Marines and Sailors.
BUILDING ON SUCCESS FOR THE FUTURE
The Marine Corps, in partnership with our Navy brethren, provides
our Nation with unrivaled maritime power to help secure peace and
promote our national interests. The President's fiscal year 2005
budget, together with your support, will provide a strong foundation
for our continued success. The fiscal year 2005 budget--predicated on a
peacetime operational tempo--sustains a high level of readiness and
ensures our ability to rapidly respond to emerging situations. It also
allows us to assimilate new technologies and explore new concepts that
will help realize the full potential of our people and their equipment.
We will continue to seek improved means to increase the efficiency of
our investments and increase the combat effectiveness of our forces.
Technology and Experimentation
The Marine Corps has a long history of innovation and adaptation.
Experimentation is our principle means to explore new ideas and
technologies in order to develop new capabilities to overcome emerging
challenges. The Marine Corps Combat Development Command has realigned
its experimentation program around the Sea Viking campaign. This
campaign will explore both concept and prototype technology development
pathways leading to the sea-based expeditionary capabilities envisioned
for the future, to include forcible entry from the sea. The Sea Viking
campaign is complementary to the joint concept development and
experimentation campaign of Joint Forces Command and the Navy's Sea
Trial experimentation process. As an integral part of this effort, the
Marine Corps is refining the expeditionary combat capabilities best
suited to participate in future Expeditionary Strike Group and
Expeditionary Strike Force operations. It is also exploring the
potential for an expanded Seabasing capability in support of future
joint operations.
The Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory has experimented with
several new pieces of equipment to enhance individual and small unit
effectiveness. Based on successful experimentation, limited numbers of
the M16A4 Modular Weapons System, Rifle Combat Optic, and the
Integrated Intra Squad Radio were fielded for use during Operation
IRAQI FREEDOM. The Marine Corps continues to seek enhanced capabilities
for the future as we continue to improve and transform the force. In
addition, we have procured sufficient quantities of the Outer Tactical
Vest and its Small Arms Protective Insert plates to ensure all Marines
participating in Operation IRAQI FREEDOM II are equipped with enhanced
ballistic protection.
New Concepts and Organizations
The Expeditionary Force Development System implemented this past
year is a methodological process that is designed to facilitate the
development and realization of military operational concepts. It is a
streamlined and integrated system that covers all phases of concept
development to the acquisition of necessary equipment and weapons
systems. The Expeditionary Force Development System proved to be of
great value to our forces engaged in combat operations and is proving
to be a helpful means of ensuring that the Marine Corps quickly profits
from recent operational experiences. The system is compatible with and
supports naval and joint transformation efforts as it integrates
transformational, modernization, and legacy capabilities and processes.
Several emerging concepts and organizational structures are maturing
that will benefit the Marine Corps and ensure we can meet the future
demanding requirements of the Combatant Commanders.
The Seabasing Concept.--Seabasing, envisioned as a National
capability, is our overarching transformational operating concept for
projecting and sustaining multi-dimensional naval power and selected
joint forces at sea. As stated by the Defense Science Board in its
August 2003 Task Force report: ``Seabasing represents a critical future
joint military capability for the United States.'' It assures joint
access by leveraging the operational maneuver of forces globally from
the sea, and reduces joint force operational dependence upon fixed and
vulnerable land bases. Seabasing unites our capabilities for projecting
offensive power, defensive power, command and control, mobility and
sustainment around the world. This will provide our Regional Combatant
Commanders with unprecedented versatility to generate operational
maneuver. Seabasing will allow Marine forces to strike, commence
sustainable operations, enable the flow of follow-on forces into
theater, and expedite the reconstitution and redeployment of Marine
forces for follow-on missions. As the core of Naval Transformation,
Seabasing will provide the operational and logistical foundation to
enable the other pillars of Naval Transformation (Sea Strike, Sea
Shield, Sea Base, and FORCEnet).
This year, the Marine Corps has continued to refine plans for the
Marine Expeditionary Brigade of 2015, in concert with our concept for
sea-based operations. Similarly, the Analysis of Alternatives for our
Maritime Prepositioning Force (Future), a critical component of
Seabasing, will provide valid choices for achieving Seabasing
capabilities. These initiatives will complement, rather than replace,
the amphibious lift and forcible entry capacity of the LHA(R), LPD-17,
and LHD, and will provide the Nation a deployment and employment
capability unmatched in the modern world.
Expeditionary Strike Groups.--The Marine Corps and Navy continue
the series of experiments that will refine the Expeditionary Strike
Group concept. This concept will combine the capabilities of surface
action groups, submarines, and maritime patrol aircraft with those of
Amphibious Ready Groups and enhanced Marine Expeditionary Units
(Special Operations Capable) to provide greater combat capabilities to
Regional Combatant Commanders. Navy combatants are incorporated within
the existing training and deployment cycle of the Amphibious Ready
Group. Further experimentation will also allow us to test command-and-
control arrangements for the Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG). The ESG-
1, composed of West Coast Navy and Marine forces, recently completed
the pilot deployment in this series. The ESG-2, composed of East Coast
Navy and Marine forces, will deploy later this year. Currently, the
Marine Corps Combat Development Command is working with Navy and Marine
operating forces to capture critical information from these
experimental deployments to ensure that the ESG capability thoroughly
integrates doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership,
education, personnel, and facilities. Also, the Marine Corps Combat
Development Command is working with the Navy to develop the concept for
the employment of the additional capabilities that the ESG provides
Regional Combatant Commanders. Finally, the Center for Naval Analyses
is evaluating the series of experiments through embedded analysts
deployed with both ESGs and will submit their consolidated reports to
the Navy and Marine Corps in October 2004.
Marine Corps--U.S. Special Operations Command Initiatives.--The
Marine Corps continues to aggressively improve interoperability with
Special Operations Forces. The U.S. Special Operations Command-Marine
Corps Board has developed over 30 initiatives to support our
interoperability goals. The Marine Corps and U.S. Special Operations
Command are working to leverage existing pre-deployment and deployment
training as a means to ``operationalize'' our relationship. Our
deploying Marine Expeditionary Units (Special Operations Capable)
exchange liaison officers with the Theater Special Operations Commands
as the Marine Expeditionary Units deploy within the various theaters.
On June 20, 2003, a Marine Corps ``proof of concept'' Detachment that
is task organized to complement U.S. Special Operations Command mission
areas in Direct Action, Special Reconnaissance, Coalition Support and
Foreign Internal Defense formally stood up at Camp Pendleton,
California. The Detachment transferred to the operational control of
U.S. Special Operations Command last December, to facilitate joint pre-
deployment training and is scheduled to deploy in April 2004, with a
Naval Special Warfare Squadron supporting U.S. Central Command.
Finally, we are conducting joint training with U.S. Special Operations
Command in the areas of fixed and rotary wing air support of special
operation missions.
Reestablishment of Air-Naval Gunfire Liaison Companies.--During
this past summer the Marine Corps reestablished an Air-Naval Gunfire
Liaison Company in I Marine Expeditionary Force and another in the II
Marine Expeditionary Force. These companies provide teams that
specialize in all aspects of fire support--from terminal control to
support of division fire support coordination centers. They greatly
enhance Marine Air-Ground Task Force Commanders' liaison capability--
with foreign area expertise--to plan, coordinate, employ, and conduct
terminal control of fires in support of joint, allied, and coalition
forces. Each company will be fully stood up by this summer, and a
separate platoon will be stood up in III Marine Expeditionary Force in
October 2004.
Tactical Aircraft Integration.--Naval Tactical Aircraft (TacAir)
Integration makes all Naval Strike-Fighter aircraft available to meet
both Services' warfighting and training requirements. As part of the
TacAir Integration plan, a Marine Fighter-Attack squadron will
eventually be attached to each of the ten active Carrier Air Wings and
will deploy aboard aircraft carriers. In addition, three Navy Strike-
Fighter squadrons will be assigned into the Marine Corps' Unit
Deployment Program for land-based deployments. Force structure
reductions associated with this plan should result in a total cost
savings and cost avoidance of over $30 billion. The integration of the
fifth Marine squadron into a Carrier Air Wing and the first Navy
squadron into the Unit Deployment Program are scheduled for later this
year.
TacAir Integration retains our warfighting potential and brings the
Naval Services a step closer to the flexible sea based force we
envision for the future. A leaner, more efficient naval strike-fighter
force is possible because of three underlying factors. The first factor
is ``Global Sourcing''--the ability to task any non-deployed Department
of Navy squadron to either Service's missions, allowing for a reduction
in force structure. Second, ``Level Readiness''--applying the proper
resources to training, maintenance, and modernization, will ensure the
smaller force is always capable of responding to the Services' and
Nation's needs. Third, the development of an operational concept that
will efficiently manage the employment of this integrated strike-
fighter force within the naval and joint context. Support of readiness
accounts, modernization programs, and our replacement of the F/A-18 and
AV-8B with the Short Takeoff and Vertical Landing (STOVL) Joint Strike
Fighter will ensure the potential promised by this integration.
Better Business Practices
The Secretary of Defense and Secretary of the Navy have emphasized,
and the Marine Corps is committed to, business transformation in order
to optimize resource allocation. The Marine Corps is employing a
variety of business transformation initiatives including: competitive
sourcing of over 3,500 commercial billets to save $57 million annually;
outsourcing garrison food service in our mess halls in the continental
United States in to free up 594 Marines for other duties; using public-
private ventures to fund new family housing and to increase the
quantity of safe, comfortable, and affordable homes; consolidation of
equipment maintenance from five to three echelons in order to improve
maintenance effectiveness and efficiency; and, regionalizing garrison
mobile equipment to realign Marines and dollars with higher priorities.
The Marine Corps continues to develop its activity based costing
capability in order to support fact based decision making.
In March 2003, the Marine Corps began participation in the Navy
Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI)--a network outsourcing initiative that
will provide a common end-to-end Department of Navy information system
capability for voice, video, and data communications. By outsourcing
information technology services not considered to be core competencies,
the Marine Corps has been able to return 355 supporting establishment
personnel structure spaces to the operating forces. As a result of this
improved business practice, the NMCI operating environment will promote
greater naval interoperability. The Marine Corps will continue to
refine our business practices and increase the effectiveness of
warfighting potential.
OUR MAIN EFFORT--EXCELLENCE IN WARFIGHTING
Training
Training at Eglin Air Force Base.--In anticipation of the cessation
of naval expeditionary forces training in Vieques, Puerto Rico, efforts
began in September 2002 to establish a new training capability at Eglin
Air Force Base (AFB). Training at Eglin AFB is envisioned to provide a
near term pre-deployment training capability for East Coast Navy
Amphibious Ready Groups/Expeditionary Strike Groups and Marine
Expeditionary Units (Special Operations Capable), with the potential to
be part of the long-term solution. The training concept was designed
for up to two 10-day training periods per year. The long-term objective
is that during each 10-day event, the Expeditionary Strike Groups will
be able to conduct the full spectrum of training required. The Marine
Corps has invested approximately $4.2 million in environmental
assessment/mitigation and infrastructure development required to
establish an initial training capability at Eglin AFB.
In December 2003, the Marine Corps completed its first 10-day
training period at Eglin AFB, at an additional cost of approximately $1
million. The Marine Corps is assessing the quality the training offered
at Eglin AFB while continuing to explore and develop other options,
both within the United States and abroad. While Eglin AFB has the
potential for enhanced live fire and maneuver training, developing this
capability will require a significant investment by the Department of
the Navy and Department of Defense to upgrade existing facilities.
Joint National Training Capability.--As described by the Deputy
Secretary of Defense: ``The centerpiece of our Training Transformation
effort will be a Joint National Training Capability.'' The Joint
National Training Capability is one of the three pillars of Training
Transformation, and will improve joint interoperability by adding
certified ``joint context'' to existing Service training events. The
Joint National Training Capability is a cooperative collection of
interoperable training sites, nodes, and events that synthesizes
Combatant Commander and Service training requirements with the
appropriate level of joint context.
The first in a series of pre-Initial Operational Capability Joint
National Training Capability exercises was held in January 2004,
linking a Marine Corps Combined Arms Exercise with live Close Air
Support sorties, a Navy Stand-off Land Attack Missile Exercise, an Army
rotation at the National Training Center, and an Air Force Air Warrior
Exercise. The Marine Corps will be actively involved in future Joint
National Training Capability exercises including Combined Arms
Exercises and Marine Aviation Weapons and Tactics Squadron-1 evolutions
scheduled for fiscal year 2005. The Marine Corps is fully engaged in
the Joint National Training Capability program development, and is on
track to enhance Service core-competency training with the appropriate
level of joint context. In concert with the other Services, the Marine
Corps is working with Joint Forces Command to refine the phrase ``joint
context,'' certify ranges, and accredit exercises to ensure the force
is training properly.
Infrastructure
Blount Island Facility.--The acquisition of the Blount Island
facility in Jacksonville, Florida, is critical to our Nation and to our
Corps' warfighting capabilities. Blount Island's peacetime mission is
to support the Maritime Prepositioning Force. Its wartime capability
and capacity to support massive logistics sustainment from the
continental United States gives it strategic significance. The Blount
Island facility has a vital role in the National Military Strategy as
the site for maintenance operations of the Maritime Prepositioning
Force. The Marine Corps thanks Congress for your role in supporting
this acquisition project. Phase II, funded by the $115.7 million
appropriated in the Defense Authorization Act of 2004, gives the Marine
Corps ownership of the leased maintenance area and supporting dredge
disposal site consisting of 1,089 acres.
Encroachment.--We are grateful to Congress for providing a tool to
facilitate the management of incompatible developments adjacent to or
in close proximity to military lands. We are working with state and
local governments and with non-governmental organizations such as the
Trust for Public Lands, The Nature Conservancy, the Sierra Club, and
the Endangered Species Coalition to acquire lands buffering or near our
bases including Camp Lejeune, Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, and
Camp Pendleton. In return for our investment, the Marine Corps is
receiving restrictive easements that ensure lands acquired remain
undeveloped and serve as buffer zones against future encroachment on
our bases.
We are also grateful to Congress for codifying legislation that
gives us the opportunity to partner with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and State fish and game agencies in order to manage endangered
species present on military lands. Management via our Integrated
Natural Resources Management Plans, which we prepare in partnerships
with these agencies, allows us to protect and enhance populations of
these species on our lands while allowing Marines to train. Finally, we
support the Secretary of Defense's efforts to provide flexibility under
the Clean Air Act and to clarify the governing authorities under which
DOD would manage operational ranges. The Marine Corps strives to be a
good environmental steward and the growing number of endangered species
on our lands and their increasing populations are examples of our
successes. We remain committed to protecting the resources entrusted to
us by the American people.
Base Realignment and Closures.--A successful Base Realignment and
Closure process, resulting in recommendations in 2005, is critically
important to the Nation, the Department of Defense, and the Department
of Navy. By eliminating excesses and improving efficiencies, the armed
services will achieve a transformation of our infrastructure in the
same way we are achieving a transformation of our forces.
Recommendations will be developed only after a thorough and in-depth
review.
Command and Control
Naval expeditionary warfare will depend heavily on the ability of
the forces to share linked and fused information from a common source
which will, in turn, ensure command and control of widely dispersed
forces. Exploiting the use of space, ground and aerial platforms
requires a networked, protected, and assured global grid of
information. Leveraging command and control technology to improve our
interoperability continues to be our focus of effort.
Advances in technology and a need to leverage existing
infrastructure requires us to establish a new Information Technology
(IT) framework--one that is more reliable, efficient, secure, and
responsive. This new IT framework must provide enhanced information
access and improved information services to the operating forces. By
streamlining the deployment of IT tools and realigning our IT
resources, the Marine Corps Enterprise IT Services will shift the
burden away from the operating forces by establishing a new IT
environment. This IT environment will fuse and integrate Department
wide, net-centric enterprise services to provide a common set of
sharable IT services to the entire Marine Corps. By eliminating
individual organizations providing duplicative and redundant services,
we will reduce the IT burden on the operating forces through enterprise
provided IT services, and improve our ability to process information
and enhance the speed of decision-making.
Intelligence
Our fiscal year 1996 through fiscal year 2004 enhancements to
Marine intelligence improved the intelligence capability within Marine
units and established a ``reach-back'' intelligence production
capability between forward deployed units and our Marine Corps
Intelligence Activity in Quantico, Virginia. These improvements are
proving to be remarkably beneficial to our efforts in Operation IRAQI
FREEDOM and Operation ENDURING FREEDOM. Marine intelligence is
concurrently supporting ongoing operations, preparing for near term
operations, and transforming our intelligence systems to meet future
warfighting requirements. Marine Intelligence Specialists have provided
significant contributions to ongoing operations in Iraq, Afghanistan,
and Djibouti and will play a crucial intelligence role as Marine Forces
return to Iraq in larger numbers this year. Before again deploying to
Iraq, we will train over 400 Marines in basic Arabic to aid in our
efforts to work with the Iraqis at the patrol level, and we will
provide enhanced language training for some of our Arabic heritage
speakers and others trained linguists to increase our operational
influence and effectiveness. Meanwhile, we prepare for future conflicts
by ensuring that our intelligence training and systems funded in the
fiscal year 2005-2009 program incorporate the latest technological
advances and become more capable of seamless interoperability with the
systems used by other armed services and national agencies.
Mobility
As preliminary assessments of operations in Iraq highlight,
operational and tactical mobility are essential to overcome the current
range of threats. The ability to rapidly respond and then flexibly
adapt to a changing situation is critical to address future challenges.
Increasing the speed, range, and flexibility of maneuver units that are
enhanced by logistical power generated from the sea, will increase
naval power projection. The following initiatives are vital to achieve
greater operational mobility:
MV-22 Osprey.--The MV-22 remains the Marine Corps' number one
aviation acquisition priority. While fulfilling the critical Marine
Corps medium lift requirement, the MV-22's increased range, speed,
payload, and survivability will generate truly transformational
tactical and operational capabilities. With the Osprey, Marine forces
operating from a sea base will be able to take the best of long-range
maneuver and strategic surprise, and join it with the best of the
sustainable forcible-entry capability. Ospreys will replace our aging
fleets of CH-46E Sea Knight and CH-53D Sea Stallion helicopters.
KC-130J.--Continued replacement of our aging KC-130 fleet with KC-
130J aircraft is necessary to ensure the viability and deployability of
Marine Corps Tactical Air and Assault Support well into the 21st
Century. Acquisition of the KC-130J represents a significant increase
in operational efficiency and enhanced refueling and assault support
capabilities for the Marine Corps. The KC-130J provides the aerial
refueling and assault support airlift resources needed to support the
Osprey, the Joint Strike Fighter, and the Marine Air-Ground Task Force
and Joint Force Commanders.
Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV).--The EFV, formerly known as
the Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle (AAAV), will provide Marine
surface assault elements the requisite operational and tactical
mobility to exploit fleeting opportunities in the fluid operational
environment of the future. Designed to be launched from Naval
amphibious shipping from over the horizon, the EFV will be capable of
carrying a reinforced Marine rifle squad at speeds in excess of 20
nautical miles per hour in sea state three. This capability will reduce
the vulnerability of our naval forces to enemy threats by keeping them
well out to sea while providing our surface assault forces mounted in
EFVs the mobility to react to and exploit gaps in enemy defenses
ashore. Once ashore, EFV will provide Marine maneuver units with an
armored personnel carrier designed to meet the threats of the future.
EFV will replace the aging Assault Amphibious Vehicle (AAV). With its
high speed land and water maneuverability, highly lethal day/night
fighting ability, and advanced armor and Nuclear Biological and
Chemical protection, the EFV will significantly enhance the lethality
and survivability of Marine maneuver units and provide the Marine Air
Ground Task Force and Expeditionary Strike Group with increased
operational tempo across the spectrum of operations.
Power Projection Platforms.--Combined with embarked Marines,
amphibious warships provide our Nation with both a forward presence and
a flexible crisis response force. These power projection platforms give
decision-makers immediately responsive combat options. As the Seabasing
concept matures, enhanced naval expeditionary forces will be optimized
to provide a full spectrum of capabilities.
Inherent in the Sea Strike pillar of the Seabasing concept is the
ability to both strike with fires from the sea base and from units
maneuvering within the littoral region. The dilemma that these two
offensive capabilities impose on an enemy and the multitude of options
they create for our leadership increase our ability to achieve success
effectively and efficiently. The built-in flexibility and survivability
of amphibious ships coupled with their combat sustainment capability
ensure the rapid achievement of a full range of offensive operations
that either allow us to accomplish operational objectives directly or
enable us to set the conditions for major joint operations. The ability
to defeat an anti-access strategy--before it is completed or even once
it is developed--is vital to our national security objectives.
The LPD 17 class amphibious ships, currently planned or under
construction, represent the Department of the Navy's commitment to a
modern expeditionary power projection fleet. These ships will assist
our naval forces in meeting the fiscally-constrained programming goal
of lifting 2.5 Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) Assault Echelons
(AEs). The lead ship detail design has been completed and the
construction process is over 80 percent complete with a successful
launch in July 2003. Production effort is focused on meeting test
milestones for a November 2004 delivery. Construction of LPD 23 has
been accelerated from fiscal year 2006 to fiscal year 2005, leveraging
fiscal year 2004 Advance Procurement resources provided by Congress.
LPD 17 replaces four classes of older ships--the LKA, LST, LSD, and the
LPD--and is being built with a 40-year expected service life.
LHAs 1-5 reach their 35-year service life at a rate of one per year
in 2011-15. LHD-8 will replace one LHA when it delivers in fiscal year
2007. In order to meet future warfighting requirements, the Navy and
Marine Corps leadership is evaluating LHA (Replacement)--LHA(R)--
requirements in the larger context of Joint Seabasing, power
projection, the Global War On Terrorism, and lessons learned from
Operations ENDURING FREEDOM and IRAQI FREEDOM. The resulting platform
will provide a transformational capability that is interoperable with
future amphibious and Maritime Preposition Force ships, high-speed
connectors, advanced rotorcraft like the MV-22, Joint Strike Fighter,
and Expeditionary Fighting Vehicles.
Maritime Pre-positioning Force.--The leases on the current Maritime
Prepositioning Ships begin to expire in 2009. The Maritime
Prepositioning Force (Future)--MPF(F)--will be a key enabler to sea-
based operations. It will allow us to better exploit the maneuver space
provided by the sea to conduct joint operations at a time and place of
our choosing. When the MPF(F) becomes operational, the maritime
prepositioning role will expand far beyond its current capability to
provide the combat equipment for a fly-in force. MPF(F) will serve four
functions that the current MPF cannot: (1) at-sea arrival and assembly
of units; (2) direct support of the assault echelon of the Amphibious
Task Force; (3) long-term, sea-based sustainment of the landing force;
and (4) at-sea reconstitution and redeployment of the force. The
enhanced capabilities of these ships will significantly increase the
capability of the Sea Base--in the Seabasing concept--to provide
unimpeded mobility and persistent sustainment. This enhanced sea base
will minimize limitations imposed by reliance on overseas shore-based
support, maximize the ability of the naval elements of the joint force
to conduct combat operations from the maritime domain, and enable the
transformed joint force to exploit our Nation's asymmetric advantage of
our seapower dominance. The ability to rapidly generate maneuver forces
from this sea base will augment our forward presence and forcible entry
forces, increasing the overall power and effect of the joint campaign.
Acceleration of the lead MPF(F) from fiscal year 2008 to fiscal year
2007 in the fiscal year 2005 budget reflects an emphasis on Seabasing
capabilities. The fiscal years 2005-2009 plan procures three MPF(F)
ships and advanced construction for an MPF(F) Aviation variant.
High Speed Connectors.--High Speed Connectors (HSC) possess
characteristics that make them uniquely suited to support the Sea Base
and sea-based operations. HSCs are unique in combining shallow draft,
high speed and large lift capacity into a single platform. HSCs will
help create an enhanced operational capability by providing commanders
with a flexible platform to deliver tailored, scalable forces in
response to a wide range of mission requirements. The range and payload
capacity of HSCs, combined with their ability to interface with current
and future MPF shipping and access austere ports greatly enhances the
operational reach, tactical mobility, and flexibility of sea-based
forces.
Mine Countermeasure Capabilities.--There is a great need to
continue the development of our mine countermeasure capabilities. A
major challenge for the Navy-Marine Corps Team is ensuring the
effective delivery of ground forces ashore when mines and other anti-
access measures are employed in the surf zone or ashore beyond the high
water mark. We are currently exploring with the Navy how the technology
of Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) promises a short-term solution
and may lead to a better long-term solution to the challenge of mines
in the surf zone. Using unitary bombs, fuses, and JDAM tail kits, we
have designed a mine countermeasure known as the JDAM Assault Breaching
System (JABS). Preliminary test results are showing promise as an
interim solution for breaching surface laid minefields and light
obstacles in the beach zones. Further testing and characterization of
the JABS system is proceeding throughout fiscal year 2004 with tests
against Surf Zone Mines and obstacles.
Some aspects of JABS development may lead to a long-term solution
to the mine threat. One possible solution that is envisioned includes
developing bomb-delivered darts that physically destroy buried mines in
the Beach Zone and Surf Zone region. In addition, the Navy has adopted
the Marine Corp Coastal Battlefield Reconnaissance and Analysis (COBRA)
mine sensor system for the beach zone with a planned product
improvement enhancement for COBRA called the Rapid Overt Airborne
Reconnaissance (ROAR) that extends detection to the very shallow water
and the surf zone regions by 2015. In addition, the Marine Corps seeks
to improve breaching capability beyond the high water mark by
developing both deliberate and in-stride breaching systems. These
include the Advanced Mine Detector program and the Assault Breacher
Vehicle program.
Fires and Effects
As events over the past year have demonstrated--and suggest for the
future--the increased range and speed of expeditionary forces and the
depth of their influence landward has and will continue to increase. To
fully realize these capabilities the Nation requires a range of
complementary, expeditionary lethal and non-lethal fire support
capabilities. During Operation IRAQI FREEDOM, sixty AV-8B Harrier
aircraft were based at-sea aboard amphibious shipping--minimizing the
challenge of airfield shortages ashore. This prelude to future sea-
based operations was extremely successful with over 2,200 sorties
generated--mostly in support of I Marine Expeditionary Force ground
units. A key factor to this success was the employment of forward
operating bases close to the ground forces which allowed the AV-8B to
refuel and rearm multiple times before returning to their ships. In
addition, the complementary capabilities of surface and air delivered
fires were highlighted in this campaign. Further, the importance of
both precision and volume fires was critical to success. Precision
fires assisted in reducing both collateral damage and the demands on
tactical logistics. I Marine Expeditionary Force also validated the
requirement for volume fires in support of maneuver warfare tactics.
These fires allow maneuver forces to take advantage of maneuver warfare
opportunities before precision intelligence can be developed and
precision fires can be employed against fleeting targets or rapidly
developing enemy defensive postures.
Short Take Off Vertical Landing Joint Strike Fighter (STOVL JSF).--
The STOVL JSF will be a single engine, stealth, supersonic, strike-
fighter capable of short take-offs and vertical landings. The aircraft
is designed to replace the AV-8B and FA-18 aircraft in the Marine Corps
inventory. The operational reliability, stealth, and payload capability
designed into the STOVL JSF represents a great improvement in combat
capability over existing legacy platforms. The aircraft is in the
second year of a 10-12 year development program. The STOVL JSF force is
integral to our future warfighting capabilities. Its design and
capabilities will fulfill all Marine Corps strike-fighter requirements
and better support the combined arms requirements in expeditionary
operations. Continued support of the STOVL JSF is vital to the Marine
Corps.
Indirect Fires Support.--In response to identified gaps in our
indirect fires capability, the Marine Corps undertook an effort to
replace the aging M198 155 mm towed howitzers and provide a full
spectrum all-weather system of systems fires capability. Operations in
Iraq confirmed this requirement and the direction that the Marine Corps
has undertaken. This system of systems will be capable of employing
both precision and volume munitions.
The Lightweight 155 mm howitzer (LW 155) is optimized for
versatility, pro-active counter fire and offensive operations in
support of light and medium forces. It supports Operational Maneuver
from the Sea and replaces all M198's in the Marine Corps, as well as
the M198's in Army Airborne, Light Units and Stryker Brigade Combat
Teams. Compared to the current system, the LW 155 is more mobile,
capable of more rapid deployment, more survivable, and more accurate.
Initial operational capability is expected during fiscal year 2005, and
a full operational capability will be reached three years later.
The High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) fulfills a
critical range and volume gap in Marine Corps fire support assets by
providing twenty-four hour, all weather, ground-based, responsive,
General Support, General Support-Reinforcing, and Reinforcing indirect
fires throughout all phases of combat operations ashore. HIMARS will be
fielded in one artillery battalion of the active component and one
battalion of the reserve component. An initial operational capability
is planned for fiscal year 2007 with a full capability expected during
fiscal year 2008. An interim capability of one battery during fiscal
years 2005-2006 is also currently planned.
The Expeditionary Fire Support System (EFSS) is the third element
of the triad of ground firing systems, and it will be the principal
indirect fire support system for the vertical assault element. EFSS-
equipped units will be especially well suited for missions requiring
speed, tactical agility, and vertical transportability. The estimated
Approved Acquisition Objective is eighty-eight systems. Initially, this
provides eleven batteries to support our Marine Expeditionary Units
(Special Operations Capable). Initial operational capability is planned
for fiscal year 2006 and full operational capability is planned for
fiscal year 2008.
Naval Surface Fire Support.--An important element of our fires and
effects capability will continue to be surface ships that provide
direct delivery of fires from the sea base. Critical deficiencies
currently exist in the capability of the Navy to provide all-weather,
accurate, lethal and responsive fire support throughout the depth of
the littoral in support of expeditionary operations. In the critical
period of the early phases of the forcible entry operations when
organic Marine Corps ground indirect fires are not yet or just
beginning to be established, the landing force will be even more
dependent on the complementary capability required of naval surface
fire support assets. To date, no systems have been introduced or are
being developed which meet near or mid-term Naval Surface Fire Support
requirements. The DD(X) destroyer--armed with two 155 mm Advanced Gun
Systems--continues to be the best long-term solution to satisfy the
Marine Corps' Naval Surface Fire Support requirements. Our Nation's
forcible entry, expeditionary forces will remain at considerable risk
for want of suitable sea-based fire support until DD(X) joins the fleet
in considerable numbers in 2020. Currently, the lead ship of this class
will not be operational until fiscal year 2013. In addition, the Marine
Corps is closely monitoring research into the development of electro-
magnetic gun technology to support future range and velocity
requirements. Electro-magnetic guns could potentially provide Naval
Surface Fire Support at ranges on the order of 220 nautical miles, and
could eventually be incorporated into ground mobile weapon systems like
the future Expeditionary Fighting Vehicles as size, weight, and power
technology hurdles are overcome.
H-1 (UH-1Y/AH-1Z).--The current fleet of UH-1N utility helicopters
and AH-1W attack helicopters is reaching the end of their planned
service life and face a number of deficiencies in crew and passenger
survivability, payload, power availability, endurance, range, airspeed,
maneuverability, and supportability. The Department of the Navy has
determined that the H-1 Upgrade Program is the most cost effective
alternative that meets the Marine Corps' attack and utility helicopter
requirements until the introduction of a new technology advanced
rotorcraft aircraft. The H-1 Upgrade Program is a key modernization
effort designed to resolve existing safety deficiencies, enhance
operational effectiveness of both the UH-1N and the AH-1W, and extend
the service life of both aircraft. Additionally, the commonality gained
between the UH-1Y and AH-1Z (projected to be 84 percent) will
significantly reduce life-cycle costs and logistical footprint, while
increasing the maintainability and deployability of both aircraft. On
October 22, 2003, the program to enter Low-Rate Initial Production
(LRIP), and on December 29, 2003 the LRIP Lot 1 aircraft contract was
awarded to Bell Helicopter.
Information Operations.--The Marine Corps is exploring ways to
ensure Marines will be capable of conducting full spectrum information
operations, pursuing the development of information capabilities
through initiatives in policy and doctrine, career force, structure,
training and education, and programs and resources. Marine forces will
use information operations to deny, degrade, disrupt, destroy or
influence an adversary commander's methods, means or ability to command
and control his forces.
New Weapons Technologies.--The Marine Corps is particularly
interested in adapting truly transformational weapon technologies. We
have forged partnerships throughout the Department of Defense, other
Agencies, and with industry over the past several years in an effort to
develop and adapt the most hopeful areas of science and technology.
Several notable programs with promising technologies include: (1)
Advanced Tactical Lasers to potentially support a tactical gunship high
energy laser weapon, (2) Active Denial System--a high-power millimeter-
wave, non-lethal weapon, (3) Free Electron Lasers for multi-mission
shipboard weapons application, and (4) various promising Counter
Improvised Explosive Device technologies.
Logistics and Combat Service Support
Logistics Modernization.--Since 1999, the Marine Corps has
undertaken several logistics modernization efforts to improve the
overall effectiveness of our Marine Air-Ground Task Forces as agile,
expeditionary forces in readiness. Some of these initiatives have
reached full operational capability or are on track for complete
implementation. Applying the lessons learned from Operation IRAQI
FREEDOM resulted in new initiatives concerning naval logistics
integration, naval distribution, and the integration of the Combat
Service Support Element with Marine Corps Bases.
The Marine Corps' number one logistics priority is the re-
engineering of logistics information technology and the retirement of
our legacy systems, which is described in the next section. The Marine
Corps is working to enhance the integration of its distribution
processes across the tactical through strategic levels of warfare,
providing the warfighter a ``snap shot'' view of his needed supplies in
the distribution chain to instantly locate specific items that are en
route. This capability, described in the following section, will result
in increased confidence in the distribution chain and will reduce both
the quantity of reorders and the amount of inventory carried to support
the war fighter.
Logistics Command and Control.--The Global Combat Support System-
Marine Corps is the Marine Corps' portion of the overarching Global
Combat Support System Family of Systems as designated by the Joint
Requirements Oversight Council and the Global Combat Support System
General Officer Steering Committee. It is a Marine Corps acquisition
program with the responsibility to acquire and integrate commercial off
the shelf software in order to satisfy the information requirements of
commanders, as well as support the Marine Corps Logistics Operational
Architecture. The Global Combat Support System-Marine Corps program
will provide modern, deployable information technology tools for all
elements of the Marine Air-Ground Task Force. Existing Logistics
Information Systems used today in direct support of our Marine Air
Ground Task Forces are either not deployable (mainframe based) or are
deployable with such limited capability (tethered client server) that
our commanders lack in-transit and asset visibility. Global Combat
Support System-Marine Corps requirements include a single point of
entry, web based portal capability to generate simple requests for
products and services, logistics command and control capability to
support the Marine Air Ground Task Force, and back office tools to
assist in the management of the logistics chain. These capabilities
will improve warfighting excellence by providing commanders with the
logistics information they need to make timely command and control
decisions. The key to improving the accuracy and visibility of materiel
in the logistics chain is to establish a shared data environment.
End-to-End Distribution.--The Marine Corps is aggressively pursuing
standardization of the materiel distribution within the Marine Corps to
include interfacing with commercial and operational-level Department of
Defense distribution organizations. Furthermore, distribution processes
and resources used in a deployed theater of operations need to be the
same as those used in garrison. We strongly support United States
Transportation Command's designation as the Department of Defense's
Distribution Process Owner. In this capacity, United States
Transportation Command can more easily integrate distribution processes
and systems at the strategic and operational levels and provide the
Department of Defense a standard, joint solution for distribution
management. Materiel End-To-End Distribution provides Marine commanders
the means to seamlessly execute inbound and outbound movements for all
classes of supply while maintaining Total Asset and In-transit
Visibility throughout the distribution pipeline.
CONCLUSION
The Marine Corps remains focused on organizing, training, and
equipping our forces to best support combatant commanders throughout
the spectrum of combat. Incorporating recent experiences, increasing
our forces' integration with joint capabilities, exploiting the
flexibility and rapid response capabilities of our units, and
preserving the adaptability of our Marines, will collectively lead to
more options for the combatant commanders. The Marine Corps' commitment
to warfighting excellence and the steadfast support we receive from
this Committee will lead to success in the Global War On Terrorism
while helping to ensure America's security and prosperity.
______
Biographical Sketch of General Michael W. Hagee
General Hagee graduated with distinction from the U.S. Naval
Academy in 1968 with a Bachelor of Science in Engineering. He also
holds a Master of Science in Electrical Engineering from the U.S. Naval
Postgraduate School and a Master of Arts in National Security and
Strategic Studies from the Naval War College. He is a graduate of the
Command and Staff College and the U.S. Naval War College.
General Hagee's command assignments include: Commanding Officer
Company A, 1st Battalion, 9th Marines (1970); Platoon Commander,
Company A and Commanding Officer Headquarters and Service Company,
First Battalion, First Marines (1970-1971); Commanding Officer,
Waikele-West Loch Guard Company (1974-1976); Commanding Officer, Pearl
Harbor Guard Company (1976-1977); Commanding Officer, 1st Battalion,
8th Marines (1988-1990); Commanding Officer, 11th Marine Expeditionary
Unit (Special Operations Capable) (1992-1993); Commanding General, 1st
Marine Division (1998-1999); and Commanding General, I Marine
Expeditionary Force (2000-2002).
General Hagee's staff assignments include: Communications-
Electronics Officer, 1st Marine Air Command and Control Squadron
(1971); Assistant Director, Telecommunications School (1972-1974);
Training Officer, 3d Marine Division (1977-1978); Electrical
Engineering Instructor, U.S. Naval Academy (1978-1981); Head, Officer
Plans Section, Headquarters Marine Corps (1982-1986); Assistant Chief
of Staff, G-1, 2d Marine Division (1987-1988); Executive Officer, 8th
Marines (1988); Director Humanities and Social Science Division/Marine
Corps Representative, U.S. Naval Academy (1990-1992); Liaison Officer
to the U.S. Special Envoy to Somalia (1992-1993); Executive Assistant
to the Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps (1993-1994); Director,
Character Development Division, United States Naval Academy (1994-
1995); Senior Military Assistant to the Deputy Secretary of Defense,
Washington, D.C.; Executive Assistant to the Director of Central
Intelligence (1995-1996); Deputy Director of Operations, Headquarters,
U.S. European Command (1996-1998); and Director Strategic Plans and
Policy, U.S. Pacific Command (1999-2000).
His personal decorations include the Defense Distinguished Service
Medal with palm, Defense Superior Service Medal, Legion of Merit with
two Gold Stars, Bronze Star with Combat ``V'', Defense Meritorious
Service Medal, Meritorious Service Medal with one Gold Star, Navy
Achievement Medal with one Gold Star, the Combat Action Ribbon, and the
National Intelligence Distinguished Service Medal.
Senator Stevens. Well, gentlemen, those are some of those
finest statements I have heard in my period on this committee,
and I thank you all very much for the depth of your comments
and for the reports you've made.
FLEET RESPONSE PLAN
Admiral, could you explain a little bit more about this
Fleet Response Plan?
Admiral Clark. Absolutely, Mr. Chairman.
Fundamentally, it goes like this. We had deployed--I like
the word ``surge''--Operation Iraqi Freedom, we surged over 50
percent of the fleet. One of our tasks was to--our business,
was telling our people, ``Look, our job is to make sure that we
get the most bang for the buck for the taxpayers of America.
And is there any way we can put this back together when we
bring it home that will make it more effective than it is
today?'' And, fundamentally, Mr. Chairman, what we've done is
this. We put a group of sailors in the room, and asked them,
``Are there things that we can do that will make us better?''
They came back with an approach, and said, ``If we look at
different ways to phase our training, if we look at new ways we
can put maintenance concepts together that will increase the
operational availability of our units, we will be able to
provide 50 percent more operational capability in response to
the President if a national emergency occurs.''
And what that means today is this. We analyzed the risk and
the requirement for naval forces. As the major combat phase of
Operation Iraqi Freedom wound down, the Secretary of Defense
looked at where we were. And I said, ``If we bring these forces
home now--the risk looked like we can bring the principal naval
force home--we will put this back together in a way that makes
it more ready than ever before.'' And, Mr. Chairman, I can tell
you, this morning, if the requirement came today, I could surge
that force forward again, the exact same force that we sent
forward for Operation Iraqi Freedom. It is ready to go this
morning. And what we have done is give the Nation a more
responsive Navy that can respond to a crisis and an emergency
anywhere in the world.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much.
V-22
General Hagee, I thank you, again, for the opportunity to
fly the V-22. It was an experience of a lifetime. I enjoyed
being in the aircraft. But I understand now that there's been
flight restrictions placed upon the V-22. Could you tell us
what's caused that?
General Hagee. Yes, sir, I can. And we appreciate you
coming down and flying in that truly transformational platform.
Back in December, when one of the--it happened to aircraft
number ten, which is instrumented, was flying towards the edge
of the envelope in an area where we're normally not going to
conduct flight operations, an input at the control caused some
yawing in the aircraft. We brought the aircraft down. It took
us some time to reproduce that particular phenomena. It was not
uncontrolled. There was no effect on safety of flight. This
aircraft happened to have a new flight control software package
put into it. So we believe it is a problem in the software. We
are investigating that right now. We haven't come to complete
closure on how to solve that. We are very confident that we
can.
We have put no flight restrictions on any of the
instrumented aircraft. We have put some flight restrictions on
the uninstrumented aircraft. We believe that we'll have a
solution to this software, possibly hardware solution, by May
of this year. We do not see that impacting the continued
evaluation of the aircraft, sir.
Senator Stevens. Will it affect the period for testing? It
this going to prolong the period of testing the V-22.
General Hagee. Sir, I think on the operational tests we're
not quite sure on that. But, as you know, this is not a time-
driven evaluation; this is an event-driven evaluation. We'll
have a much better feel for that in about April or May, sir.
Senator Stevens. Well, again, I think it was a joy to be
able to fly that airplane. It does things that one would never
expect to be able to do, and particularly because of the
software that you've adapted into it. I would appreciate it if
you'd keep me posted on that if there's anything additional we
can do. I would like to be sure that we do keep the schedule
for putting that aircraft really into full operation, as far as
the marines are concerned.
General Hagee. We will keep this committee informed, Mr.
Chairman.
Senator Stevens. Thank you.
DD(X)
Admiral Clark, the DD(X) includes transformational
technologies that bring what my staff believes are
revolutionary capabilities to the fleet. Can you accomplish the
acquisition strategies for the DD(X) within the cost and
schedule that is currently outlined, in view of those new
technologies?
Admiral Clark. Well, Mr. Chairman, I agree completely with
your staff and their assessment of what DD(X) is all about. It
is a revolutionary platform. And I believe that when we have
DD(X), it is going to change the way we do everything. And what
I think is going to happen is that when we realize these
capabilities, it will set us on a path to spiral to our other
platforms, as well.
Let's talk about cost and schedule. As you know, we
received permission to fund this ship in Research and
Development. There are certainly risk areas in the development
of something that is this revolutionary, including an all-
electric platform, an advanced gun system that will fire, with
precision, at a [deleted]. You know, this will give us the
ability to support General Hagee and all of his marines, and
cover [deleted] more area in support of them than we can do so
today with a gun system. And I have great confidence in that
path that we're on, because there have been mitigation
strategies put in place to address the new technologies that
we're bringing on. However, I would not be so bold as to say
that any of us can predict the future. But I have great
confidence in the team that is putting the plan together to
create the future. And what does that mean? Well, it means
this. One of the reasons that we asked to put this platform in
research and development is that we wanted to have the same
kind of tools to do this kind of new development that we have
with other combat systems, and we haven't done that with ships
before. And we believe that this was the right way to go at
this.
So I don't see any cause for concern on the horizon. I'm
confident with where we are in the reports that I'm getting
from the acquisition community. But I also believe that the
path that we set on last year to fund this in research and
development (R&D) is absolutely the right approach.
END STRENGTH REDUCTIONS
Senator Stevens. Mr. Secretary, I am informed that there
are plans to reduce the end strength of the Navy by 7,900
sailors, and another 8,700 sailors over the next 4 years. We're
told, to be on the safe side, that that is premature. What do
you say to that?
Mr. England. Well, let me reiterate, to some extent, the
opening comments that Admiral Clark made regarding our
manpower. We do want the very best-trained force, but we also
do not want an extra force. We do not want people that we do
not need in this great Navy, frankly. And as we have made
improvements, in terms of our ships, in terms of our manning--
for example, if you go back, Senator, to the ships, Senator
Inouye, that are sitting out in Hawaii, the U.S.S. Missouri, it
had almost 2,000 sailors when it was active. Now we have about
350 sailors on our destroyers. That will go down, on DD(X), to
about 150 sailors. So our manpower demands are less. A lot of
our older ships, we are retiring, where most of the manpower
has the highest demands. Also, our maintenance is better, our
reliability is better on these ships, technology is helping us.
So we are not stressed, in terms of our force, Senator. I
mean, we have efficiencies in the system, effectiveness, in
terms of better performance, that we can reduce the size of our
force. So this is a planned program, and we are not doing this
in advance. I mean, we clearly understand the forces we need,
and we are taking them down after we have new processes and new
technology in place. So this reflects, frankly, the
effectiveness, the efficiency of the Navy and our plans, in
terms of staffing this great naval force.
JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER (JSF)
Senator Stevens. Could you briefly--I've got a minute
left--briefly tell us about the Joint Strike Fighter? Just an
update on the Joint Strike Fighter?
Mr. England. First, I hope one day you'll be able to fly
the Joint Strike Fighter, Senator. But, look, it is a very,
very important program. There are three development programs
going on simultaneously. As you may know, we delayed the
program 1 year because we wanted to keep them together, and we
wanted to make sure that we solved all the problems early as we
transitioned from the prototypes into development. So we did
delay the program deliberately 1 year because our feeling is,
by doing this now, we will save a lot of money and time later
on. These are very important programs to us. There is an Air
Force version and a Navy version. They are both, frankly,
overweight, but not to the point that they will miss their key
performance parameters. So we know we will realize significant
improvement there.
The short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) version,
which is now both for the Marine Corps and also for the U.S.
Air Force, also is experiencing a weight problem, because it is
the most difficult design challenge. On the other hand, it
provides us the greatest advantage, and it will replace the AV-
8B, which is currently becoming long in the tooth and having
difficulty in the Marine Corps. So it provides us the very
greatest step forward, in terms of capability. It is harder to
do, but I am absolutely convinced the design is on track and we
will achieve the key performance parameters for these three
airplanes.
This program also has a large international content. We
have about $4.5 billion funded by our friends and allies around
the world, who are also relying on these three airplanes. This
is a highly integrated program. It is technically challenging,
but it is also very achievable, and the results will be
dramatic for the entire military and for our friends and allies
around the world.
I would encourage full support for this program, because it
is so crucial to so many services. And, Senator, I can tell
you, from my own personal experience, I am convinced that these
three airplanes will all be of significant value, major value,
to our military forces.
Senator Stevens. I'm smiling, Mr. Secretary, because
someone the other day asked me why do people use that phrase
``long in the tooth,'' as when we get older, our teeth get
shorter.
Senator Inouye.
SUBMARINE FORCE STRUCTURE
Senator Inouye. Mr. Secretary, your stated submarine force
structure calls for 55 boats, but it appears that by 2020, we
may have about 30. You have indicated that this would be
unacceptable. Do you have alternative programs or platforms to
adjust this force structure?
Mr. England. Senator, right now, as you probably recall, we
start a multi-year--last year, we were authorized to go into a
multi-year, so we have a five-submarine multi-year program that
will continue for 5 years. So we are, frankly, fixed at this
rate of one a year for the next 5 years. That was the program
authorized by the Congress. At the same time, you are right, if
we continue at that level, our submarine force will, indeed,
shrink. So, recognizing that, we have initiated a study to
better understand the size of our submarine force and how we
might afford a larger force as we go forward. That study will
be part of our 2006 deliberations. So we will come to the
Congress next year with our submarine program, in terms of
recommendations. We are working that now. We will be briefing
that shortly within the Department of Defense, and that will be
part of our whole development of the fiscal year 2006 budget.
So, with your permission, I would like to defer a final answer
on that. Frankly, for the next 5 years, next 4 years now, we
are locked into this one submarine a year because of the multi-
year program. So it does give us some time to work, and we will
have that resolved in fiscal year 2006.
Senator Inouye. Well, we'll wait for your study.
END STRENGTH
Admiral Clark, the Secretary spoke of how your end strength
may be reduced. As the operational chief here, do you agree
with that?
Admiral Clark. I certainly do, Senator. And, in fact, you
can blame me for this, or give me credit, whichever way you
choose to do so. I have been--I want to report publicly, I have
been under no pressure from anybody senior to me in the chain
of command to affect my manning.
What we have been doing is this. Actually, I've learned a
lot from working with Secretary England. He worked in the big-
business world. And, you know, I grew up driving destroyers and
haven't run an operation nearly as big as we're now given the
task to operate. Part of our journey, Senator, is that we
have--as I said in my opening statement, we have come to grips
with the cost of manpower. And I've made a commitment to our
people that goes like this. ``We will invest in your growth and
development if you promise to serve and support and defend the
Constitution of the United States and be part of the Navy. We
are going to invest in you. And we're going to make sure that
you have opportunities to make a difference in our Navy.''
That's what I promised them. But I've also asked my leaders,
the Senior Executive Service (SES) civilians and the admirals
in this organization, that are given the task to function as
executives, ``Look, we've got to figure out how to run this
business more effectively. This is for the taxpayers. How do we
give them the most return on their investment?'' And I will
tell you that we are actively seeking ways to learn how to
operate this organization more effectively and more
efficiently. We are making great progress, and that is the
result of the 7,900 you see today.
My objective is this. I've learned that 10,000 people
equals $1.5 billion a year, and I'm turning that money into
recapitalization. The year I got to this job--and, Mr.
Chairman, you indicated this is my fourth visit to see you
all--the year I got here, the investment in shipbuilding was
$4.7 billion. The investment today is $11.1 billion, and I've
been shooting to get toward a goal of $12 billion a year. We
have done this fundamentally by redirecting resources inside
the Navy and becoming more effective. And so we intend to
continue working toward that, and I want to promise you that
part of this is because the technology insertion is allowing us
to do tasks with fewer people. As he said, DD(X) is going to
have far fewer people, the CVN 21 is going to have a 900-person
reduction in the crew, and these kinds of things make these
savings possible. And our investments make it possible. We
intend to keep looking for ways to operate more effectively and
put that money in tomorrow's Navy.
SHIP FORCE STRUCTURE
Senator Inouye. Mr. Secretary, I'm certain you recall that
about 10 years ago, when we discussed warfare, they spoke of
major war, regional war, guerrilla war, et cetera, and you
needed so many ships for that, and so many men for that. Is the
force structure that you're proposing for regional war or
global war?
Mr. England. Senator, it's for whatever the Navy is called
upon, sir. I mean, I believe as we go forward, and particularly
what is in the 2005 budget, with our new ships, our Littoral
combat ship and DD(X), along with LHA, the new LHA(R) we're
looking at and the new ships that we'll have, in terms of pre-
positioning, the future ships, there are concepts there that
provide us significantly greater flexibility, in terms of
projecting power forward. As General Hagee said, we believe
this is a 50-percent improvement, in terms of response time to
put power forward, which is very, very important, in terms of
affecting the outcome of whatever events may be occurring.
I think my judgment--and I believe I can speak for the CNO
and the Commandant here--it's our judgment we have approaches
now that allow the Navy and the Marine Corps, our naval force,
to respond to any type of threat to America, whether it be
regional or a larger war. I mean, we are prepared now to
respond and do this very, very quickly. That's our objective--
very, very quick response.
FORCIBLE ENTRY
Senator Inouye. General Hagee, the Department, last year,
announced that it had initiated a study on forcible entry
options. And we've been told that this study may have an impact
upon programs like the LPD-17, the LHA(R), and the
Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle. What is the status? And what
can we expect?
General Hagee. Thank you for that question, sir.
First, there are two studies, really. There is a joint
forcible-entry study that the Navy and the Marine Corps took
the lead on and conducted last year. That is going to inform a
much larger joint study on joint forcible entry that's being
led by the joint staff right now. We hope to have the results
of that study sometime late spring, early summer. I think it's
really important to look at forcible entry from a joint
standpoint.
As I mentioned in my opening statement, the joint forcible-
entry study that we did within the Navy and the Marine Corps,
the analysis of alternatives that we received on LHA(R), and
the analysis of alternatives that we have just received a
preview on for the maritime pre-positioning force has helped
inform us on how we can project combat power faster, more
combat power ashore faster, in the future. And what you're
going to see Admiral Clark, myself, and the Secretary talk
about is the integration of these platforms. They are
complementary platforms. The maritime pre-positioning ship, the
new maritime pre-positioning ship, the new LHA(R), which--we
want to leverage the Joint Strike Fighter and the MV-22
capabilities; we want to make that ship more aviation-capable--
the LPD-17, the connectors between those platforms, the DD(X),
the Littoral combat ship, all will come into play, and we are
starting to inform ourselves on what the advantages and
disadvantages of having one platform versus the other. For
example, on your maritime pre-positioning-ship future, if that
has a well deck, or if that has what we're calling an
integrated landing platform, which is platform external to the
ship, where the ship can put that platform on the leeward side
and actually do offloads onto that platform in a higher-state
sea, this could impact the ultimate design of other amphibious
ships and what we would be carrying on those amphibious ships.
So we are trying very hard and, I think, somewhat
successfully, in looking at how all of these platforms come
together to deliver a better capability, a more agile
capability to the regional combatant commander.
Senator Inouye. And this is realistic?
General Hagee. Yes, sir. We have talked with scientists, we
have talked with physicists. This is not a physics problem;
this is an engineering problem. It's also a finance problem, or
an issue. And that's why the Secretary of the Navy and Admiral
Clark and myself have urged support of the fiscal year 2005
budget, sir.
Senator Inouye. I thank you very much, General.
Admiral Clark. Mr. Chairman, may I comment on that
question?
Senator Stevens. Yes, sir, Admiral.
Admiral Clark. Senator Inouye, I'd just like to say that
our task is to deliver the Marine Corps to the fight. And I see
the integration between MPF(F), Maritime Pre-Positioned Force
Future, and the LHA(R) as a critical intersection of new
capability unlike what we have today. I absolutely do not
believe that LHA(R) is just a repeat of the LHDs that we have
today. It is going to be a much better, more capable platform
that optimizes the aviation capability we are investing in. And
that, coupled with the new concepts that we are pushing forward
on MPF future, will give the marines much more surgeable
capability. We talked about surging the Navy; it will improve
the Marine Corps' surgeable capability, too, which is why the
future will see General Hagee and the marines producing combat
capability faster anywhere in the world we have to. And these
two new capabilities are going to make that happen.
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much. I'll be waiting for
your report.
Admiral Clark. Yes, sir.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much.
Senator Cochran.
LHA(R) AND SHIPBUILDING INDUSTRIAL BASE
Senator Cochran. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Mr. Secretary, I notice, in the budget submission, the
construction of the LHA(R) has been delayed 1 year from what
was planned in last year's 2004 budget, and that you've
identified $250 million for the construction of the LHA(R) as
an unfunded requirement. I understand that a delay in the
construction of this ship is likely to lead to an increase in
the cost of the ship. Can you discuss the need to maintain the
shipbuilding industrial base associated with the construction
of the LHA(R)?
Mr. England. Senator, I'd be happy to. You raised a valid
issue here. We originally had LHA(R) proposed for fiscal year
2007, in terms of our planning in the Future Years Defense
Program (FYDP). We moved that out to fiscal year 2008, and we
did it, frankly, because of funding issues. We are required, as
you know--to fully appropriate the money, fund the ship
immediately, on day one. That would have required, in fiscal
year 2007, that we fund the full value of the ship in fiscal
year 2007. Frankly, we did not have the resources to do that,
so we've moved it to fiscal year 2008, where it was affordable,
in terms of our projection on fiscal year 2007 and on fiscal
year 2008. It does leave us with a problem right now, in terms
of the yard, because we would like to start at least advanced
procurement, some incremental funding, I guess you would call
it, at that point in time. But, at this point, we are required
to fund the full ship. Now, as we go forward in 2006 and 2007,
we're going to have to look at those funding profiles to see
how we can handle that situation. But, frankly, that was--your
point is valid--it was strictly a decision we had to make based
on what we saw as the funding profiles in those years.
Senator Cochran. Thank you.
LARGE DECK AMPHIBIOUS SHIPS REPLACEMENT
General Hagee, can you discuss the need to replace the
large-deck amphibious ships that have exceeded their designed
service life?
General Hagee. Yes, sir, Senator. Thank you, also, for that
question. And it really goes back to my answer to Senator
Inouye.
I don't think that we can look at one individual ship. As
Admiral Clark talked about, we're looking at the LHA(R), which
is going to be, as I mentioned, an increased aircraft-capable
ship. We're going to leverage the Joint Strike Fighter and the
MV-22 capabilities. It's also going to complement the Maritime
Pre-Positioning Force Future ship, and will complement the LPD-
17. So as we build the LHA(R), and as we build MPF future, I
believe that you will see some of the equipment that has, in
the past, been carried on these large amphibs, move over to the
Maritime Pre-Positioning Force Future ship.
What we want is the capability to operate from the sea base
in a state-four sea. We want to be able to do to the reception,
staging, onward movement, integration, the arrival and
assembly, at sea. Today, we cannot do that, because we--as
Admiral Clark mentioned, we dense-pack our maritime pre-
positioning ships, so we cannot do a selective offload. So as
we replace the amphibs, we're looking at how LHA(R), LPD-17,
LHD, which is going to be around for some time, thank goodness,
and Maritime Pre-Positioning Force Future are going to
integrate with one another.
TILT-ROTOR PILOT TRAINING
Senator Cochran. Mr. Secretary, last year's appropriations
bill and the accompanying report indicated the importance of
training student pilots in the same type aircraft that they
would eventually be called on to fly in the fleet after they
graduate from pilot training. The report required the
Department of the Navy to submit a tilt-rotor pilot training
roadmap to the committee prior to the submission of this year's
budget request, although this report has not been submitted. I
wonder if you have any information about whether we can expect
this report or whether you can share with us now what the
response of the Navy is to this provision in last year's bill
directing the Department to consider tilt-rotor pilot training
at an existing naval training site?
Mr. England. Senator, my apologies. The report is somewhat
late, because, frankly, it's gone through some revision. But we
are about to publish that report, and we should have that
report to you here, I would expect, in about 1 week. So we're
very close to having that out.
And if you don't mind, I'm going to defer the question to
General Hagee, since it's his V-22 and his pilots, I believe
he's probably better able to answer this question for you.
But we will have the report to you in about 1 week, sir.
[The information follows:]
Information Paper
Subject: V-22 Tilt-rotor pilot training roadmap
1. Purpose
The Defense Appropriations Bill, 2004, directed the Secretary of
the Navy to submit a Tilt-rotor pilot training roadmap before the
presentation of the fiscal year 2005 budget estimate.
2. Key Points
The MV-22 Student Undergraduate Pipeline Training and Fleet
Replacement Squadron Analysis, Final Report, 1999, was conducted by
Logicon, Inc.
The purpose of the study was to examine the MV-22 pilot, aircrew
and maintainer training pipelines and determine if the planned training
could meet the demands of an increased aircraft delivery rate. If the
planned training was insufficient to meet the demand, alternatives must
be developed to increase the throughput. If the demand could be met
with planned resources, the recommendations for improving the training
in order to produce more capable personnel in the most efficient and
cost effective manner must be provided.
The study's recommendations have been included and expanded on in
the V-22's training plan. Interactive Media Instruction (IMI), state of
the art procedural trainers and simulators as well as the activation of
an Aircrew Training Systems (ATS) command to address the intricacies of
the training continuum are some examples.
The current tilt-rotor pilot training roadmap represents a non-
material solution to implement the study's recommendations. A powered
lift trainer for Undergraduate Pilot Training would address the
inefficiencies in the current roadmap, increase the number of trainable
tasks, and decrease time to train while increasing throughput.
The current tilt-rotor pilot training roadmap has three major
elements: Primary, Advanced and Fleet Replacement training (Figure 1).
Each element contains academics, simulator and aircraft phases.
--Undergraduate Pilot Training (UPT).--UPT for tilt-rotors begins
with primary flight training in the TC-34C. Pipeline selection
occurs upon completion primary training.
--Students selected for the tilt-rotor training pipeline will
continue advanced training in the TC-12B.
--Following training in the TC-12B tilt-rotor UPT students will
complete their advanced training in the TH-57B/C.
--Upon completion of the advanced training students are designated
Naval aviators and are assigned to the Fleet Replacement
Squadron for training in the MV-22.
--Fleet Replacement Squadron (FRS).--Provides combat capable tilt-
rotor training for selected aircrews.
--Combat capable training consists of the completion of the 100
level training tasks listed in Marine Corps Order P3500.34A
(Aviation Training and Readiness Manual, MV-22).
--Advanced Tilt-rotor Training Unit (ATTU). The ATTU is resident in
the FRS and trains selected aircrew in advanced tactics
instruction (200 level and above as specified in the Marine
Corps Order P3500.34A). The ATTU provides transitioning
squadrons the experience base to complete the transition as
a core capable squadron per the MV-22 T&R.
The Deputy Commandant for Aviation has submitted a Universal Needs
Statement (UNS) for a powered lift trainer for Undergraduate Pilot
Training. Successful incorporation of the UNS in the requirements
generation process will form the basis for an Analysis of Alternatives
at Milestone A.
Senator Cochran. Okay.
General Hagee, do you have any comments?
General Hagee. Yes, sir, I do. First off, we are absolutely
committed to having a joint training site. Any service that's
going to fly the MV-22, we think we could get a lot of synergy
by having one training site. We have initially stood up the
training squadron down at New River, North Carolina. But I can
tell you, Senator, we are open to looking at any and all sites
that might work better.
MISSILE DEFENSE
Senator Cochran. Admiral Clark, we've talked before about
the plans that you envision for the Navy participation in
missile defense. We have the near-term ballistic missile threat
to the homeland that has attracted the attention of planners.
Could you update the committee on the progress the Navy is
making in the area of ballistic missile defense and how it fits
in your overall sea-shield strategy?
Admiral Clark. Yes, sir. Thank you, Senator. That's a very
important question for the future, and clearly the kind of
things that General Hagee and I envision the Navy/Marine Corps
team doing in the future requires our ability to climb in the
ring with an enemy, and to be able to defend ourselves, and
project defense and offense. And so ballistic missile defense
capability is crucial to the future, no doubt about it.
The way, of course, as you well know, it is unfolding, the
acquisition--the development responsibility and acquisition
responsibility, has been given to the Missile Defense Agency
(MDA). What that suggests is that--General Kadish has been
given the responsibility to develop what's best for the Nation.
And this year has been an exciting year in the Navy. Under MDA,
we have participated in several tests this year. All but one
have been fully--completely successful, and one had a problem
in a late-guidance phase of the test. But what that suggests to
us is this, sea-based missile defense is going to be a part of
the interim missile defense capability that has been called
down by the President. That will stand up in fiscal year 2005,
this budget year that we're talking about here this morning.
And I would just also report to you, Senator, that during
Operation Iraqi Freedom, we had prototype capability
functioning in the Arabian Gulf, and operating from one of our
Aegis DDGs. They experienced significant success tracking
missiles that were fired by the Iraqis at our forces, and we
were connected in an integrated way. We could not--we were not
equipped to fire, but detect and track; and that detect and
track algorithm functioned very successfully.
And so the bottom line of the status report is that we
anticipate modifying a number of our Aegis destroyers to bring
this kind of capability to the Nation by the end of this
calendar year, and we will be a part of that interim
capability.
Senator Cochran. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Stevens. Thank you.
Senator Burns.
Senator Burns. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think we have--
I've already submitted my statement. And thank you, gentlemen,
for your service to your country and for coming today.
I will probably focus on some of the things that interest
me. My main interest is the troops on the ground, our enlisted
people that are in harm's way, and especially like an operation
like we have in Iraq, who are most vulnerable to being hurt
very badly, and most vulnerable in a hostile action.
SHIPBUILDING PROGRAM
But I wanted to ask Admiral Clark--since you've increased
the funds on shipbuilding from the $4.7 billion to the $11.1
billion, with what has happened in the world and the changing
landscape, have you changed the thrust of your investment to
meet those times? And could you give me an example on the
challenges you face, now that the landscape does change from
time to time?
Admiral Clark. Well, absolutely.
Here's the way I would lay it out. And Senator Inouye asked
this question of the Secretary, do we have the numbers right?
And, you know, where do we need to go? This morning, we have
295 ships in the Navy. Is this enough? I don't believe it is. I
have said that for 3 years and 8 months.
Having said that, I believe we're on the right track. We
can't undo history. And we didn't buy enough ships in the
1990s. Over the decade of the 1990s, our shipbuilding budget
averaged just slightly over $6 billion a year. And in order to
have the Navy--when I got to this job, the Congressional Budget
Office (CBO) had just put out a study that said you had to
invest $12 billion a year to sustain yourself, and that's why
$12 billion was my target.
How does it stack out in priorities? And, by the way, I
have said I think we need about 375. I've never said it's
exactly 375. We have to move toward the capability of the
future, and capability is more important than numbers. But
there's a fact here--is that--we've studied this long and hard,
Senator; I haven't figured out how to defy the laws of physics
and make a ship be in more than one place at a time. You know,
it's a fundamental reality.
I want to say that the Secretary has allowed me to speak to
that number. It's not a number that has been sanctioned by the
Department. It is the CNO's view. My view this morning is that
we're continuing to learn.
Let me give you an example. We are completing, as I speak,
an experiment that I've had going on for 2 years. I have had a
destroyer, forward deployed, has been in Operation Iraqi
Freedom every step of the way, for 2 years. I have been
rotating crews to that ship. That's a Pacific-based ship, and a
Pacific-based ship spends at least one-third of its
deployment--because it's a vast area, of course--one-third of
its 6-month deployment, is spent in transit. I've had it over
there 2 years, rotated four crews. It'll be home soon. We're
going to put the technical people onboard, and we're going to
learn the lessons from that. But I'll tell you what it's
already shown me is that that's a concept I need to exploit. It
gives me more operational availability for the investment.
What have I learned about the priorities? Senator Cochran
asked about missile defense. It absolutely is a requirement for
the future. We do not have money in the budget yet, but I have
spoken openly, and it's in my written testimony, that CG(X), a
ship designed from the ground up to do that missile-defense
mission, is going to have to be built. It has to be built when
we know exactly what the size and shape of the future missile
defense systems are going to be.
LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP (LCS)
More importantly, the Littoral combat ship that is at the--
down-select--in the next 2 months, this new class ship is
designed to do one principal thing: take on the enemies where
they're going to take us on. No Navy is going to take us on toe
to toe. We are too big and too strong. They're going to come
after us in the littorals, they're going to come after us
asymmetrically. Senator, I need that ship tomorrow morning. I
cannot get it fast enough. I need the ability to take on the
way they're going to come at us, anti-submarine warfare in the
near-land arena, anti-surface attacks, mine warfare. And we're
going to build this ship from the ground up to be optimized to
handle unmanned vehicles, and we're going to change the
calculus on the enemy. This is going to be a much smaller ship,
and we're going to have to build it in numbers. And I think we
need 50 or 60 of them. But the reason I don't know the exact
number is that I'm still working the manning concept, and am I
going to be able to keep them forward, like I've just done with
this ship for 2 years. And if I can, I will need not as many as
if I had to rotate them every time. So those are the way I see
the priorities. Coupled with what we described with General
Hagee in the new Navy/Marine Corps team and the capability that
we will project with MPF Future, which I believe should be
considered as an integral part of the fighting force. Today's
MPF maritime pre-positioned ship is a warehouse, floating
warehouse. Tomorrow's MPF isn't going to be like that. It will
have command and control spaces in it, it will have aviation
decks on it to surge aircraft forward and so forth. That's the
way I see the future, Senator.
RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION
Senator Burns. General Hagee, give me an idea--recruitment
and retention of our troops, are you making your quotas? Are
you getting the kind of people that you want? I would ask all
three of you that. Are there areas of concern or--how are we
doing?
General Hagee. Sir, thank you for that question. I am happy
to report to you that we are doing very well in both areas.
Last November, we had 100 straight months of meeting mission,
recruiting, and we are getting the right type of young American
man and young American woman, and I think you saw that in
Operation Iraqi Freedom. Unbelievable quality. Just had a
report yesterday, we are on track to make mission this month.
But we are doing very well on recruiting.
As far as retention is concerned, for this fiscal year we
are about 80 percent of attaining our first-term re-enlistment
goal, and we are about 85 percent of achieving our second-term
re-enlistment goal. And, of course, we have all the way to
September to accomplish those two missions.
So I am very happy with where we are right now. I have to
be--I'll be frank with you, sir, we are putting a lot of
demands on our marines. The sun never sets on the Marine Corps.
It is around the world, and they are doing a magnificent job.
And I have asked all the commanders to keep a good feel on the
pulse of the marines and their families for any indication that
retention or recruiting is going to turn in the wrong
direction. Right now, we do not have those signals, sir.
Senator Burns. Admiral Clark, do you want to comment about
that?
Admiral Clark. Yes, I sure do. Highest retention in the
history of the Navy, ever, 38 or 39 straight months. Quality,
we have increased quality 4 percent, to the 94 percent level
last year, and our goal was 95 percent high-school graduates.
Quality is high. It's fundamentally because of the things the
Congress has done. And at the end of my opening statement, I
said that they're reading the signals of the citizens of
America. They're listening. They're watching. And the support
that America is sending to our people is resonating with them.
They believe in their cause, and they're committed to making a
difference.
Now, here's one concern I have. Because we're successful,
please don't take my tools away. The tools that I've got are
the things that are allowing me to reshape my force, and I need
them. And our people are responding to this challenge we're
giving them. ``We're going to give you a chance to make a
difference, and we're going to invest in your growth and
development,'' and that's what they're responding to, Senator.
Senator Burns. Mr. Secretary, do you want to make a
comment? Because I have another question and comment.
Mr. England. Just one comment. When I first testified, we
were recruiting 58,000 a year, in terms of sailors, and now we
are recruiting about 40,000 because our retention is so high.
So it's an indication, just in terms of numbers that we're
recruiting, much lower than we were in the past.
AIRSPACE AVAILABILITY FOR TRAINING
Senator Burns. We lost our ability to train into--at
Vieques, as you well know, down in Puerto Rico. It continues to
be a problem among all our services that have a flight wing to
them, or whatever. And I noticed that, in your statement, you
mention Eglin as a joint place where you're training. I would
just make a comment that we, in Montana, are--when you look at
this country, and the airspace that we have in which to train,
it continues to shrink. And I think we should look at some
areas where we have airspace in which to train, and also the
infrastructure in which to hold those people that are in
training, and their aircraft. So we would visit with you about
that.
IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE DEVICE (IED)
And then I have some other questions about detecting these
explosives in Iraq. I know--you know, that's why I say, our men
and women are in a most vulnerable position. They are the
target, and they're unprotected, and I'm concerned about body
armor. Are they protected? Can we detect those roadside bombs,
General Hagee? And is there new technology which allows us to
do that? And if not, are we looking into maybe some
unconventional areas to gain that technology?
General Hagee. Yes, sir. That is, without a doubt, our
highest priority right now, is to ensure that all of our
servicemen and women overseas are protected. I can tell you
that the 25,000 marines and sailors that are going into
Operation Iraqi Freedom, they all have the so-called Small Arms
Protective Inserts (SAPI) plates. Everyone will be wearing it.
There is no magic answer, there is no one solution for the
improvised explosive device. It is a combination of
technologies and tactics and procedures. We have worked very
closely with the United States Army to learn everything that we
can from them. The Army has stood up a task force called Task
Force IED, improvised explosive device. It is a joint task
force that is focused on this particular problem. What
technologies we can bring to bear, what are the tactics,
techniques, and procedures that we need to use on the
battlefield, and, probably most importantly, where do we have
gaps? Because every time that we come up with a solution, the
opposing side is looking for a way to get around that
particular solution. So we are working very hard in those
particular three areas.
We're going to have about 3,000 vehicles of various kinds--
Humvees, 5 ton, 7 ton--on the road and in harm's way. Every one
of those vehicles, before it goes out on patrol in Iraq, will
be hardened. We have a few of the so-called up-armored Humvees,
but not very many of those. So what we have done is, we have
purchased kits, we have cut steel, and we have sufficient
quantity to harden every single one of those vehicles.
We have done the same with our aircraft. We have put on the
most modern aircraft survivability equipment that this Nation
has produced. We have also taken our pilots, every single one
of them that will be going over there, they've gone through a
2-week very intensive training course down in Yuma, Arizona,
flying against the type of threat that we believe is over
there. Once again, marrying the technology and the tactics,
techniques, and procedures.
Once again, to be frank, sir, it's still a dangerous place
over there. We are aware of that, and all of us are working
very hard in that area.
Senator Burns. Well, you know, my father was always
criticized for working mules. You know, everybody else worked
horses. This was back in the old days, and they said, ``Why do
you work them darn mules? You know, they'll kick you, bite you,
and everything else.'' And Dad would kind of say, under his
breath--he said, ``Well, you've got to be smarter than the
mule.'' So we've got to be a little bit smarter, too, and a
jump ahead. And I thank you for your thoughts.
Senator Stevens. Senator McConnell.
MK45
Senator McConnell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me begin by thanking all three of you for your
extraordinary contributions to the war on terrorism, which has,
so far, been successful beyond anyone's expectations. It's been
a great American success story, and it continues.
Mr. Secretary, despite the efficiencies and cost savings
achieved by the privatization of the Louisville Naval Ordnance
Station, the Navy has relied heavily on congressional add-ons
in order to meet its requirements for overhauls and for
procurement of large-caliber guns. This committee has provided
sufficient additional funding for the MK45 gun overhaul orders
to extend the life of this important weapon. And several of us
have sought funding for modifications that allow the Navy to
modernize this gun so that it can bridge the gap between the
Navy's budget for this program and its requirements until the
Navy's cruiser modernization and DD(X) destroyer programs
actually begin production.
It's my understanding the Navy's request today contains no
provision for MK45 gun modifications to support cruiser
modernization, and despite Congress' efforts to restore this
program last year and this committee's expression of the
importance of the MK45 gun modernization. The so-called cost
savings associated with this move are not particularly
impressive with cutting these modifications, particularly given
the negative impact this will have on the Navy's industrial
base, the Marine Corps' requirement for naval surface-fire
support, and the costs associated with restarting the
production line for the DD(X) advanced gun system.
That having been said, General Hagee, it's my understanding
that the Marine Corps supports the modernization of the MK45
gun to improve its capacity for precision fire support. Would
reinvesting in the modernization of this gun improve the Navy's
ability to provide the kind of fire support you need for your
marines onshore?
General Hagee. Sir, I think Admiral Clark and I have
discussed this. We like that gun. But it's an affordability
issue, as you mentioned. And what we have to do is balance the
weapon systems that we have out there with the risks. We've got
DD(X) coming on, which is going to have a significant
capability. The aviation fires is, of course, a part of this
particular equation, and moving the lightweight 155 and the
expeditionary fire-support system ashore is also a part of the
fires equation. So it's integrating all of the fires that we're
going to have.
I would repeat, would we like to have that gun? Yes, sir.
But when you look at the affordability, the risk, and then look
at all the other fire systems that we have out there, I support
Admiral Clark in his decision.
Senator McConnell. So then are you telling me that the
marine's near-term need for precision naval surface fire
support is adequate?
General Hagee. No, sir, I'm not. It is not.
Senator McConnell. Therefore, Secretary England, I hope you
will reconsider the decision to cut funding for this important
modification to the MK45 gun system. It seems to me, clearly,
you need this, at least on an interim basis, until you get to
the next weapon. Do you have any observations about this?
Mr. England. Just one, and then I would turn it over to the
CNO--all right, go ahead----
Admiral Clark. Why don't I----
Senator McConnell. Jump right in.
Admiral Clark. All right. We're excited about the extended
range guided munition (ERGM) development, and the round that is
going to give us extended-range precision capabilities for the
marines. Senator, General Hagee's got it exactly right. When I
sit down at the end of the day, I don't have all the resources
I'd like to have; I've got more than I've ever had before, but
technology costs money. And so I made this judgement that, with
the cruisers, who would be primarily focused on operations near
the carrier, and not in the near-land scenario supporting the
marines, I would not do the modification for the cruisers, but
I would focus that money on the DDGs. So that's the decision
that we made. If we had unlimited resources, we absolutely
would have procured this modernization for every one of the
guns that we have. We would.
We expect this--even though AGS, the advanced gun system,
is coming, we expect that this gun is going to be around for a
long time. And, frankly, when you look at future warfare, the
ability to provide precision on the battlefield to the Marine
Corps is what is going to help us transform the way we fight.
So it's an affordability issue. We made the judgement based
upon where the cruisers will spend most of their life, and
that's, you know, more in the deep-blue environment instead of
the near-land brown-water environment.
Senator McConnell. Summing it up, if you had the resources,
you'd like to do what I suggest.
Admiral Clark. That is correct.
Senator McConnell. I thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
CG(X)
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much.
Admiral, I went to the archives to look up the CG(X) that
you presented in May 2003, a long-range shipbuilding plan, that
indicated that those would be procured sometime after the end
of this first decade. As a matter of fact, it looks like the
first procurement would be 2018. The description you just gave
it indicates that it probably is going to be needed sooner. Are
you going to revise the plan?
Admiral Clark. I would tell you that the far-out plan
doesn't have great granularity to it yet, Mr. Chairman. I
believe that this is contingent totally upon the way the
technology develops and the size missile system that MDA
decides that this platform is going to have to carry--all of
that work is still ongoing.
I do believe that 2018 is likely to be too far away. I have
not refined it because we're outside the FYDP--this platform I
expect to be fundamentally built upon the hull and the
technology that exists in DD(X), so that we will spiral the
technology from DD(X) to CG(X). And I would like to tell you
that I don't have great confidence in the date that is in that
extended projection, and it is one of the issues that we have--
that we are analyzing as we move forward with the Missile
Defense Agency.
Senator Stevens. Well, is the DD(X) to be designed so that
it could be evolved into the CG(X)?
Admiral Clark. It is my intention to recommend that we do
just that, and that is what our intent has been. But I would
reserve this point, Mr. Chairman, that it might have to be
scaled up to do the kinds of things that may be required. So
what I'm really trying to say is, we will spiral the technology
in DD(X), and that's all of the pieces, including all electric
and the hull form. You know, we kind of stopped talking about
how advanced this platform really is. I mean, let me just give
you one fact as an example. This ship, in its size, is going to
have the radar cross-section of a fishing boat because of the
advanced design, stealthy design, of the platform. That's the
kind of technology we want for the future. We want the
technology that gives us the ability to man it with fewer
people.
So I expect it to be built upon the frame of a DD(X). It
might have to be made a little bit larger.
Senator Stevens. Do you have money in the research budget
now for that CG(X)?
Admiral Clark. I do not have that money in the budget yet.
No, sir, I do not.
Senator Stevens. Is any additional money needed for the
DD(X) to evolve into the CG(X)?
Admiral Clark. We have placed the emphasis on the research
and development to do the risk mitigation that I spoke about in
my earlier answer, to develop DD(X). And, you know, when we're
2 to 3 years into this, into the construction, I believe we're
going to know the things that we need to know, where we need to
put the follow-on research and development.
It is fundamentally going to be an issue of the hull form,
and scaling it up, and we do need to get started on that
development.
ADVANCED RADAR TECHNOLOGY
Senator Stevens. What about the development of the radar
suite and the other air-to-air missile defense research? Is
that in the budget?
Admiral Clark. There are resources against advanced radar
technology. We have resources against digitalizing the new
Aegis architecture. I could take, for the record, the specifics
to--I want to make sure I'm telling you that we've got the
right levels there, because, frankly, this interfaces with MDA
and their budget, and I need to go check that out.
[The information follows:]
The Navy is already conducting solid-state S-Band
prototyping and we have requested $220 million in additional
research and development funding in the fiscal year 2005
budget. This solid-state active phased array radar would allow
increased capability against cruise missile and air-breather
threats, as well as simultaneous performance of long-range
Ballistic Missile Defense missions.
Our current plan puts us on a path for initiation of radar
system development in fiscal year 2008 and ultimately,
integration with the CG(X) platform in the 2020 timeframe. It
is important to note that we are continually analyzing the rate
and evolution of future threats to refine the pace of our own
capabilities development. As we gain fidelity in the timeline
for CG(X), we will likely need to adjust future budget
submissions to appropriately align the schedules.
The nexus of this capability will greatly enhance the
forward, credible, assured access of our Naval forces through
mid-century.
Senator Stevens. Well, I was just going to ask whether that
interface has taken place yet. The National Missile Defense
System has a substantial amount of research money. Are you
included in that?
Admiral Clark. Absolutely. For example, I indicated that by
the end of this year I expect to have 15 ships modified to our
existing Aegis systems, with advanced algorithms in the
software to do the detect and track, and the funds for that
activity are coming from MDA.
Senator Stevens. Well, I think we'd like to visit with you
later, in a classified situation, to discuss this. At least I
would. Because I would like to make sure, during our watch,
that this thing is moving forward as rapidly as possible.
Admiral Clark. Yes, sir. We'd be very--I absolutely believe
that would be very helpful.
Senator Stevens. Senator Inouye.
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much.
SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING
General Hagee, you have a significant contingent of marines
in Haiti, and this deployment was not accounted for in fiscal
year 2004. And now you are going to be deploying a large
contingent to Iraq. Can you fund this without a supplemental?
General Hagee. Sir, as you know, the Department did receive
a supplemental for fiscal year 2004, and we are capturing those
costs, both the costs that we're starting to incur with the
deployment of marines down into Haiti, and we are most
definitely capturing those costs of deployment into Iraq. And
we are reporting those costs up to the Office of the Secretary
of Defense (OSD), and we expect to be reimbursed for those
funds.
BODY ARMOR
Senator Inouye. Mr. Secretary, Senator Burns brought up a
very interesting, but tragic, matter. Unofficially, I've been
advised that in Operation Iraqi Freedom, there are
disproportionately more amputees than chest or stomach
injuries. For one thing, you have body armor that cover your
chest and stomach area, but nothing for the legs and arms. Are
we doing any research to, for example, protect the foot and
ankle or the hands and wrists?
Mr. England. Senator, there's a lot of work underway. And
I'd like to, if I can, get together with you separately on this
subject, because there is work, but I'd rather not discuss it
here, if we can. But there's definitely work underway to expand
the type of coverage we have, in terms of protection for our
men and women in combat. But, if we can, we can bring some
people in and have that discussion with you, sir.
Senator Inouye. All right. I appreciate that, sir.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
AMPUTEE MEDICAL TREATMENT
Senator Stevens. On that subject, Mr. Secretary, I was
talking to some of the surgeons out at Walter Reed, and they
tell me that a lot of the people that they need to deal with,
the problems that Senator Inouye is discussing, are in theater,
but are really not used there, because people are injured with
this type of situation, in arms and legs, are being brought
home. Are you familiar with that?
Mr. England. I'm not familiar with that subject at Walter
Reed. No, sir, I'm not.
Senator Stevens. I would ask that you look into it, because
they tell me that they have not enough at Walter Reed, and
there are people that are over there, that are reservists that
have been called up, and they don't have the facilities to do
the work. It's long-term work, and not emergency work, in
theater. I would urge you to take a look at that. That, from
one of the most senior and trusted surgeons in Walter Reed,
tells me that they're hard-pressed. I'd like to see if you'd
look into that, please.
Senator Cochran.
Mr. England. We will do so, Senator.
[The information follows:]
The Department of the Navy is not in a position to comment
on the staffing of Army medical treatment facilities, or their
concept of operating and staffing medical treatment facilities
in direct support of operating forces.
What Naval Medicine can comment on is its current
deployment status as relates to orthopedic surgeons and its
ongoing process of tracking medical services in the military
treatment facilities. Currently, there are 4 orthopedic
surgeons deployed with U.S. Marine Corps Surgical Companies in
Iraq. On a monthly basis, or more frequently as required, the
Naval medical treatment facilities provide a Medical Service
Availability Report that details the services that they can
offer to their beneficiaries. Should an event like this
deployment interrupt a military treatment facility's ability to
provide specific services, it is determined early so that the
Bureau of Medicine and Surgery (BUMED) can apply mitigating
strategies utilizing resources from across all of Naval
Medicine to minimize the impact from the loss of services. In
this case, no Naval medical treatment facilities have reported
an inability to provide orthopedic services.
The Department of the Navy would respectfully defer comment
on the level of staffing at Walter Reed Army Medical Center to
the Army Surgeon General.
MARITIME NORAD CAPABILITY
Senator Cochran. Admiral Clark, you've indicated that
you're convinced of the necessity to build a maritime aerospace
defense command for North America. I understand that the
littoral surveillance system, which is part of the distributed
common-ground station, may already be able to accomplish many
of these mission requirements. I also understand that Northern
Command and the Pacific Command are looking at this capability
for separate initiatives in the Gulf of Mexico and Pacific Rim.
In your opinion, is there an opportunity to leverage existing
capabilities of the littoral surveillance system to reduce
research and development costs and to expedite delivery of a
maritime NORAD capability?
Admiral Clark. Well, I absolutely believe--while I'm not
expert on the system, I absolutely believe that there's
potential to help us have a system with much better information
in it, that would be akin to what I have dubbed the Maritime
North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD). And here's
the way I look at it--and, by the way, I have discussed this
extensively with the Commandant of the Coast Guard, who, I
believe, fundamentally has this responsibility, but that we
understand that we've got to be a great partner to the Coast
Guard. And I believe that we are partnering better than we ever
have before. We, just the other day, completed another
headquarters-level cooperation talk so that we can better align
our efforts.
Having said that, and that the littoral surveillance system
will improve the process, I do believe that ultimately--and I
would say that the Commandant of the Coast Guard agrees with
me--that what makes the NORAD system so effective is the
transponder system that exists in aircraft, so that they are
actively transmitting who they are and where they are. The
reason I believe that this is the kind of capability that we're
going to have to have, is that people that don't have anything
to hide are going to be anxious to tell you that they don't
have anything to hide, and here they come.
I believe we have the technology today to advance our
knowledge to better protect ourselves. Where I had an
opportunity to talk about ways that we could better defend the
United States of America, I made these recommendations. I'm
happy to report to you that the Commandant of the Coast Guard
is working through his channels in Homeland Security--and this
is an international challenge, of course--that they are
actively working toward how we would put together such a
capability.
UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES (UAV)
Senator Cochran. As we all know, unmanned aerial vehicles,
such as Global Hawk, are proving to be very valuable to current
operations. I'm informed that the Navy broad-area maritime
surveillance UAV is not scheduled for operational capability,
until fiscal year 2010, but the Air Force's Global Hawk program
is on track for fiscal year 2006 for initial operating
capability. It seems there is an opportunity to achieve the
desired capability ahead of schedule with interoperability with
the Air Force. Can you tell us what the likelihood is that the
Navy may choose to delay a decision on the Navy broad-area
maritime surveillance UAV and to accelerate the program by
selecting a joint platform?
Admiral Clark. Well, I cannot talk about the acquisition
decision, because the acquisition authority rests with the
Secretary and the Assistant Secretary, who make those
decisions. But let me just say what I can talk about.
I agree with the foundation of your question. Your question
suggests, well, you know, ``Admiral Clark, why aren't you
exploiting what the Air Force is doing?'' And that's where we
are. We laid money in the budget this last year and this year,
in execution--to get started in this direction, because we
desperately need this kind of capability. And so we funded and
let the contract recently to buy Global Hawks as initial
demonstrators for us to then mature this capability in the
maritime domain.
I'm happy to report to you, Senator, that we'll get our
first platform about 1 year from now. I believe it's scheduled
for April 2005. And then we will get the second platform in
late 2005. The acquisition executive will have to make a
determination if we can build upon that or if we will be
required to compete from that point, and I can't--I will not be
the one that makes a decision on that.
We have taken this direction because I want to be as joint
as I can, I want to partner and capitalize on the research and
development of the United States Air Force in this case every
time I get an opportunity, instead of spending R&D of my own,
of our own. And so I'm very excited about the rapid
introduction of this capability. And, frankly, what we looked
at is--we redefined that program in the 2005 submit to you,
because we said--we had more money in the demonstration phase
of it, and said, ``The Air Force has already done a lot of this
demonstration, so why do we need to do that?'' And, in the
process, we saved several million dollars. And so the future--
the decision is that in the future, I'm very happy with where
we are in buying these two demonstrator vehicles, which will
deliver 1 year from now.
Senator Cochran. Thank you.
Mr. Secretary, do you have any comments, views on that
subject?
Mr. England. Only, Senator, that there are some competition
issues as we go forward, in terms of, do we sole-source? Do we
have competition? But what the CNO said is right, we are buying
some Global Hawks. As we go forward, though, the discussion
we're having now is, Is there going to be a competition for
follow-on vehicles, and what will that be?
SEABEES
Senator Cochran. Mr. Secretary, I understand that Seabees
have played a very important role during our combat operations
in Iraq, and they continue to be an important resource. In
fact, I think there were two individuals from the Navy
construction regiment, based down in Gulfport, the Navy
Construction Battalion Center, that were awarded Bronze Star
Medals for their recent actions. Could you tell us something
about the work that Seabees have performed and the important
contributions that they've made in Iraq?
Mr. England. Senator, thanks for the opportunity to
recognize the Seabees, because I can tell you, we are
tremendously proud of the men and women in the Seabees. They
have served with distinction in Operation Enduring Freedom,
supporting the Marine Corps, and also the Navy, ashore. They
were deployed with the IMEF. There were approximately 5,000
Seabees, and almost 2,000 from the reserve, that supported that
effort. And today we have well over 500 Seabees, active duty,
and about 500 Seabees, reserved, who are deploying with the
marines on this deployment to Iraq. And they will be tasked
with force protection, doing structures and facilities, and
also for reconstruction of some of the civilian infrastructure
in Iraq. So the Seabees have been very important, very
instrumental. Like I say, we're tremendously proud of their
effort.
UPARMORED HUMVEES
Senator Cochran. There has already been a question about
the problem with the improvised explosive devices. I understand
that, in the case of the marines, there is an effort being made
to upgrade the deployment of Humvees with armor that would
provide additional protection. And I know there are other
things that are being done in this area that can't be discussed
in open session. But will the Marine Corps have adequate
numbers of up-armored Humvees to help deal with this situation?
General Hagee. Sir, we won't have the up-armored Humvees.
As I mentioned, we're going to have about 3,000 vehicles in
Iraq, a combination of Humvees, 5 tons, 7 tons, and other
moving stock. Any of those vehicles that will go in harm's way
on patrol will be hardened. They're not the M1114, which is the
up-armored Humvee, but they will be hardened, either with kits
or with steel that we have cut to fit the platforms.
LIGHTWEIGHT 155 HOWITZER PROGRAM
Senator Cochran. There is a request in the budget for funds
for 97 Lightweight 155 Howitzers. Could you provide us with
your assessment of how this program is progressing?
General Hagee. Sir, the Lightweight 155 is going very well.
There was a minor problem here a month or so ago with the weld
on the tail of the 155. That's been resolved. We are very
confident that we'll be able to go to a full-rate production,
and we'll have a positive decision in January 2005.
Senator Cochran. Thank you very much, General.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
GLOBAL HAWK
Senator Stevens. Secretary England, I noted the comments of
the Senator from Mississippi about the Global Hawk. And,
Admiral Clark, we have done some work with the Coast Guard in
trying out the Predator for long-range activities along the
maritime border off Alaska. And they've reported that that has
been fairly successful. I do hope there's going to be some
competition, because I see the Global Hawk as one platform; the
Predator and some of these other smaller ones are different
platforms, and they have different utilities as we go along.
Are you exploring all of these possibilities for competition
with the Global Hawk?
Mr. England. Yes, we are. That was really the gist of my
comment, that we're now talking specific platforms. We are
specifically looking at the competitive environment and who
should compete in this. But we will definitely compete if there
are systems that meet the requirements, Senator.
Senator Stevens. As a matter of fact, I was out at Stanford
Research Institute recently, and one of them you could hold in
your hand. Very interesting derivation of the concept of
unmanned aircraft. But I do think the future is in utilizing a
whole series of them, and I hope we stay current with the whole
concept, and not just one.
Mr. England. No, actually, we agree. I mean, this is not
only in the air, but this is on the surface of the Earth, it's
on the surface of the water, it's undersea. We're working a
wide variety of unmanned, across a full spectrum of utility in
combat. And, Senator, I agree with you, I think there's far
more utility in the future than we expect.
Senator Stevens. Not that I have anything against Global
Hawks. They're a very sound platform. But it's high-altitude,
long-range, and long-endurance. I think it's a very vital
portion of our system, but there are other challenging areas
where it just cannot fit in. And so I hope we pursue them all.
Yes, Admiral?
Admiral Clark. If I can add, Mr. Chairman, I think this is
really something for us to collectively consider. The
technology is moving so fast. We are going to send the marines
over, and, at the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL), we have
developed a hand-launched UAV that they're taking with them.
It's called Silver Fox. The marine will launch it like this. It
will link directly to him. The marine will be carrying a
computer. He won't be bothering with the satellites and all
this stuff. We've got to have mechanisms to be able to tap into
this technology and turn it in a hurry. And by the time we
finish our demonstrations, it's impossible to say today how
much the technology is going to have moved in this area. And so
we need the acquisition system to be agile enough for us to be
able to exploit.
This is our asymmetric advantage, Mr. Chairman. We'd like
to think of this enemy that we're fighting, that they're the
ones with the asymmetric advantage; ours is that we can turn
technology faster than anybody in the world. And the marines
are going with this brand-new system.
General Hagee. If I could pile on for a minute, Mr.
Chairman. I could not agree more with both the Secretary and
Admiral Clark. We're also bringing a UAV called Dragon Eye,
which is a hand-launched UAV, that can give the company
commander visibility over the next hill. And, of course, we
have Pioneer.
To me, what is critical is the ability to link all of these
platforms--whether they're tactical, whether they're
operational, or whether they're strategic--that we have the
communication architecture down there to where that company
commander, battalion commander, or ship driver, can get that
information, and it's not stove-piped down to one ground
station. I think that's where our concentration needs to be.
Senator Stevens. And it's going to be linked up to the
cockpit of the manned aircraft, too. So I think this is the
future, and I hope you are doing what we're doing, and that is,
visiting some of those people in graduate school who are
thinking out of the box and trying to really push the
envelope----
Mr. England. Actually----
Senator Stevens [continuing]. On the whole subject.
Mr. England. I'm sorry, Senator. But, you know, a lot of
this is operational. I mean, even in the war that we're
conducting, in Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and, before,
Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), we actually had unmanned tied in
with manned aircraft. And it's interesting, when you listen to
the conversation, you don't know if the pilot's on the ground
or in the airplane. So it's quite interesting how this all ties
together. We have made, I think, giant strides in this area.
Senator Stevens. Well, the three of you make us proud.
Do you have any further questions, Senator?
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Without any question, we've seen a lot of teams at that
witness table, in my time on this subcommittee; I think you're
the finest we've seen, and we appreciate what you're doing.
You've got a grand group of young men and women serving our
country under your command. So we couldn't be more pleased with
the way you're conducting your activities. And I do hope that
we can find ways to work together and make sure that we deliver
the funds to you in the areas that they're needed.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted to Hon. Gordon R. England
Questions Submitted by Senator Pete V. Domenici
WATER PURIFICATION PROGRAM
Question. Mr. Secretary, as you know the Office of Naval Research
(ONR) has begun a water purification research program in southern New
Mexico.
The goal of this program is to study techniques in reverse osmosis
that will lead to the production of a transportable water purification
unit.
In turn, these units would be used by Marines engaged in
humanitarian and disaster relief efforts. They would also help meet the
water demands of our expeditionary war-fighters.
What is the schedule to produce the first water purification system
with the upgraded technology being developed by the Navy?
Answer. The Office of Naval Research (ONR) is the program
coordinator for the Expeditionary Unit Water Purification (EUWP)
program. The EUWP program is in the near term building state of the art
demonstrators, and for the long term is investing in significant
science and technology enhancements.
In the near term, the EUWP program is designing a 100,000 Gallon
Per Day (GPD) system. This system is transportable by C-130 aircraft
and encompasses state of the art commercially available technology. It
will ultimately be fielded to the Tularosa Basin National Desalination
Research Facility (TBNDRF), Alamogordo, New Mexico, and is on schedule
with delivery planned for January 2005.
NAVY HIGH ENERGY LASER TESTING
Question. What is the status of the Navy high energy laser testing
against anti-ship missiles at White Sands?
Answer. The Navy is in the process of upgrading the Sea-Lite Beam
Director (SLBD) acquisition and tracking systems from its circa 1970s
technology to more state of the art technologies. The name of this
program is High Energy Laser Precision Acquisition and Track (HEL-PAT).
At present, two new cameras, mid wave infrared, and long wave infrared,
have been purchased and are on site. A new Automatic Aimpoint Selection
and Maintenance (AUASM) telescope and Hot Spot Tracking (HST) optics
are being manufactured. A new Tracking Processor Unit (TPU) has been
procured and the associated tracking software is being developed. The
new TPU will allow object oriented tracking as opposed to edge tracking
currently employed.
Starting in April 2004, the TPU and one of the new cameras are
being installed and integrated with the SLBD using a surrogate AUASM
telescope. This will ensure that the TPU can properly control the SLBD
for tracking. First tests will be on a stationary target board. Later
tests will track military aircraft. The goals of the SLBD upgrades are
to allow the tracking and engagement of low contrast targets against a
clutter background and to maintain the high energy laser beam on
target. In addition, tracking through the full aperture will be
utilized. Low power laser engagements will begin in June 2004 and high
power engagements in November 2004.
Question. Is the Navy interested in developing laser weapons for
the all-electric ship?
Answer. The Navy is interested in high-energy lasers as a future
concept, but does not consider the technology to be mature enough for
inclusion in an acquisition program. Adequate power generation is a
limiting factor in the development of these weapons. We continue to
invest in Science and Technology programs to attain methods for
generating the required power levels. One example is the ongoing
program in free electron laser development sponsored by the Office of
Naval Research. Additionally, we continue to coordinate with other
Services and Agencies on related high energy laser development
projects.
JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER
Question. The success of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program is
vital to the future of tactical aviation of all the services,
especially the fighter bases in New Mexico.
What is the status of the JSF program, especially the problem of
being over-weight? Do you expect any significant impact on the
schedule?
Answer. The Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program has completed two
years of an 11-year development program. To date, the development of
all three variants has gone very well in propulsion, subsystems,
avionics, and autonomic logistics areas. The Air System Preliminary
Design Review was completed in June 2003, and the F-135 First Engine to
Test was successfully completed in October 2003.
The Department does have concerns regarding the aircraft's airframe
design. At this time, the airframe design is heavier than the
established goal. Reducing the weight of the airframe is an important
step in meeting performance requirements. We believe current weight
issues are solvable within normal parameters of design fluctuation, and
we are re-planning JSF System Development and Demonstration (SDD) to
make sure we succeed. Specifically, our SDD plan recognizes that Short
Takeoff and Vertical Landing (STOVL) performance is absolutely vital
and is focusing upfront efforts to ensure STOVL viability for our war
fighters. In addition, we are aggressively pursuing trade studies to
improve performance by reducing weight, as well as aggressively
pursuing propulsion enhancements to improve performance. Additionally,
the Department has formed an independent review team to look at the
entire program, including a near-term engineering view, assessing the
present design, with specific emphasis on weight, aircraft structural
design, and other technical risk areas.
Additional design work required to address technical issues,
primarily weight projections, will result in an SDD schedule delay and
a one-year slip to starting Low Rate Initial Production to fiscal year
2007 vice fiscal year 2006. In addition, Initial Operational Capability
(IOC) dates will be extended as a result of adjusting the program with
the STOVL variant's IOC moved from fiscal year 2010 to fiscal year
2012, the Conventional Takeoff and Landing (CTOL) variant moved from
fiscal year 2011 to fiscal year 2013, and the Carrier Variant (CV)
moved from fiscal year 2012 to fiscal year 2013.
______
Question Submitted to General Michael W. Hagee
Question Submitted by Senator Thad Cochran
M4 CARBINES
Question. General Hagee, I noted with some concern an unfunded
requirement of $4.9 million for the procurement of 5,400 M-4 Carbines
to be used by forward deployed Marines. Also, I recently became aware
of a new technology for coating weapons that could enable weapons such
as the M4 Carbine to operate without lubrication. I understand that
this technology could greatly improve the reliability of the weapons
concerned while decreasing the workload of the Marine.
Could you update the Committee on your small arms shortfall, and
are you aware of this technology? If so, are you investigating the
feasibility of its application to Marine Corps weapons?
Answer. As the result of lessons learned in recent operations,
certain Marines are inappropriately armed with the M9 pistol or the
M16A4 rifle. The M4 carbine is a shorter, lighter version of the
standard M16A2 service rifle and is deemed a better weapon for specific
applications due to its smaller profile. Therefore, the Marine Corps
recently established a 10,119 Table of Equipment (T/E) requirement for
the M4 carbine variant of the Modular Weapon System (MWS). The M4
carbine replaces some of the current M16A2 rifles and M9 pistols. This
increase of 4,420 weapons raises the MWS requirement to 69,883 weapons.
This is comprised of 59,764 M16A4 rifles and 10,119 M4 carbines. The
$4.9 million will procure 5,400 M4 carbine variants.
The Marine Corps Infantry Weapons and Weapons Maintenance program
is actively investigating coating technology for small arms. A
Universal Chemical Technologies, Inc. product will increase wear and
corrosion resistance and reduce friction. The Marine Corps will
continue to investigate coating technology sources to reduce weapons
lifecycle costs.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Stevens. Our next Defense Subcommittee meeting is
scheduled for Wednesday, March 24, at 10 a.m.
Thank you very much.
[Whereupon, at 11:42 a.m., Wednesday, March 10, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Wednesday,
March 24.]