[Senate Hearing 114-653]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 2, 2016
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10:31 a.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Thad Cochran (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Cochran, Collins, Graham, Blunt, Daines,
Durbin, Reed, and Schatz.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Navy
Office of the Secretary
STATEMENT OF HON. RAY MABUS, SECRETARY
opening statement of senator thad cochran
Senator Cochran. The Committee of the Appropriations
Subcommittee for Defense Appropriations meets this morning to
review the fiscal year 2017 Navy and Marine Corps budget
request.
We're pleased to welcome to our distinguished panel of
witnesses to help us review and understand the budget request
for the United States Navy and Marine Corps.
We're pleased, specifically, to welcome to the Committee,
the Honorable Ray Mabus, the Secretary of the Navy, Admiral
John M. Richardson, Chief of Naval Operations and General
Robert B. Neller, Commandant of the Marine Corps.
This is Admiral Richardson's and General Neller's first
appearance before the subcommittee since becoming Chief of
Naval Operations and Commandant of the Marine Corps.
We're pleased to welcome you both.
We also welcome our fellow Mississippian, Secretary of the
Navy, Ray Mabus, back to the subcommittee. We appreciate your
joining us today and providing your testimony, Mr. Secretary.
For fiscal year 2017 the President's budget requests $155
billion in base funding to support the Navy and Marine Corps.
The request is $5 billion less than the current funding level.
The request also includes $9.5 billion to support ongoing,
Overseas Contingency Operations. These funds will support
deployment of Sailors and Marines throughout the world and
sustain ongoing operational commitments.
We appreciate your efforts to help maintain a robust
shipbuilding budget. Specifically, we welcome the inclusion of
full funding for the Ohio-Class Replacement Program within the
Navy's regular budget request for fiscal year 2017 through
fiscal year 2021.
We appreciate your service to our Nation. We look forward
to working with you as we prepare and report the fiscal year
2017 Defense Appropriations bill that will enable the Navy and
Marine Corps to defend our national security interests around
the world.
Thank you very much for your testimony and your cooperation
with our Committee.
Your full statements will be included in the record.
We would now be prepared to yield to the distinguished Vice
Chairman of the Committee, Senator Durbin, for his opening
remarks.
statement of senator richard j. durbin
Senator Durbin. Thanks, Mr. Chairman and I'll make my
remarks brief and put the statement in its entirety in the
record.
I'm pleased to join you in welcoming Secretary Mabus,
Admiral Richardson and General Neller to our hearing to review
the Navy budget request for fiscal year 2017.
At the outset let me say, Mr. Secretary and Admiral, we are
proud that our country's Sailors get their start in Illinois at
Naval Station Great Lakes. It is a magnificent facility and
some extraordinary people work there to serve our Nation and
prepare the next generation of Sailors. We want to continue to
work with you to make sure the quality of life for all that are
part of that operation is at the very highest level. And we
will continue to do that.
General Neller, when it comes time for questions you and I
will spend a few moments recalling one of our first
conversations about the terrible tragedy that occurred in
Hawaii in January of this year with the crash of two CH-53,
heavy lift helicopters. I have a number of questions I want to
ask that may as well be answered by the Secretary concerning
that incident and Naval Aviation and Marine Corps Aviation as
well.
But at this point I'll turn it back over to the Chairman.
We can proceed with the hearing.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Richard J. Durbin
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to join you in welcoming Secretary
Mabus, Admiral Richardson, and General Neller to our hearing to review
the Navy's budget request for fiscal year 2017.
I would note at the outset that the Senate is still considering the
nomination of Dr. Janine Davidson to be Under Secretary of the Navy.
She is a very capable nominee.
She was nominated in September, and was voted out of committee in
December. I know you would appreciate having a full team onboard to
deal with today's challenges, and I hope the Senate will act swiftly to
confirm her.
Every year, when a new budget is submitted, it seems the recurring
refrain that we hear from each of the Services is that this is a tough
budget year. I expect this year to be no different.
Americans ask a lot of our Navy and Marine Corps, including long
deployments at sea and in war zones for the women and men who have
signed up to serve their country.
I am proud that our country's Sailors get their start in Illinois
at Naval Station Great Lakes.
These Sailors and their Marine partners are expected to be a source
of geopolitical stability across the globe. They are called upon to
reassure allies and deter enemies.
We look to them to calm territorial disputes and defend against
threats to maritime commerce.
They provide humanitarian assistance in the wake of disasters. And
they are a critical counter to terrorist and criminal networks.
This is a constant and complex set of demands. We should not and
cannot underestimate the toll it creates on people, aircraft, ships,
and infrastructure.
Preparing for today is even more difficult when we are also called
upon to prepare for tomorrow through investments in future capabilities
and technologies. Congress has not made this easy, barely avoided
sequestration through a string of short-term budget deals.
One area I am concerned about, General Neller, is the conversations
we have had about the health of the Marine Corps' aircraft. Many
helicopters were left overseas too long and took quite a beating
operating in sandy conditions. They need to be repaired and they need
to be replaced.
We were all heartbroken to learn of January 2016 crash of two CH-53
Heavy Lift helicopters off the coast of Hawaii. I am concerned about
what incidents like these may imply about the broader force.
I also talked with your predecessor, General Dunford, about
concerns with maintaining older F-18 aircraft. We have to remain
vigilant in ensuring the safety of our force, and aviators should be
priority number one.
On the more positive side, the Navy has provided the necessary
funding within its 5 year budget plans to start construction of the
Ohio-class replacement submarines in 2021.
These submarines are an indispensable part of our Nation's nuclear
deterrence. But there are valid concerns about how much the total
program will cost--perhaps $80 billion in procurement over the next
three decades--as well as the transparency in budgeting for these costs
in the future.
As the Ohio-class replacement program progresses, we will be
interested in hearing about the cost saving initiatives you plan to
implement on this program, how you plan to get the best performance out
of our industrial partners, and what we can do to set this program up
for success.
Secretary Mabus, Admiral Richardson, and General Neller, the
affordability of new submarines and the safety of old aircraft are only
two of the myriad of issues you have to address on a daily basis as you
lead the most powerful fighting forces on the seas today.
I look forward to hearing about solutions for the today's issues,
how you will calm the seas for tomorrow's Navy and Marine Corps.
Senator Cochran. Thank you.
Thank you.
Mr. Secretary, you may proceed.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. RAY MABUS
Mr. Mabus. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Senator Durbin and
members of the Committee, thank you so much for the opportunity
to discuss the Department of the Navy.
As the Chairman pointed out this is the first testimony for
our Chief of Naval Operations, John Richardson and for the
Commandant of the Marine Corps, Robert Neller.
In the time since they took these positions I've had the
privilege of their frank, their professional, their invaluable
counsel. They're officers of the highest caliber who expertly
lead our Navy and Marine Corps during ever tightening fiscal
constraints and an increasingly dynamic threat environment.
This is my seventh time to appear before you and my last.
For me, leading the Department of the Navy is the greatest
honor of my life. I couldn't be more proud of our Sailors, our
Marines and our civilians.
I'm also proud of the many steps we've taken and changes
we've made to ensure that the Navy and Marine Corps in the
future remain the greatest expeditioner fighting force the
world has ever known.
First and foremost, we continue to provide presence that
unrivaled advantage, all and above, beneath and from the seas,
gives our leaders options in times of crisis, reassures our
allies and deters our adversaries. There is no next best thing
to being there. Maintaining that presence requires grey hulls
on the horizon.
While there's been discussion about posture versus
presence, the simple fact is, for the Navy and Marine Corps,
our posture is presence.
In every case from high-end combat or irregular warfare to
disaster relief, our Naval assets get there faster. We stay on
station longer. We take everything we need with us. And since
we operate from our ships which are sovereign American
territory, we can act without having to ask anyone else's
permission.
That's the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps, America's away team,
doing its job.
Resourcing that presence depends on four fundamentals:
people, our Sailors and Marines; platforms, our ships and
aircraft and systems; power, how we use energy to make us
better war fighters; and partnerships, our relationships with
our international allies, industry and the American people.
When I took this post 7 years ago we had an incredibly
committed and capable force but each of these four Ps was under
pressure.
Our people were under stress from high operational tempo
and extended deployments. Our fleet was shrinking and too many
of our platforms were costing too much. Our use of power was a
vulnerability. We were losing too many Marines guarding fuel
convoys in Afghanistan and volatile oil prices were stressing
many areas, particularly training. And our partners were
seeking reassurance of our sustained engagement.
Now our people, platforms, power and partnerships are
stronger than they've been in many years. We've instituted the
most sweeping changes in personnel policy for our people in
many years.
Promotions are based more on merit and not tenure.
Commanding officers are empowered to meritoriously promote more
Sailors and Marines. We've made career paths more flexible. One
example, thanks to you, is the Career Intermission Program
which has been dramatically expanded.
Senator Durbin, I'm going to depart here for a second and
talk about Great Lakes because the Master Chief Petty Officer
of the Navy is seated right behind me. And thanks to an idea he
had every recruit that goes through there now gets a tablet
that they keep for their career so that they will have access
to all their military records and so they can be updated
continuously on any education or information that they need.
And that's one of the examples of how our Sailors get a
great start in Illinois.
We've also increased the professional development and
educational opportunities to bring America's best ideas to the
fleet by adding 30 graduate school slots through our Fleet
Scholars Education Program and sending high performing Sailors
on SECNAV Industry Tours to great American companies where they
learn private sector best practices.
We're absolutely committed, from leadership to the deck
plates, on combating the crime of sexual assault and the
tragedy of suicide. We've revamped physical fitness
assessments, making them more realistically aligned to the jobs
we do and we promoted healthier lifestyles through better
nutrition and a culture of fitness.
All billets in both services are now open to women.
Standards will absolutely not be lowered but anyone who can
meet the standards will be able to do the job. This will make
us more combat effective as a force.
We're trying to mitigate stress on Sailors and Marines and
their families by making deployments more predictable,
extending hours for child care and establishing co-location
policies.
For platforms, we reversed the decline in ship count. And
thanks to Congress and in particular to this Committee, our
Navy will reach 300 ships by 2019 and our assessed and
validated of 308 by 2021.
In the 7 years before I took office, the Navy contracted
for 41 ships. In my 7 years we've contracted for 84 and we've
done so while increasing aircraft purchases by 35 percent, all
with a smaller top line.
Practices like for oil--fixed price contracts, multiyear
buys and stable requirements, have driven down the cost on
virtually every class of ship. And we're also in the process of
recapitalizing nearly every Naval aviation program.
We've expanded unmanned systems on, under and above the sea
and we've put increased focus on them organizationally.
We're also implementing advanced energy technologies like
rail guns and lasers.
To increase our lethality and operational flexibility I set
goals of having 50 percent of sea and shore based energy
derived from alternative sources by 2020, competitive with the
price of conventional power. We met that goal last year on our
bases and we will meet it in the fleet by 2020.
And energy efficiency is being greatly increased on our
bases and at sea. Both Navy and Marine Corps have achieved a
large drop in oil consumption.
Finally, partnerships, I've traveled almost 1.2 million
miles to 144 different countries and territories visiting
Sailors and Marines, visiting our allies and our partners.
Twelve of my trips have been to Afghanistan where I visited
every Marine Corps forward operating base in Helmand to be with
our forward deployed men and women. And I've actively engaged
with our allies and friends around the world to build and
sustain a network of Navies with whom we train, operate and
trust, and we've worked in partnership with Congress to fulfill
the constitutional mandate to provide for and maintain a Navy.
As a result, our Sailors and Marines are there for us at
home and abroad, around the globe, around the clock.
As President George Washington once said, ``It follows then
as certain as night succeeds day that without a decisive Naval
force we can do nothing definitive and with it everything
honorable and glorious.''
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Ray Mabus
Chairman Cochran and Vice Chairman Durbin, members of the
Committee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the readiness and
posture of the Department of the Navy. With Chief of Naval Operations
John Richardson and Commandant of the Marine Corps Bob Neller, I have
the great privilege of representing the Sailors and Marines who serve
our Nation around the world, the civilians who support them and all of
their families.
This is the first testimony before this committee for Admiral
Richardson and General Neller in these positions. In the time since
they took these critical posts, I have had the privilege of their
frank, professional and invaluable counsel. They are officers of the
highest caliber who expertly lead our Navy and Marine Corps during
ever-tightening fiscal constraints and an increasingly dynamic threat
environment.
This is my eighth time, and my last, to appear before you. For me,
leading the Department of the Navy is the greatest honor of my life. I
could not be more proud of our Sailors, Marines, and civilians. I'm
also proud of the many steps we've taken and changes we've made to
ensure that the Navy and Marine Corps remain as they have been for over
240 years as the greatest expeditionary fighting force the world has
ever known
This statement, together with those provided by Admiral Richardson
and General Neller, presents to you and to the American people an
overview of the Department of the Navy and highlights our priorities as
we move forward with the fiscal year 2017 budget process. As the
Secretary of the Navy, I am responsible for recruiting, training, and
equipping the Sailors, Marines, and civilians who spend every day
working to defend the American people and our national interests.
Every year, as we review our current posture, we must ask
ourselves, as a Department, as a military, and as a Nation, how to
balance our national security demands. We face an increasing array of
threats, conflicts and challenges around the globe, even as our fiscal
and budgetary situation continues to strain resources. Consistently,
when a crisis occurs, the leaders of this country want immediate
options, so they ask for the Navy and Marine Corps, for our carrier
strike groups and our amphibious ready groups, for our Sailors and
Marines, for our presence. With 90 percent of global trade traveling by
sea, 95 percent of all voice and data being transferred under the ocean
and more than 80 percent of the world's population living within 60
miles of the sea, there is no question that now, more than ever, we are
living in a maritime century.
the value of presence
What our Navy and Marine Corps uniquely provide is presence--around
the globe, around the clock--ensuring stability, deterring adversaries,
and providing the Nation's leaders with options in times of crisis. We
are ``America's away team'' because Sailors and Marines, equally in
times of peace and war, are deployed around the world to be not just in
the right place at the right time but in the right place all the time.
In every case, from high-end combat to irregular warfare to disaster
relief, our naval assets get on station faster, we stay longer, we
bring whatever we need with us and, since we operate from our ships,
which are sovereign American territory, we can act without having to
ask any other nation's permission. While there has been discussion
about posture versus presence, the simple fact is that for the Navy and
Marine Corps, our posture is presence.
For more than seven decades, Navy and Marine Corps presence has
kept international sea lanes open around the world. For the first time
in history, one nation--America--is protecting trade and commerce not
just for ourselves and our allies but for everyone. Today, $9 trillion
in goods are traded by sea annually, supporting 40 million jobs in the
U.S. alone and benefiting nearly every consumer on earth. These
statistics make it clear that the health of the world's economy depends
in large part on the United States Navy and Marine Corps.
The security and stability of the international system of trade and
finance is tied irrevocably to the free movement of goods and data
across, above and under the sea, and is more than just a military
concern. It impacts every American in the prices we pay for goods and
services and the very availability of those goods and services. While
the Navy's activities often take place far away and out of sight of
most citizens, the impact of our global naval presence isn't a
theoretical construct; its effects are palpable throughout American
life.
The economic benefit is just one that comes from our Sailors and
Marines doing their job across the globe. That ubiquitous presence
reassures our allies and deters our adversaries. And, if conflict
comes, we will fight and win. Our presence is an unrivaled advantage
that we provide our Nation. There is no ``next best thing'' to being
there. Maintaining that presence requires gray hulls on the horizon.
With each year's budget decisions, we determine what the future
Navy and Marine Corps will look like. Just as the Fleet and Corps we
have today are the result of decisions made a decade ago, so will
tomorrow's Fleet and Corps be a result of the decisions we make today.
For this reason, we have to balance the needs of our Navy and Marine
Corps today with those of our Nation tomorrow.
Our combatant commanders understand the critical expeditionary
capability the Navy and Marine Corps team brings to the fight. Whether
we are conducting security cooperation around the world, deploying
Marines in response to a humanitarian crisis or launching strikes from
our carriers, it is clear Navy and Marine Corps presence provides great
value to our decision makers and our Nation. The emergence of a diverse
set of challenges, including Russia, North Korea, China, Iran and ISIS
demands continued emphasis on our Naval and expeditionary forces. We
absolutely cannot afford to forfeit the capabilities of our future
maritime power and superiority.
around the globe, around the clock
You only need to look around the world to see our Navy and Marine
Corps are first on-station and demonstrate an instrumental and
prominent role in our national security strategy.
For the first 54 days of the air campaign against Islamic State
militants in Iraq and Syria, the only strikes came from Navy F/A-18
Hornets off USS George H.W. Bush in the Arabian Gulf because land-based
fighters could not participate until host nations approved.
During a 10-month deployment ending in June 2015, USS Carl Vinson
Strike Group conducted 12,300 sorties, including 2,383 combat missions
against Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
The operational tempo of Naval Special Operations Forces (NAVSOF)
remains high, as they continue operations in the Middle East, Horn of
Africa, and Central Asia. NAVSOF is manning the Combined Joint Special
Operations Task Force-Iraq and deploying forces to Afghanistan.
In March 2015, USS Gary intercepted a suspected narcotics-
trafficking vessel off the coast of Central America and seized 5,200
kilograms of cocaine.
In July 2015, USS Porter entered the Black Sea to reassure NATO
allies of our commitment to regional stability by conducting naval
exercises with ships from 30 different nations including Spain,
Portugal, France, Turkey, Greece and Bulgaria.
Last fall, as a visible demonstration of our commitment to
maintaining freedom of navigation for everyone, USS Lassen patrolled
the Spratly Islands and nearby artificial reefs in the South China Sea.
USS Curtis Wilbur conducted similar freedom of navigation operations by
patrolling near the disputed Triton Island earlier this year.
When tensions rose in Yemen last summer, Marines embarked with
Sailors onboard Navy craft to shore up security and surveillance in
surrounding waters in preparation for a potential crisis.
The 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) deployed to Saipan to
provide Defense Support to Civil Authorities after Typhoon SOUDELOR
killed 30 people and displaced 150,000 others in the Commonwealth of
the Northern Marianas.
Within 40 hours of President Obama's order, a Special Purpose
Marine Air-Ground Task Force deployed Marines, Sailors, aircraft and
equipment to Liberia to respond to the Ebola crisis, providing critical
airlift and surgical capability as part of U.S. disaster relief
efforts.
Maritime presence has been a tenet of our democracy since its
inception; the founding fathers wrote in the Constitution that Congress
is authorized to ``raise'' an Army when needed, but mandated it
``maintain'' a Navy. Maintaining our great Navy and Marine Corps is
what assures Americans at home, our friends and allies, as well as our
adversaries that we are ready to respond when called upon to any
crisis, anywhere.
Early on in my tenure as Secretary, I outlined four principles that
enable our Navy and Marine Corps' to sustain their global presence.
They are People, Platforms, Power and Partnerships. Those have been,
and continue to be, the key factors in assuring the capability,
capacity and success of our naval services, which is why they have
been, and will remain, my top priorities.
People--Sustaining the World's Most Formidable Expeditionary Fighting
Force
The Sailors, Marines, and civilians serving today are the best
force we've ever had. But for more than a decade we asked a lot of
everyone, because unlike other services, we deploy equally in peacetime
and wartime. There are no permanent homecomings for Sailors and
Marines. Despite all we've asked, they have performed magnificently.
We've taken steps to maintain the health and resilience of our force
across every facet of the Department. We have addressed issues like
operational readiness levels, personal well-being for our people and
their families, creating more options for career flexibility, opening
new slots for graduate education, improving our advancement process,
and promoting equality of opportunity. We have made the Navy and Marine
Corps stronger, focused not only on retaining the incredible expertise
and professionalism that resides within these two services, but also
that draws from the broadest talent pool America has to offer.
Our Sailors and Marines make Navy and Marine Corps presence
possible by operating the platforms, harnessing the power, and building
the partnerships necessary to fulfill our national security strategy.
Seven years ago when I took office, we had a committed and capable
force, but our people, and our platforms, were under stress from high
operational tempo and extended deployments.
To return stability to our Sailors, Marines, their families, and to
our maintenance cycles, one of our first priorities was to develop and
institute the Optimized Fleet Response Plan (OFRP). This is a program
that the Navy is using to schedule and plan our deployments and the
maintenance of our platforms. Entering its third year since
implementation, OFRP is beginning to fully demonstrate its advantages
to the Fleet. USS Eisenhower Carrier Strike Group and USS Makin Island
Expeditionary Strike Group will be first to deploy later this year
entirely under the OFRP. Our men and women know there is no way to
completely eliminate the unexpected, because events around the world
can and do take on a life of their own. However, increasing the
predictability of deployments will help improve resilience in our
Sailors and Marines and their families and also has the added benefit
of helping us properly support our maintenance requirements and
readiness posture.
Under the OFRP, we continue to meet all operational commitments,
and Sailors, Marines, and their families are giving us positive
feedback on this and other initiatives like increases to Hardship Duty
Pay--Tempo (HDP-T), a pro-rated additional pay that kicks in when a
deployment extends beyond more than 220 consecutive days, and Career
Sea Pay, paid to those who have spent a total of 3 years at sea and
Career Sea Pay-Premium for those E-6 and above who have spent a total
of 8 years in sea-going assignments. These incentives reward those who
take the hard and challenging billets at sea, which form the backbone
of our operations.
Taking care of our people is about more than just operational
stability. Through our 21st Century Sailor and Marine Initiative,
implemented in 2012, we have provided a holistic approach to assuring
we have the healthiest, fittest, and most resilient force in the world.
We have focused on helping our Sailors and Marines maximize their
personal and professional readiness by assisting them and their
families with the mental, physical and emotional challenges of military
service. Eliminating the stovepipes that existed between many of the
programs designed to support our people allows us to better address
issues like suicide and sexual assault in a comprehensive way that
protects our Sailors and Marines and makes them stronger.
In suicide prevention, we are continuing to accelerate our efforts
in 2016 by becoming more assertive on early recognition, education and
open dialogue to promote climates supportive of psychological health.
We are expanding our Ask, Care, Treat (ACT) initiative that focuses on
training, counseling, and intervention. To date, over 40,000 Sailors
have received training via Navy Operational Stress Control (OSC)
courses. And our partnerships with the Navy and Marine Corps Public
Health Center, the Defense Suicide Prevention Office, and the Bureau of
Navy Medicine and Surgery have maximized our public health approach to
suicide prevention. Furthermore, we are adding to the nearly 800
Suicide Prevention Coordinators (SPC) trained in 2015, enhancing local
suicide prevention efforts at the deckplate by having a qualified
program advocate at nearly every command.
Sexual assault is a crime with devastating impacts to the Navy and
Marine Corps. Every Sailor and Marine deserves a working environment
respectful of all, completely intolerant of sexual assault, and
supported by programs of prevention, advocacy, and accountability. So
we've implemented many actions to attack this insidious threat. While
there is still work to be done, we have instituted an increasingly
effective Sexual Assault Prevention and Response program and Victim's
Legal Counsel, which together encourage increased reporting and provide
critical support to those who come forward, and I am the only Service
Secretary who has my Sexual Assault Prevention Response Officer report
directly to me. We are also taking steps to prevent and respond to
perceptions of retaliation or ostracism on the part of the courageous
people who report these crimes--whether by the chain of command or
peers.
Our Sexual Assault Prevention and Response programs are many and
varied. Through our InterACT Bystander intervention training we've
educated more than 52,000 Sailors and Marines at 220 training events on
how to stop a potentially dangerous scenario from leading to an
assault. Our Navy Chaplain Corps has teamed with clinicians to
establish CREDO, a 48-hour retreat event with workshops focused on
teamwork, community building, personal resiliency and reconciliation.
In-person education is augmented by numerous interactive training tools
available to all Sailors and Marines ashore and afloat. But no matter
how much we've done and continue to do, we will not consider our
mission a success until this crime is eliminated.
Protecting our Department from instability and destructive and
illegal behavior is important, but equally important is promoting
healthy lifestyles that result in a more capable and ready fighting
force. Our high operational tempo demands a year-round culture of
fitness. So we have completely revamped the Physical Fitness Assessment
to focus on producing warfighters, capable of accomplishing any mission
any time, a measure that not only improves readiness but reduces
overall medical costs. To set Sailors and Marines up for success, we
opened a 24-hour a day, 7-day a week gym on every base worldwide and we
began issuing the Navy Fitness Suit, a uniform item the Marines already
have. Sailors earn Fitness Suit patches for outstanding performance,
and those who maintain that level of performance over three cycles
receive the ``Outstanding Fitness Award.''
To complement physical training with well-balanced diets, we've
increased efforts to provide nutritious food options to Sailors and
Marines at sea and ashore. In 2012, the Marines introduced the ``Fueled
to Fight'' nutrition program, designed to promote a healthy lifestyle
by providing more nutritious food choices. At base dining facilities, a
labeling system identifies healthier options and enhances the Marine's
ability to make a healthy choice. The Navy also created their version,
called, ``Fuel to Fight,'' launched by the SEALS at Naval Amphibious
Base Little Creek, which increases the availability of lean-proteins,
vegetables, and complex carbohydrates in our galleys. We are further
developing the concept at one sea-based and one shore-based unit this
year and will implement it Fleet-wide in 2017.
Part of overall health is emotional health. In order for Sailors
and Marines to remain focused on the mission, they should not be
distracted by concerns about their home life. The Department of the
Navy takes very seriously its commitment to support our Navy and Marine
Corps families, and we have taken actions to make service more family
friendly. We established 24/7 Child Care Development Centers at three
Fleet concentration areas and increased access to childcare by a total
of four hours, two hours on either side of the previously existing
timeframe, at all locations.
And, in July of last year, I tripled paid maternity leave from 6 to
18 weeks, a period subsequently reduced to 12 weeks by the Secretary of
Defense. Meaningful maternity leave when it matters most is one of the
best ways that we can support the women who serve our county. This
flexibility is an investment in our people and our Services, and a
safeguard against losing skilled service members. In our line
communities, for example, we were losing about twice as many female
service members as male, most leaving between 7-12 years of service. We
believe extending maternity leave will save money and increase
readiness in the Department of the Navy by keeping people in.
Under a Congressional authorization, we piloted the Career
Intermission Program (CIP) beginning in 2009. CIP allows a Sailor or
Marine to take up to 3 years off, with a 2-year payback for each year
taken. When they return they compete against people who have been on
active duty the same amount of time, as opposed to those from their
previously assigned year-group. So career flexibility does not come at
the cost of advancement potential. Our early participants have
successfully rejoined the Fleet and, again due to Congressional action,
we are expanding this program to help retain talented Sailors and
Marines.
While we have taken steps to provide additional services and career
flexibility so Sailors and Marines can address their needs personal
needs, we have also aggressively enhanced professional development
opportunities to strengthen our all-volunteer force. In a world
increasingly dependent on inter-service, inter-agency, and
international cooperation, that development takes place over the entire
span of one's career. To broaden background diversity in our officer
corps, we re-opened NROTC units at Harvard, Yale, Columbia and
Princeton after a 40-year hiatus.
We also established the Fleet Scholars Education Program, adding 30
new graduate school positions allocated by warfighting commanders to
eligible officers. Our first participants are now studying at Harvard,
Dartmouth, and Yale.
Outside the classroom, we recognize the value that private sector
ingenuity adds to American innovation, so we have also sent officers to
work at places like FedEx and Amazon as part of SECNAV Industry Tours.
Those who participate in these programs are our very best, and, in
return for their experience, we expect them to bring their knowledge
back to the Fleet and to continue to serve under the requirement that
for every month spent away, a Sailor or Marine owes 3 months back.
We want people to take advantage of these and other opportunities,
and we want them to commit to a career beyond any prescribed service
obligation. That means creating an advancement system based primarily
on merit, not tenure. In the Navy, we removed arbitrary ``zone stamps''
from officer promotion boards this year which can unnecessarily create
bias. Additionally, for enlisted, we increased the number of
advancement opportunities available to Commanding Officers to spot
promote their best and brightest Sailors via the Meritorious
Advancement Program. Next year, we expect those numbers to grow even
further.
In the Marine Corps we are revamping our manpower models to develop
the force and address gaps in our Non-commissioned Officer ranks. Sixty
percent of Marines are on their first tour and 40 percent are E-3 and
below. So we've implemented the Squad Leader Development Program to
mature and further professionalize the force. This Program screens
small unit infantry Marines, selects candidates based on performance
and provides them with opportunities for education, qualification and
assignment.
After returning predictability to the Navy and Marine Corps and
creating an environment that supports families and promotes
professional development, I took actions to make a career in the
Department attractive and viable to the broadest spectrum of American
talent. We now actively cultivate a force representative of the nation
it defends. Doing so maximizes our combat effectiveness, because a
diverse force is a stronger force.
This year, twenty-seven percent of the freshman class at the Naval
Academy Class is comprised of women, more than a one-third increase
from the summer of 2009 when I first took office. And for the first
time in American history, all billets in the Navy and Marine Corps will
be open to every member of this year's graduating class, and to all
others, officers and enlisted, throughout the Fleet.
I started integrating women into previously closed jobs shortly
after taking office by opening up submarines and the coastal riverines
to women. Later, in 2013, Secretary Panetta and Chairman Dempsey
decided that the default position would be to open all military
positions to women or seek an exemption to the policy. When weighing
this decision, I took a methodical and comprehensive approach.
Ultimately, I decided that denying any individual who meets an
established standard the opportunity to serve because of their gender
not only goes against everything we value as Americans, but it will
most certainly diminish our combat effectiveness. We have already
proven that is the case with respect to things like the color of
someone's skin or who they love.
While we celebrate diversity in all of our people, we are uniform
in purpose as part of an organization that prioritizes service over
self. Rather than highlighting differences in our ranks, we have
incorporated everyone as full-participants by moving, with some few
exceptions, to common uniforms in both the Navy and the Marine Corps so
that our forces have a common appearance. Now and in the future, we
will present ourselves not as male and female Sailors and Marines, but
as United States Sailors and Marines.
In the Reserves, during fiscal year 2015 we mobilized 2,700
individual Reserve Sailors and Marines to support operations worldwide.
This allows us to focus our active component on filling critical sea
billets to help ensure Fleet wholeness and readiness. This year, we
were reminded of the sacrifices our reserves make with the attack at
Navy Operational Support Center (NOSC) Chattanooga that took the lives
of five of our Sailors and Marines. At home, we have taken steps to
provide force protection against these kinds of terrorist acts at off-
installation NOSCs, and as of December 2015, 70 of 71 off-installation
NOSCs now have armed Selected Reservists. More than 150 NOSC staff
personnel have graduated the Navy's Security Reaction Force Basic (SRF-
B) course in support of the Navy Reserve Force Protection mission. For
Marine Corps reserve centers, 146 of 161 locations have armed duty
personnel, and the remaining 15 sites are in the process of training
personnel to be armed. Abroad, our Reserve Sailors and Marines are
deployed globally, and we will continue to maintain a Reserve that is
ready, relevant, and responsive to the nation's needs.
The Department's civilian workforce supports our uniformed force
and is critical to the success of our missions. Our civilian employees
have endured multi-year pay freezes, a hiring freeze, furloughs and
continued limits on performance awards that impacted morale. Results of
a Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey indicated that, while our civilians
appreciated the role they play in our mission, they felt recognition
and training were lacking. Where possible, through such efforts as
Operation Hiring Solutions, the Department has mitigated the impacts to
Fleet readiness and operations and to increase civilian employee job
satisfaction. Our efforts have produced tangible results, demonstrated
by increased civilian retention rates over the last two consecutive
years.
This patriotic workforce is the foundation of how the Department of
the Navy operates. In order to ensure we have the most capable people,
in the right positions, we run a number of leadership development
programs. Annually we select participants for senior leader, executive
leader, and developing leader programs to provide education and
training that will help our people tackle the issues we face now and in
the future.
platforms--growing our fleet despite shrinking budgets
To provide the presence the American people and our Nation's
leaders expect and have come to rely on, our Sailors and Marines need
the right number and composition of ships, aircraft, weapons, vehicles,
and equipment to execute the missions mandated by our National Security
Strategy. That means we must have a properly sized Fleet. Quantity has
a quality all its own.
When I first took office, I committed to growing the Fleet to meet
our validated requirement and strengthen the acquisition process by
employing stricter management and increased competition. In the 7
fiscal years from 9/11/2001 to 2009, our Fleet declined from 316 to 278
ships, and during that period, the Navy contracted for only 41 ships,
not enough to keep our Fleet from declining nor keep our shipyards open
and healthy. In the 7 fiscal years following 2009, we will have
contracted for 84 ships. And we will have done so while increasing
aircraft purchases by 35 percent, despite decreasing defense budgets.
shipbuilding
Navy shipbuilding is an essential part of our country's larger
shipbuilding and repair industry, which provides more than 400,000 jobs
and contributes more than $37 billion to America's gross domestic
product. Shipbuilding enhances and strengthens economic security as
well as national security. The work we have done, and must continue to
do, will reinforce the importance of maintaining a partnership with the
industrial base, as well as keep our shipbuilding industry strong and
ready to support the national security needs of our Navy and our
country.
Across our shipbuilding portfolio, we have employed direct,
impactful actions including increased competition within and across
product lines, using block buys and multi-year procurements when
products are mature; ensuring designs are stable before entering into
production; pursuing cross-program common-equipment buys; and achieving
affordability through hard-but-fair bargaining. This would not have
been possible without Congressional approval on items like multi-year
procurements.
Stability and predictability are critical to the health and
sustainment of the industrial base that builds our Fleet. Changes in
ship procurement plans are significant because of the long lead time,
specialized skills, and extent of integration needed to build military
ships. The skills required to build ships are perishable, and, in the
past, we have lost talent in this critical industry when plans have
changed. Each ship is a significant fraction of not only the Navy's
shipbuilding budget but also industry's workload and regional
employment. Consequently, the timing of ship procurements is a critical
matter to the health of American shipbuilding industries, and has a
two-to-three times economic multiplier at the local, regional and
national levels.
The Navy will continue to consider and, when appropriate, use
innovative acquisition strategies that assure ship construction
workload and sustain the vendor base while imposing cost competition.
And we will continue to invest in design for affordability, modularity
and open systems architectures while incentivizing optimal build plans
and shipyard facility improvements and supporting shipbuilding
capability preservation agreements. These initiatives support
affordability, minimize life-cycle costs, improve and ensure quality
products, facilitate effective and efficient processes, and promote
competition--which all support Department priorities.
Our efforts to maintain and affordably procure our Fleet's ships
and submarines have continued through this past year. The Department
has established a steady state Ford Class procurement plan designed to
deliver each new ship in close alignment with the Nimitz Class ship it
replaces. CVN 78 cost performance has remained stable since 2011 and
this lead ship will deliver under the Congressional cost cap. The
fiscal year 2016 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) reduced this
cost cap for follow-on ships in the CVN 78 class by $100 million.
Stability in requirements, design, schedule, and budget, is essential
to controlling and improving CVN 79 cost, and therefore is of highest
priority for the program. In transitioning from first-of-class to
follow-on ships, the Navy has imposed strict configuration and cost
controls to ensure CVN 79 is delivered below the cost cap. CVN 80
planning and construction will continue to use class lessons learned to
achieve cost and risk reduction. The CVN 80 strategy seeks to improve
on CVN 79 efforts to schedule as much work as possible in the earliest
phases of construction, where work is both predictable and more cost
efficient.
In our attack submarine program, we awarded the largest contract in
Navy history, $18 billion, to build 10 Virginia-class submarines.
Because Congress authorized a multi-year contract for these 10 boats,
giving our shipyards stability and allowing them to order materials in
economic quantities, we were able to save the taxpayer more than $2
billion and effectively procured 10 boats for the price of nine.
We are continuing procurement of two Virginia Class submarines per
year under the Block IV 10-ship contract which runs through fiscal year
2018. We will also continue to develop the Virginia Payload Module
(VPM), which is planned for introduction in fiscal year 2019, as part
of the next Virginia Class multiyear procurement (Block V).
The Arleigh Burke Class (DDG 51) program is one of the Navy's most
successful shipbuilding programs--62 of these ships are currently
operating in the Fleet. We are in the fourth year of a multi-year
procurement, and thanks to the work at shipyards in Mississippi and
Maine and our acquisition team, the DDG 51 competitive multiyear
contract is saving more than $2 billion. The two Arleigh Burke Class
destroyers requested in fiscal year 2017, which will complete the
current multiyear contracts, will provide significant upgrades to
integrated air and missile defense and additional ballistic missile
defense capability (Flight III) by incorporation of the Air and Missile
Defense Radar.
With our Littoral Combat Ships (LCS), the average ship construction
cost, under the current block buy contracts, has decreased by nearly 50
percent in comparison to LCS hulls contracted prior to 2009. We now
have six ships of this class delivered, 18 currently on contract, and
two additional ships to award this fiscal year. We are currently
upgrading the design, which will significantly increase LCS lethality
and survivability, to be introduced no later than fiscal year 2019, and
potentially as early as fiscal year 2018. Because of these ships'
enhanced counter-surface and counter-submarine capabilities,
contributing to their role in Battle Group operations, we are re-
designating these future ships as Frigates.
Our budget request also includes incremental funding for the next
big deck amphibious assault ship, LHA 8. We are in the midst of an
innovative solicitation which solicits bids for LHA 8, the replacement
Fleet oiler T-AO(X), and early design efforts for the replacement for
the LSD 41/49 class LX(R). These bids which uniquely support both
stability and competition within the amphibious and auxiliary sectors
of the industrial base, will be awarded this fiscal year.
Ohio Replacement (OR) remains our top priority program. Prior
modernization programs, such as our first strategic deterrence
procurement, ``41 for Freedom,'' were accompanied by topline increases.
The Navy greatly appreciates Congressional support in overcoming the
challenges posed by funding the OR Program.
The fiscal realities facing the Navy make it imperative that we
modernize and extend the service lives of our in-service ships to meet
the Navy's Force Structure Assessment requirements. An important
element of mitigation is the extension and modernization of our Arleigh
Burke class destroyers and Ticonderoga class cruisers (CGs).
The fiscal year 2017 President's Budget includes funding for the
modernization of two destroyers to sustain combat effectiveness, ensure
mission relevancy and to achieve the full expected service lives of the
AEGIS Fleet. The destroyer modernization program includes Hull,
Mechanical, and Electrical (HM&E) upgrades as well as combat systems
improvements with upgraded AEGIS weapons systems. Advanced Capability
Build (ACB) 12 to include open architecture computing environment, BMD
capability, installation of the Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM),
integration of the SM-6 missile, and improved air dominance with
processing upgrades and Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air
capability. This renovation reduces total ownership costs and expands
mission capability for current and future combat capabilities.
Cruiser modernization ensures long-term capability and capacity for
purpose-built Air Defense Commander (ADC) platforms. Of our 22 total
cruisers, 11 recently modernized CGs will perform the ADC function for
deploying Carrier Strike Groups while the Navy modernizes our other 11
ships. As these are completed, they will replace the first 11 on a one-
for-one basis as each older ship reaches the end of its service life
(35 years) starting in fiscal year 2020. Our modernization schedule
commenced in fiscal year 2015 on a 2-4-6 schedule in accordance with
Congressional direction: two cruisers per year for a long-term phase
modernization, for a period no longer than 4 years, and no greater than
six ships in modernization at any given time.
The Budget supports CG Modernization and proposes a plan that will
save $3 billion over the FYDP by inducting the remaining cruisers into
modernization following their current planned operational deployments.
This differs from the current plan in that we would put a total of four
CGs in phased modernization in fiscal year 2017. We understand that
this request does not align with previous Congressional direction, but
feel it is the best way to honor today's operational demands as we
prepare for future strategic requirements.
aviation
With the support of Congress, we continue to strengthen our Naval
Aviation force. We are in the process of re-capitalizing every major
aviation platform in the Navy and Marine Corps inventory. The MV-22B
has replaced the CH-46E/CH-53D, and we are in the process of replacing
all other Navy and Marine Corps aircraft. We also continue to focus on
unmanned aviation. We are investing in the MQ-4C Triton, MQ-8C Fire
Scout, RQ-21 Blackjack, and RQ-7B Shadow plus initiating efforts to
provide carrier-based unmanned aviation capability with the RAQ-25
Stingray.
Our investments focus on developing and integrating capabilities by
using a family of systems approach, when viable, to maintain
superiority against rapidly evolving threats. Using current and future
platforms, weapons, networks and technologies, we will ensure Naval
Aviation relevance and dominance in the future. For legacy weapons
systems, we are addressing aviation readiness by investing in
operations and support accounts to mitigate training and platform
readiness issues. Our procurement of new aircraft and synchronization
of readiness enablers will improve our ability to project power over
and from the sea.
The Strike Fighter inventory should be viewed in two separate and
distinct phases. The near term challenge is managing a Department of
Navy Tactical Aviation (TACAIR) force that has been reduced in capacity
through a combination of flying many more flight hours than planned,
pressurized sustainment and enabler accounts, legacy F/A-18A-D Hornet
depot throughput falling short of the required output due to
sequestration and other factors, and the impact of delays to completing
development of the Joint Strike Fighter program. As a result of
aggressive efforts instituted in 2014 across the Department to improve
depot throughput and return more aircraft back to service, fiscal year
2015 depot throughput improved by 44 percent as compared to fiscal year
2014, returning to pre-sequestration levels of throughput. TACAIR
aviation depots are expected to continue to improve productivity
through 2017, and fully recover the backlog of F/A-18A-D aircraft in
2019 at which time the focus will shift toward F/A-18E/F service life
extension. In the far term, the Strike Fighter inventory is
predominantly affected by the rate at which we can procure new TACAIR
aircraft. The fiscal year 2017 budget request increases both the F/A-
18E/F and F-35 strike fighter aircraft in order to mitigate near-term
and far-term risks to our strike fighter inventory in the most
affordable, effective manner possible.
Critical to power projection from the sea, the E-2D Advanced
Hawkeye, our new and upgraded airborne early-warning aircraft,
completed Fleet integration and deployed with USS Roosevelt (CVN 71)
Carrier Strike Group. We are continuing Full Rate Production under a
multi-year contract and Fleet transition is underway. We expect to
integrate the advanced capabilities with Forward Deployed Naval Forces
(FDNF) by 2017. We continue to recapitalize the P-3C Orion with P-8As,
and are on-schedule to complete the purchase within the FYDP to bring a
total of 109 P-8As to the Fleet. And our P-8s will continue to undergo
incremental improvements.
Finally, we expect to complete EA-18G Growler Fleet transition in
fiscal year 2016. As the DOD's premier tactical Airborne Electronic
Attack/Electronic Warfare aircraft, the Growler is crucial to power
projection ashore in a saturated electronic warfare environment. With
Congress' addition of seven EA-18Gs in fiscal year 2016, we will have
160 of these aircraft in 15 squadrons to support the Navy requirement.
With the retirement of the Marine Corps' last EA-6B Prowlers in 2019,
these highly capable aircraft take over the nation's airborne
electronic attack mission.
Our rotary wing and assault support communities are in the midst of
large-scale recapitalization. In the vertical lift community, multi-
year production contracts for the MV-22 continue. We have taken
advantage of joint service commonality in the V-22 to fill a crucial
enabler in the Carrier On-board Delivery mission. In the Marine Corps,
procurement of the AH-1Z continues to deliver combat proven-
capabilities. Finally, with its first flight last fall, the CH-53K King
Stallion is poised to bring significant improvements in our heavy lift
capabilities.
unmanned systems
Currently, our warfare communities--air, sea, undersea and ground--
are all doing superb work in unmanned systems which are critical to our
ability to be present. They increase the combat effectiveness of our
deployed force while reducing the risk to our Sailors and Marines,
allowing us to conduct missions that last longer, go farther, and take
us beyond the physical limits of pilots and crews. Launching and
recovering unmanned aircraft from the rolling decks of aircraft
carriers, launching unmanned rotary-wing patrols from our small surface
combatants, and deploying unmanned underwater vehicles globally are
vital elements both now and in the future for maritime presence and
naval warfare. We have enhanced our focus on unmanned systems and
prioritized efforts under purposeful leadership at the level of the
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Unmanned Systems and the new
office of Unmanned Warfare Systems of the staff of the Chief of Naval
Operations, also known as N99.
We are moving ahead with a number of unmanned programs in the
effort to rapidly integrate new capability into the fleet. The MQ-8B
Fire Scout began regular deployments in 2014. When USS Fort Worth
deployed to Singapore recently, the ship took a mixed aviation
detachment of a manned MH-60R helicopter and MQ-8B Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle's (UAV). This kind of hybrid employment, pairing our manned and
unmanned systems to take advantage of the strengths of each, will be a
hallmark of our future approach to unmanned systems. The first
operational variant of the larger and more capable next generation Fire
Scout, the MQ-8C, recently completed developmental testing and a
successful operational assessment. This aircraft is scheduled to be
deployable by the end of 2017 and will bring double the endurance and
double the payload of the older versions.
The MQ-4C Triton is a key component of the Navy Maritime Patrol
Reconnaissance Force. Its persistent sensor dwell capability, combined
with networked sensors, will enable it to effectively meet ISR
requirements in support of the Navy Maritime Strategy. The MQ-4C Triton
will establish five globally-distributed, persistent maritime ISR
orbits beginning in fiscal year 2018 as part of the Navy's Maritime ISR
transition plan. Currently, MQ-4C Triton test vehicles have completed
53 total flights and will continue sensor flight testing this spring.
In 2015, the Office of the Secretary of Defense conducted a
comprehensive Strategic Portfolio Review (SPR) of DOD ISR programs. The
results of the SPR, and a subsequent ISR portfolio review, as reflected
in our PB17 budget is the restructure of the Unmanned Carrier-Launched
Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) program. The MQ-25 Stingray
will deliver the Navy's first carrier-based unmanned aircraft, a high-
endurance platform that will replace today's F/A-18E/F aircraft in its
role as the aerial tanker for the Navy's Carrier Air Wing (CVW), thus
preserving the strike fighter's flight hours for its primary missions.
Stingray will also have the range and payload capacity associated with
high-endurance unmanned aircraft to provide critically-needed, around
the clock, sea-based ISR support to the Carrier Strike Group and the
Joint Forces Commander. The Navy envisions that the open standards to
be employed in the Stingray design will enable future capabilities to
be introduced to the aircraft after it has been fully integrated into
the CVW.
Autonomous Undersea Vehicles (AUV) are a key component of the
Navy's effort to expand undersea superiority AUVs are conducting sea
sensing and mine countermeasure tasks today with human-in-the-loop
supervision. While nominal force structure requirements for fiscal year
2025 have not been determined, the Navy is committed to growing both
the size and composition of the AUV force. In the near-term, AUVs
present an opportunity to increase undersea superiority and offset the
efforts of our adversaries.
The Large Displacement Unmanned Underwater Vehicle (LDUUV) is an
unmanned undersea vehicle to offload ``dull, dirty, dangerous''
missions from manned platforms beginning in 2022. LDUUV will be
launched from a variety of platforms, including both surface ships and
submarines. The craft's missions will include ISR, acoustic
surveillance, ASW, mine counter-measures, and offensive operations.
The Surface Mine Countermeasure Unmanned Undersea Vehicle (SMCM
UUV) commonly referred to as Knifefish employs low-frequency broadband
synthetic aperture sonar. Knifefish is planned for incorporation into
increment four of the LCS mine countermeasures mission package.
weapons
The fiscal year 2017 budget invests in a balanced portfolio of ship
self-defense and strike warfare weapons programs. The Navy has made
significant strides in extending the Fleet's layered defense battle-
space while also improving the capabilities of the individual ship
defense layers in order to pace the increasing anti-ship missile
threat.
Standard Missile-6 (SM-6) provides theater and high value target
area defense for the Fleet, and with Integrated Fire Control, has more
than doubled its range in the counter-air mission. And as the Secretary
of Defense announced a few weeks ago, we are modifying the missile to
provide vital anti-surface capability. The Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile
(ESSM) program awarded the Block 2 Engineering Manufacturing and
Development contract in 2015, which will borrow from the SM-6 active
guidance section architecture to improve ship self-defense performance
against stressing threats and environments. Rolling Airframe Missile
(RAM) Block 2 achieved IOC in May 2015, providing improved terminal
ship defense through higher maneuverability and improved threat
detection.
For strike warfare, the Department's Cruise Missile Strategy has
been fully implemented with the PB17 budget submission. This strategy
sustains Tomahawk Blocks III and IV through their service lives;
integrates modernization and obsolescence upgrades to the Block IV
Tomahawk during a mid-life recertification program which adds 15-years
of additional missile service life; fields the Long Range Anti-Ship
Missile (LRASM) as the Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare (OASuW) Increment
1 solution to meet near to mid-term threats; and develops follow-on
Next Generation Strike Capability (NGSC) weapons to address future
threats and to replace or update legacy weapons. This plan brings next
generation technologies into the Navy's standoff conventional strike
capabilities. NGSC will address both the OASuW Increment 2 capabilities
to counter long-term anti-surface warfare threats, and the Next
Generation Land Attack Weapon (NGLAW) to initially complement, and then
replace, current land attack cruise missile weapon systems.
ground forces
The focus of our Marine Corps ground modernization efforts
continues to be our ground combat and tactical vehicle (GCTV)
portfolio, along with the Command and Control (C2) systems needed to
optimize this effectiveness of the entire MAGTF once ashore.
The key priority within the GCTV portfolio is the replacement of
the legacy Amphibious Assault Vehicle (AAV) with modern armored
personnel carriers through a combination of complementary systems. The
Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV) program is the Marine Corps' highest
ground modernization priority and will use an evolutionary, incremental
approach to replace the aging AAVs with a vehicle that is capable of
moving Marines ashore, initially with surface connectors and ultimately
as a self-deploying vehicle. ACV consists of two increments, ACV 1.1
and ACV 1.2. Increment 1.1 will field a personnel carrier with
technologies that are currently mature. Increment 1.2 will improve upon
the threshold mobility characteristics of ACV 1.1 and deliver C2 and
recovery and maintenance mission role variants.
In parallel with these modernization efforts, a science and
technology portfolio is being developed to explore a range of high
water speed technology approaches to provide for an affordable, phased
modernization of legacy capability to enable extended range littoral
maneuver. These efforts will develop the knowledge necessary to reach
an informed decision point in the mid-2020s on the feasibility,
affordability, and options for developing a high water speed capability
for maneuver from ship-to-shore.
We are also investing in the replacement of a portion of the high
mobility, multi-purpose, wheeled vehicle (HMMWV) fleet which are
typically exposed to enemy fires when in combat. In partnership with
the Army, the Marine Corps has sequenced the Joint Light Tactical
Vehicle (JLTV) program to ensure affordability of the entire GCTV
portfolio while replacing about one third (5,500 vehicles) of the
legacy HMMWV fleet with modern tactical trucks prior to the fielding of
ACV 1.1.
Critical to the success ashore of the MAGTF is our ability to
coordinate and synchronize our distributed C2 sensors and systems. Our
modernization priorities in this area are the Ground/Air task Oriented
radar (G/ATOR) and the Common Aviation Command and Control System
(CAC2S) Increment I. These systems will provide modern, interoperable
technologies to support real-time surveillance, detection and targeting
and the common C2 suite to enable the effective employment of that and
other sensors and C2 suites across the MAGTF.
innovation
As we continue to use better procurement strategies for ships,
aircraft, and other weapons systems, we are also using better ideas to
enhance the utility of current assets and to accelerate future
capabilities to the Fleet. The Navy and Marine Corps have always been
at the cutting edge of technology. To tap into the ingenuity inherent
in our force, I created Task Force Innovation: a group from across the
department comprised of thinkers, experts, and warfighters with diverse
backgrounds and from every level. The Task Force is anchored in the
Department as the Naval Innovation Advisory Council, with a location on
each coast. These councils rely on feedback from databases such as
``the Hatch,'' a crowdsourcing platform that cultivates solutions from
those who know best, our deckplate Sailors and Marines in the field.
To facilitate ways for new technologies to reach the Fleet
unhindered by the overly-bureaucratic acquisitions process, we are
implementing Rapid Prototyping strategies. This initiative provides a
single, streamlined approach to prototyping emerging technologies and
engineering innovations to rapidly response to Fleet needs and
priorities.
We are also continuing the research and development of promising
technologies such as 3D printing, directed energy weapons, robotics,
adaptive force packaging at sea and unmanned vehicles to counter
projected threats and using the entire force to prove these concepts.
We are continuing the development and testing of the Electromagnetic
Railgun and Hyper Velocity Projectile (HVP) as part of a broader Gun/
Projectile Based Defense strategy. We plan to demonstrate this
capability this fiscal year in preparation for follow-on at sea
testing. In 2014, we deployed the first operational Laser Weapons
System (LaWS) onboard PONCE in the Arabian Gulf. Lessons-learned from
the 30 kilowatt LaWS installation are directly feeding the Navy's
investment in Solid State Laser weapons. The Navy is developing a 100-
to-150 kilowatt laser prototype for at-sea testing by 2018.
To secure our superiority in cyberspace, we are building a new
cyber warfare center of excellence at the Naval Academy, and we have
more than doubled our cyber workforce since 2009. In addition to
growing the cyber domain, we are also re-designating appropriate
positions to count as part of the cyber workforce. The Department is
diligently working on ensuring cyber workforce billets are properly
coded in our manpower databases for tracking and community management
efforts.
There has been a concerted effort to protect cyber positions from
drawdowns and maximize direct and expedited civilian hiring authorities
to improve cyber readiness and response. Additionally, the DON is
supporting the DOD Cyber Strategy in the stand-up of the Cyber Mission
Force teams; 40 teams by Navy, 3 teams by Marine Corps and 1,044 cyber
security positions within Fleet Cyber and Marine Forces Cyber commands.
These positions require unique cyber security skills and qualifications
to perform a multitude of cyber security functions that will enhance
the Department of the Navy cyber security and defense capability.
power--alternative energy fueling the fight
Energy is a necessary commodity for modern life, and it plays a
critical geopolitical role around the world. Access to fuel is often
used as a weapon, as we have seen with Russian action against Ukraine,
and threats against the rest of Europe. Although the price of oil has
recently declined, the overall trend strongly suggests that over time,
the prices could return to the higher levels.
Aside from the obvious economic instability that comes with the
volatile price of oil, being overly reliant on outside energy sources
poses a severe security risk, and we cannot afford to limit our Sailors
and Marines with that vulnerability and lack of stability. When I
became Secretary, our use of power was a vulnerability; we were losing
too many Marines guarding fuel convoys in Afghanistan and volatile oil
prices were stressing many areas, particularly training.
In 2009, the Department of the Navy set out to change the way we
procure, as well as use, energy, with the goal of having at least half
of naval energy- both afloat and ashore- come from non-fossil fueled
sources by 2020. By using alternative energy sources, we improve our
warfighting capabilities; reduce our reliance on foreign sources of
fossil fuels; and reduce the ability of potential adversaries the
opportunity to use energy as a weapon against us and our partners.
Pioneering new advancements in how we power our platforms and
systems is nothing new for the Navy and Marine Corps. For two centuries
we have been a driver of innovation, switching from sail to steam,
steam to coal, coal to oil, and harnessed the power of nuclear
propulsion. Operationally, energy matters now more than ever; our
weapons platforms today use far more energy than their predecessors.
The new technology we develop and acquire will ensure we maintain a
strategic advantage for decades to come. Fueling the ships, aircraft,
and vehicles of our Navy and Marine Corps is a vital operational
concern and enables the global presence necessary to keep the Nation
secure.
After successfully testing the Great Green Fleet at the Rim of the
Pacific Exercise in 2012, just last month USS John C. Stennis Strike
Group departed on a routine operational deployment, steaming on an
blend of conventional and alternative fuels, as well as conducting
underway replenishments at sea with these fuels. The three stipulations
we have for our alternative fuels are they must be drop-in, they cannot
take away from food production, and they must be cost competitive.
The alternative fuels powering the Great Green Fleet 2016 were
procured from a company that makes its fuel from waste beef fats. These
alternative fuels cost the Department of Defense $2.05 per gallon. It
is critical we continue to use cost-competitive blended alternative
fuels in our ships and aircraft to ensure operational flexibility. For
example, of the three crude oil refineries in Singapore one is 50
percent owned by China, while an alternative fuel plant is owned by a
Finnish company.
This past year, we surpassed the goal the President set in his 2012
State of the Union Address, when he directed the Department of the Navy
to have a gigawatt (one-half of our total ashore energy needs in the
U.S.) of renewable energy by 2020. The Renewable Energy Program Office
(REPO) coordinates and manages the goal of producing or procuring cost-
effective renewable energy for our bases, and the power we are buying
through our REPO projects will be cheaper than our current rates over
the life of the contract. Today, we have in procurement more than 1.1
gigawatts of renewable energy for our shore installations--5 years
ahead of schedule.
In August, the Department of the Navy awarded the largest renewable
contract in Federal Government history with the Western Area Power
Administration. This solar project will meet a third of the energy
needs for 14 Navy and Marine Corps installations, bringing them 210 MW
of renewable power for 25 years, and saving the Navy $90 million.
In the Marine Corps, the Expeditionary Energy Office (E2O)
continues to focus on increasing their operational reach and empowering
Marines in the field. E2O is doing amazing work. The Marine Corps hosts
two expos- one on each coast- every year where they ask industry
leaders to bring their latest technology, and, if the Marines see an
operational use for it, they can buy it. They have invested in items
such as small, flexible and portable solar panels that can save a
company of Marines in the field 700 pounds in batteries. The Marines
are also working on kinetic systems for backpacks and knee braces that
harvest energy from a Marine's own movement. These technologies are
making our Marines lighter, faster and more self-sustainable on the
battlefield.
Across the Fleet and Marine Corps, we have taken numerous energy
conservation measures that are aimed at energy efficiency, and have had
dramatic impact on our energy use.
For example, two of our newest amphibious ships, USS Makin Island
and USS America use a hybrid propulsion system that has an electric
power plant for slower speeds and traditional engines for speeds over
12 knots. When MAKIN ISLAND returned from her maiden deployment, she
came back with almost half her fuel budget, despite the fact she stayed
at sea an additional 44 days.
We had a Chief suggest we change all the lightbulbs on our ships to
LEDs. Now every time a ship comes in for overhaul, we are changing out
the bulbs. This simple change is saving us more than 20 thousand
gallons of fuel per year per destroyer. They also last far longer, give
off better light, and reduce our maintenance costs.
Our Sailors are using a Shipboard Energy Dashboard that provides
them with real-time situational awareness of the energy demand on the
various systems that are running, allowing Sailors to see the impact
the way they operate a ship can have on fuel consumption. Sailors
across the Fleet are taking it upon themselves to make their own
platforms as efficient as possible, and the results are tangible.
The Department of the Navy's efforts in energy efficiency have
strongly contributed to a decline in the Navy's demand for oil nearly
15 percent from fiscal 2008 to fiscal 2014, and the Marines slashed
their oil consumption 60 percent over that same period, according to a
recent report by the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for
Acquisitions, Technology and Logistics. While drawdowns in Iraq and
Afghanistan have certainly contributed to these numbers, improvements
in our use of energy have had an impact on our overall consumption.
Diversifying our energy supply for our ships, our aircraft, and our
bases helps guarantee our presence and ability to respond to any crisis
because we can remain on station longer or extend our range, reducing
the delays and vulnerabilities associated with refueling.
We are a better Navy and Marine Corps for innovation, and this is
our legacy. Employment of new energy sources has always been met with
resistance, but in every case, adoption of new technologies enhanced
the strategic position of our Nation through improvements in the
tactical and operational capabilities of our force. Our focus on power
and energy is helping to ensure the United States Navy and Marine Corps
remain the most powerful expeditionary fighting force in the world and
enhance their ability to protect and advance American interests around
the globe.
partnerships--building partnerships to advance our shared values
In this maritime century, cooperation with our international allies
and partners is critical to defending the global system, as it broadens
responsibility for security and stability, while diffusing tensions,
reducing misunderstandings, and limiting conflict. It is through a
cooperative effort that we will assure our navies can provide the
necessary presence to maintain freedom of navigation and maritime
security around the world.
I have traveled almost 1.2 million miles and visited 144 countries
and territories and all 50 States to meet with Sailors and Marines and
to build partnerships both at home and abroad. International meetings
establish the trust that helps us deter conflict and respond in a
coordinated and effective manner to manmade or natural crises. We
strengthen these partnerships in times of calm because, in times of
crisis, you can surge people, you can surge equipment, but you cannot
surge trust.
We continue to focus our efforts on the rebalance of assets to the
Pacific as an important part of our partnership efforts. Having the
right platforms in the right places is a vital piece of ensuring our
friends and allies understand our commitment to this complex and
geopolitically critical region. We're moving more ships to the central
and western Pacific to ensure our most advanced platforms and
capabilities are in the region, including forward basing an additional
attack submarine in Guam and forward stationing four Littoral Combat
Ships in Singapore. Also, we're providing two additional multi-mission
Ballistic Missile Defense destroyers to Forward Deployed Naval Forces
(FDNF) in Japan and the P-8A maritime patrol aircraft are making their
first rotational deployments in the region. Additionally, USS Ronald
Reagan replaced USS George Washington as our carrier homeported in
Japan.
We are hubbing Expeditionary Transfer Docks (T-ESD) 1 and 2 in the
vicinity of Korea/Northeast Asia, and hubbing Expeditionary Fast
Transports (T-EPF) to Japan and Singapore. In the longer term, by 2018
we will deploy an additional Amphibious Ready Group to the Pacific
region and we will deploy a growing number of Expeditionary Fast
Transports and an additional Expeditionary Sea Base there.
The U.S. Seventh Fleet along with allies and partner nations
combined for over 110 exercises throughout 2015 to train, build partner
capability and relationships, and exchange information. The largest
exercise, Talisman Sabre in the Asia-Pacific region, in July 2015,
featured 21 ships, including U.S. Navy aircraft carrier USS George
Washington and more than 200 aircraft and three submarines. USS Fort
Worth participated in Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training (CARAT)
exercises with partner navies from Cambodia, Philippines, Malaysia,
Indonesia, Brunei, and Bangladesh to conduct maritime security
cooperation exercises.
In addition to participating in many of the exercises as part of
the Navy-Marine Corps team, the Marine Corps is also building its
capacity to work with our Asia-Pacific partners. Marines participated
in 46 exercises in the region in 2015. Examples include Cobra Gold, a
crisis-response exercise with partners from Thailand, Singapore, Japan,
Republic of Korea, Indonesia, and Malaysia, and exercise Talisman
Saber, a U.S.-Australia exercise focusing on high-end combat operations
and peacekeeping transitions. Additionally, Marine Rotational Force
Darwin sustains more than 1,000 Marines on a revolving basis to conduct
exercises, security cooperation and training with the Australian
Defense Force and other countries in the region. This will increase
over the next few years to a full Marine Air Ground Task Force.
As we rebalance our expeditionary forces to the Pacific, we will
remain focused on maintaining maritime superiority across all domains
and geographies, ensuring we don't neglect obligations in places like
Europe.
As a continuation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's 65-
year mission to keep all nations free without claiming territory or
tribute, we moved the fourth ballistic missile defense capable DDG, USS
Carney, to Rota, Spain, to join USS Donald Cook, USS Ross and USS
Porter to enhance our regional ballistic missile defense capability,
provide maritime security, conduct bi-lateral and multilateral training
exercises, and participate in NATO operations. We've also established
an AEGIS ashore site in Romania to provide additional shore-based
ballistic missile defense capability in Europe, with a second
installation in Poland scheduled to come online in the 2018 timeframe.
The Navy and Marine Corps continue to demonstrate support for our
allies and friends and American interests in the European region.
Alongside the Marine Corps' Black Sea Rotational Force's operations in
Eastern Europe, a series of Navy ships have deployed into the Black Sea
to ensure freedom of navigation and work with our partners there.
This past fall USNS Spearhead completed the Southern Partnership
Station 2015 in South America. As Spearhead sailed through the
Americas, the Sailors and Marines aboard participated in subject matter
expert exchanges and building partner capacity throughout the region.
In October, USS George Washington and USS Chafee participated in the
annual multinational exercise UNITAS, which was hosted by the Chilean
Navy and included personnel from Brazil, Ecuador, El Salvador,
Guatemala, Honduras, New Zealand and Panama to conduct intense training
focused on coalition building, multinational security cooperation and
promoting tactical interoperability with the participating partner
nations. USS George Washington also deployed as part of Southern Seas
2015, which seeks to enhance interoperability, increase regional
stability, and build and maintain relationships with countries
throughout the region while circumnavigating South America. A unique
symbol of our desire to build a strong relationship is evident in
deployments by our world class hospital ship USNS Comfort. As part of
CONTINUING PROMISE 2015, medical and support staff from across the U.S.
military and the region worked alongside nearly 400 volunteers to treat
122,268 patients and conduct 1,255 surgeries. In an historic event
during the USNS Comfort port call in Haiti, U.S. and Cuban medics
worked side-by-side to treat Haiti's poor and exchange best medical
practices. CONTINUING PROMISE is without doubt one of the U.S.
military's most impactful missions, but future USNS Comfort deployments
will be affected by today's budget realities. Our security is
inextricably linked with that of our neighbors, and we continue to work
with innovative and small-footprint approaches to enhance our
interoperability with partners in the Americas.
For some people around the world, Sailors and Marines who sail
aboard our ships are the only Americans they will ever meet, and it is
they who represent our country around the world.
In December, I hosted the leaders of our partner navies from West
Africa and from Europe and the Americas for the Gulf of Guinea Maritime
Security Dialogue. Naval leaders from 16 nations bordering the Gulf of
Guinea as well as 37 heads of navy, delegates and representatives from
Europe and the Americas came to discuss collaborative solutions to
piracy, extremism, trafficking and insecurity in the region. We
discussed a unified code of conduct for maritime law enforcement and
more direct cooperation in the region. As the economies in the Gulf of
Guinea continue to grow, so does the increasing relevance of guarding
against maritime terrorism, illicit trafficking of drugs, people and
weapons, extremism moving from east to west, and other transnational
crime. The U.S. Navy and Marine Corps will continue to work with our
partners in West Africa and help them improve their capabilities and
promote collaboration.
Working alongside other navies enhances interoperability, provides
key training opportunities, and develops the operational capabilities
of the countries and navies with which we have shared values. As we
look toward future operations, multinational cooperation will continue
to be vital to suppressing global threats, and building these strong
partnerships now seeks to enhance and ensure our operational
superiority into the future.
Outside of our international partnerships, the Department of the
Navy's collaboration with industry, both in technology development and
ship and aircraft building and repair, bolsters economic security as
well as national security interests at home and abroad.
Finally, our Navy and Marine Corps require the support of the
American people to maintain presence. I continue to honor our most
important partnership- the one with the American people- by naming
ships after people, cities, and States, as a reflection of America's
values and naval heritage, and to foster that powerful bond between the
people of this country and the men and women of our Navy and Marine
Corps.
fiscal year 2017 budget summary
The Department of the Navy's proposed budget for fiscal year 2017
is designed to achieve the President's Defense Strategic Guidance
(DSG): protect the homeland, build security globally, and project power
and win decisively when called upon. In doing so we have looked across
the FYDP to maintain our ability to conduct the primary missions listed
in the DSG to 2021 and beyond. Overall the fiscal year 2017 President's
Budget balances current readiness needed to execute assigned missions
while sustaining a highly capable Fleet, all within a continually
constrained and unpredictable fiscal climate.
Our approach to this budget has focused on six objectives. First,
maintain a credible and modern sea-based strategic deterrent. Second,
sustain our forward global presence to ensure our ability to impact
world events. Third, preserve the capability to defeat a regional
adversary in a larger-scale, multi-phased campaign, while denying the
objectives of- or imposing unacceptable costs on- a second aggressor in
another region. Fourth, ensure that the force is ready for these
operations through critical afloat and shore readiness and personnel
issues. Fifth, continue and affordably enhance our asymmetric
capabilities. Finally, sustain our industrial base to ensure our future
capabilities, particularly in shipbuilding.
Even as we deal with today's fiscal uncertainty, we cannot let slip
away the progress we've made in shipbuilding. It takes a long time,
measured in years, to produce a deployable ship. It is the least
reversible thing we might do to deal with budget constraints. If we
miss a year, if we cancel a ship, it is almost impossible to recover
those ships because of the time involved and the inability of the
industrial base to sustain a skilled set of people without the work to
support them. To do the job America and our leaders expect and demand
of us, we have to have those gray hulls on the horizon.
Because of the long lead time needed for shipbuilding, it is not
the responsibility of just one administration. This Administration and
Congress, in previous budgets, have guaranteed we will reach a Fleet of
300 ships by fiscal year 2019 and 308 by fiscal year 2021. This FYDP
establishes a proposed shipbuilding trajectory for our Battle Force and
its underpinning industrial base in the years following fiscal year
2021, while maintaining decision space for the next Administration and
Congress. As such, the fiscal year 2017 President's Budget requests
funding for seven ships: two Virginia class attack submarines, two DDG
51 Arleigh Burke class destroyers, two Littoral Combat Ships (LCS), and
the LHA 8 Amphibious Assault Ship. The budget request also includes
funding for refueling and complex overhauls (RCOH) for aircraft
carriers USS George Washington and USS John C. Stennis.
The plan for LCS/FF requests funding for two ships in fiscal year
2017, preserving the viability of the industrial base in the near term
and creating future decision space for Frigate procurement should
operational requirements or national security risk dictate the need.
The fiscal year 2017 President's Budget includes funding for the
modernization of destroyers ($3.2 billion total invested in fiscal year
2017--fiscal year 2021) to sustain combat effectiveness, to ensure
mission relevancy, and to achieve the full expected service lives of
the AEGIS Fleet. The budget also requests $521 million across the FYDP,
in addition to current Ships Modernization, Operations and Sustainment
Fund (SMOSF) funding, to support cruiser modernization. The Navy will
continue to work with Congress to develop and evaluate funding options
to continue this vital modernization.
Above the sea, our naval aviation enterprise grows. Specifically,
we continue our recapitalization efforts of all major platforms and
increase procurement of F/A-18E/F and F-35 aircraft, and make key
investments in current and future unmanned aviation systems and strike
warfare weapons capabilities.
While accelerating new platforms and capabilities to the Fleet is a
priority, it is equally important to reduce the maintenance backlog
created by sequestration. The fiscal year 2017 budget provides
additional investments in shipyard and aviation depots in both civilian
personnel and infrastructure to achieve that end. As we execute our
readiness strategy, our focus remains on properly maintaining ships and
aircraft to reach their expected service lives and supporting a
sustainable operational tempo.
The cyber domain and electromagnetic spectrum dominance remain
Department priorities. The budget includes an increase of $370 million
over the FYDP ($107 million in fiscal year 2017) across a spectrum of
cyber programs, leading to significant improvements in the Department's
cyber posture. Specific elements include funding for engineering of
boundary defense for ship and aviation platforms and for afloat cyber
situational awareness.
While hardware upgrades and additions are crucial, our investment
in people must be equally prioritized. The fiscal year 2017 budget
includes a 1.6 percent pay raise for Sailors and Marines and adds
billets for base security. Our personnel initiatives receive funding
aimed to recruit, train, and retain America's best.
Our priorities combine to achieve one objective--naval presence.
And that presence is weighted to meet the national security strategy.
The fiscal year 2017 budget sustains a forward deployed presence and
continues the rebalance to the Pacific. The number of ships operating
in the Asia-Pacific will increase from 52 today to 65 by 2020.
Crafting the Department of the Navy's budget did not come without
hard choices. To achieve a balance between current and future
capabilities, we were compelled to make several risk-informed
decisions. We have proposed deactivating the 10th Carrier Air Wing.
This primarily administrative move improves the alignment of carrier
air wing and aircraft carrier deployment schedules and alleviates
excessive time between deployments for CVWs attached to CVNs in lengthy
maintenance phases, without losing any aircraft.
Finally, throughout my tenure, as part of my Department of the Navy
Transformation Plan, I have stressed the importance of accountability.
We are moving very quickly to an audit ready environment. Congressional
support has been critical in providing the resources we need to bring
our systems into compliance.
conclusion
As the longest-serving Secretary since World War I, I have truly
been able to get to know the men and women of this Department, and I
have led institutional change--from inception to reality.
In order to provide our Nation with presence, to deter our
adversaries and assure our allies, and provide our Nation's leaders
with options in times of crisis, we have enhanced our capabilities
across every area of this department. By focusing on our people,
platforms, power and partnerships, we assure we remain the greatest
expeditionary fighting force the world has ever known.
Today there is no operational billet in the Navy or Marine Corps
that is closed to anyone based on their gender. Men and women wear
uniforms common in appearance so they are uniformly United States
Sailors and United States Marines. Career paths are flexible and
provide unprecedented opportunities for professional growth. We promote
based more on merit and not just tenure. We are encouraging retention
in the Department by creating an environment that doesn't force our
Sailors and Marines to choose between serving their country and serving
their families.
We are seeking innovation from within the talent inherent in our
Sailors and Marines. We have established an innovation network, with
crowdsourcing platforms established to allow new ideas to get from the
deckplates to our leaders.
We are growing the fleet. By the end of this fiscal year, we will
have contracted for 84 ships, which will give America a 300-ship Navy
by 2019 and a 308-ship Navy by 2021. We stood up a new Deputy Assistant
Secretary of the Navy and OPNAV staff for Unmanned Systems development,
making us leaders in this emerging capability.
The Navy has fundamentally changed the way we procure, use and
think about energy. In the past 7 years, the Navy and Marine Corps have
significantly lowered fuel consumption. We have sailed the Great Green
Fleet on alternative fuel blends and met our goal of having 1 gigawatt
of renewable energy powering our shore-based installations 5 years
early.
We are rebalancing our Fleet to meet the goal of having 60 percent
of our assets in the Pacific region by the end of the decade, and we
continue to contribute to security cooperation and international
exercises with our friends and allies around the world.
Since the inception of our Nation, America's Navy and Marine Corps
have paved the way forward for this country.
As President George Washington once said, ``It follows then as
certain as that night succeeds the day, that without a decisive naval
force we can do nothing definitive, and with it, everything honorable
and glorious.''
Senator Cochran. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
Admiral Richardson, I'm going to call on you next for any
statement you have.
Thank you.
STATEMENT OF ADMIRAL JOHN M. RICHARDSON, CHIEF, NAVAL
OPERATIONS
Admiral Richardson. Thank you, Sir.
Mr. Chairman, Vice Chairman Durbin and distinguished
members of the Committee, I am honored and humbled for the
privilege to appear before you today as your CNO, on behalf of
the more than 500 thousand active and reserve Sailors, our Navy
civilians and their families, to discuss the Navy's budget
request.
And to start I want to thank you for your leadership in
keeping our Nation secure and in keeping our Navy the strongest
Navy that has ever sailed the seas, and this year's budget
continues that important work.
It's always good to start by framing the problem.
America has been and remains a maritime nation and our
prosperity is tied to our ability to freely operate in the
maritime environment. And today's strategic environment is
increasingly globalized and increasingly competitive. Global
systems are used more, stressed more and contested more and for
the first time in 25 years, there is competition for control of
the seas.
The maritime environment has seen explosive growth from the
sea floor to space, from deep water to the shoreline and in the
information domain. Things are accelerating.
The global information system has become pervasive and has
changed the way we all do business, including at sea.
Technology is being introduced at an unprecedented rate and
is being adopted by society just as fast.
And finally, a new set of competitors are moving quickly to
use these forces to their advantage. And for the first time in
25 years, the United States is facing a return to great power
competition.
These new forces have changed what it means for the Navy
and Marine Corps to provide maritime security. And while the
problems are more numerous and complex, our responsibility
remains the same. Naval forces must provide our leaders
credible options to protect America from attack, to advance our
prosperity, to further our strategic interests, to assure our
allies and partners and deter our adversaries, which rests on
the ability of the Navy, working with our sister services, to
win decisively if conflict breaks out.
To do this the Navy is focusing on four lines of effort.
First and foremost, we're going to do right by our people.
Senator Durbin, I was there at Great Lakes just last
weekend. Got a chance to see that terrific team just bring
people from around the nation in and sailorize them and get
them off to a great start. And the support of the community
there in Great Lakes is absolutely critical to that mission.
The second line of effort with the Marines will be
broadening Naval warfighting concepts and capabilities. We'll
be strengthening our partnerships and we will be learning
faster.
Unquestionably the most important part of our Navy is our
team.
Everything we do starts and ends with our Sailors,
civilians and their families. And as our platforms and missions
become more complex, our need for talented people continues to
be a challenge. We need to recruit, train and retain the right
people. And our Sailor 2025 initiatives are aimed squarely at
that challenge.
But these efforts are based on our core values of honor,
courage and commitment and demonstrated through four core
attributes of integrity, accountability, initiative and
toughness.
That team is committed to our mission which requires us to
strengthen Naval power at and from the sea. This budget
reflects some very tough choices as we achieve this aim. We
have prioritized shipbuilding and the industrial base.
First in that effort is the Ohio Replacement Program which,
I believe, is vital to our survival as a Nation. We are taking
steps to more deeply ingrain information warfare and we're
investing in our Naval aviation enterprise, rapidly integrating
unmanned systems and bolstering our investments in advanced
weapons.
In addition to these investments, we are adjusting our
behaviors to keep pace with the world that continues to
accelerate. And we are doubling down on an approach that relies
more heavily on experimentation and prototyping. We are
pursuing multiple avenues to drive shorter learning cycles into
all that we do. We must learn faster.
To close, I wanted to mention that I've had the honor over
the last few days to spend time with Senior Chief Ed Byers, who
was awarded the Medal of Honor Monday by the President on
behalf of the Congress. Senior Chief Byers represents the very
best of our servicemen and women and he is emblematic of this
generation's continued commitment to our core values and to
their fellow Americans.
He's a Navy SEAL. And the SEAL ethos reads, ``My loyalty to
country and team is beyond reproach. I humbly serve as a
guardian to my fellow Americans, always ready to defend those
who are unable to defend themselves. I do not advertise the
nature of my work nor seek recognition for my actions.''
Mr. Chairman, all our people want to do is protect this
great Nation. It's my job to lead them well and prepare them
for that task. The 2017 Navy budget is this year's best
approach to solving the problems and seizing the opportunities
that face the Navy today.
I thank you again for your leadership and support and I
look forward to your questions.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Admiral John M. Richardson
Chairman Cochran, Vice Chairman Durbin, and distinguished members
of the Committee, it is an honor to appear before you today. This is my
first of hopefully many chances to discuss the future of the United
States Navy with you, and as your Chief of Naval Operations, I look
forward to continuing to work closely with you to ensure that your Navy
is best postured to defend America's interests around the globe.
Prior to my confirmation, I testified that my most serious concern
was the gap between challenges to America's security and prosperity and
the resources available to protect them. In January of this year, I
outlined this gap in more detail when I released A Design for
Maintaining Maritime Superiority (the ``Design''), which describes an
increasingly competitive environment and the lines of effort the Navy
will pursue to execute our mission in that environment. The thinking in
the Design reflects inputs from leaders inside and out of the Navy and
is guiding our way forward. It shaped our budget submission and shapes
my testimony below.
The 2017 budget is this year's best approach to solving the
problems and seizing the opportunities that face the Navy today. The
budget reflects some constants; America has been a maritime nation
since we began. Our prosperity continues to depend on our maritime
security--over 90 percent of our trade is shipped over the seas--and
this linkage will only tighten in the future. Against the backdrop of
this historical truth, current problems and opportunities are growing
rapidly. The maritime environment has remained remarkably constant
since man first put to sea thousands of years ago. The oceans, seas,
shipping lanes and chokepoints are physically unchanged in the modern
era, but the maritime system has seen explosive growth in the past 25
years. Traffic over the seas has increased by 400 percent since the
early 1990's, driving and outpacing the global economy, which has
almost doubled in the same period. Climate change has opened up trade
routes previously closed. Access to resources on the seafloor has also
increased, both as Arctic ice has receded and as technology has
improved. And just as it has in the past, our future as a Nation
remains tied to our ability to operate freely on the seas.
That maritime freedom is coming under increasing pressure and
stress. For the first time in 25 years, there is competition for
control of the seas. Nations like China and Russia are using their
newfound maritime strength not only to advance their national goals,
but also to challenge the very rules and standards of behavior upon
which so many nations since the end of World War II have based their
growth. We should interpret this challenge to international rules and
order as a challenge to our own security and prosperity, and to the
security and prosperity of all who support an open, fair architecture.
It is against this background that I consider the gravity of the
Navy's mission statement, as reflected in the Design:
``The United States Navy will be ready to conduct prompt and
sustained combat incident to operations at sea. Our Navy will
protect America from attack and preserve America's strategic
influence in key regions of the world. U.S. naval forces and
operations--from the sea floor to space, from deep water to the
littorals, and in the information domain--will deter aggression
and enable peaceful resolution of crises on terms acceptable to
the United States and our allies and partners. If deterrence
fails, the Navy will conduct decisive combat operations to
defeat any enemy.''
To me these words are not an abstraction, and are easiest to
appreciate in the context of what naval forces do every day. As just
one example, there was a day last fall when:
--The destroyer USS Donald Cook transited the Mediterranean,
following an 11-nation multinational exercise in the Black Sea
and a port visit to Odessa, Ukraine--demonstrating our
commitment to our NATO allies;
--Sailors at the Navy Cyber Defense Operations Command in Suffolk, VA
monitored intrusion prevention sensors that actively mitigated
almost 300,000 instances of unauthorized or adversary activity
across the Navy network enterprise, including more than 60,000
threats to afloat networks;
--The Kearsarge Amphibious Readiness Group, with the 26th Marine
Expeditionary Unit aboard, participated in a Turkish-led
amphibious exercise, demonstrating our combined capability and
physically displaying our commitment to U.S. allies and
partners;
--Five ballistic missile submarines patrolled the oceans (the latest
in over 4,000 patrols since 1960), providing 100 percent
readiness in providing strategic deterrence;
--USS Fort Worth, a Littoral Combat Ship, swapped crews in Singapore
after participating in a Cooperation Afloat Readiness And
Training (CARAT) exercise with the Bangladesh Navy, developing
cooperative maritime security capabilities that support
security and stability in South and Southeast Asia.
--Sailors from a Coastal Riverine Squadron and an Explosive Ordnance
Disposal unit participated in an exercise in Cambodia,
increasing maritime security cooperation and interoperability
between the two navies;
--Navy SEALS trained and advised Iraqi forces in the fight against
ISIL extremists, facilitating, mentoring, and enhancing their
ability to secure their territory;
--Members of the Navy Expeditionary Combat Command provided tactical
intelligence training to Ghanaian Maritime Law Enforcement and
Naval service members at Sekondi Naval Base, increasing our
partners' capacity and capability to secure their territorial
waters;
--The aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan launched four F/A-18
fighters to intercept and escort two approaching Russian TU-142
Bear aircraft that approached as the carrier was operating in
the Sea of Japan, operating forward to preserve freedom of
action; and
--The fast-attack submarine USS City of Corpus Christi operated in
the Western Pacific, after participating with the Indian and
Japanese Navies in Exercise Malabar 2015, increasing our level
of engagement with our partners across the Indo-Asia Pacific.
All of these events occurred on a single day: October 27, 2015. But
none were in the headlines. That is because on that day the guided
missile destroyer USS Lassen conducted a freedom of navigation
operation in the South China Sea, one of the many visible
demonstrations of our international leadership and national commitment
to preserving a rules-based international order that the Navy conducts
routinely around the world.
Your Navy's ability to execute these responsibilities--our
mission--is becoming more difficult as three interrelated forces act on
the global economic and security environments, and as new actors rise
to challenge us. I have already described the first force--the force
exerted by the expanding use of the maritime domain, on, over, and
under the seas. This global system is becoming more used, stressed, and
contested than perhaps ever before, and these trends show no signs of
reversing.
The second force is the rise of the global information system.
Newer than the maritime system, the information system is more
pervasive, enabling an even greater multitude of connections between
people and at a much lower cost of entry. Information, now passed in
near-real time across links that continue to multiply, is in turn
driving an accelerating rate of change.
The third interrelated force is the rising tempo at which new
technologies are being introduced. This is not just information
technologies, but also those that incorporate advances in material
science, increasingly sophisticated robotics, energy storage, 3-D
printing, and networks of low-cost sensors, to name just a few
examples. The potential of genetic science and artificial intelligence
is just starting to be realized, and could fundamentally reshape every
aspect of our lives. And as technology is developed at ever-increasing
speeds, it is being adopted by society more quickly as well--people are
using these new tools as quickly as they are produced, in new and novel
ways.
Our competitors and adversaries are moving quickly to use these
forces to their advantage, and they too are shifting. For the first
time in decades, the United States is facing a return to great power
competition. Russia and China demonstrate both the advanced
capabilities and the desire to act as global powers. This past fall,
the Russian Navy operated at a pace and in areas not seen since the
mid-1990's, and the Chinese PLA(N) continued to extend its reach around
the world. Their national aspirations are backed by a growing arsenal
of high-end warfighting capabilities, many of which are focused
specifically on our vulnerabilities. Both nations continue to develop
information-enabled weapons with increasing range, precision and
destructive capacity, and to sell those weapons to partners like Iran,
Syria, and North Korea.
From a strategic perspective, both China and Russia are also
becoming increasingly adept in coercion and competition below the
thresholds of outright conflict, finding ways to exploit weaknesses in
the system of broadly accepted global rules and standards. For example,
Russia has continued its occupation and attempted annexation of another
nation's territory. And, as perhaps the most startling example, China's
land reclamation and militarization of outposts amidst the busiest sea
lanes on the planet casts doubt on the future accessibility of our
maritime domain. China is literally redrawing the map in the South
China Sea by creating artificial islands, to which they then claim
sovereign territorial rights, now complete with surface to air missiles
and high performance radars. Their activity creates great uncertainty
about the intentions and credibility of their leadership.
Russia and China are not the only actors seeking to contest U.S.
and global interests in the emerging security environment. Others are
also pursuing advanced technology, including military technologies that
were once the exclusive province of great powers; this trend will
persist. Coupled with an ongoing dedication to furthering its nuclear
weapons and missile programs, North Korea's provocative actions
continue to threaten security in Northeast Asia and beyond. Iran's
advanced missiles, proxy forces and other conventional capabilities
pose threats to which the Navy must remain prepared to respond.
Finally, international terrorist groups such as ISIL and Al Qaeda have
proven their resilience and adaptability and pose a long-term threat to
stability and security around the world.
In summary, these new forces have changed what it means for the
Navy and Marine Corps to provide maritime security; the problems are
more complex, demanding, and numerous than ever before. But our
responsibility remains the same. Naval forces must provide our leaders
credible options that allow them to advance the Nation's prosperity,
defend its security, further its strategic interests, assure its allies
and partners, and deter its adversaries--which rests on the ability of
the Navy and our sister services to decisively win if conflict breaks
out. The breadth of challenges we face demands a range of options, and
they must be credible. Only then can the United States effectively
advocate as a maritime power for the system of global rules and
standards that underpin shared prosperity now and in the future.
It is becoming increasingly difficult for the Navy to present a
sufficient number of credible options for leadership. While the
predictability provided by the 2015 Bipartisan Budget Act is greatly
appreciated, the Navy's fiscal year 2017 budget submission comes on the
heels of four prior years' budgets that collectively provided $30
billion less than requested levels to the Department of the Navy. It
represents yet another reduction of almost $5 billion from 2016 funding
levels. And we have started the last 6 years with a continuing
resolution, with an average duration of 120 days. In response, we have
had to modify our behaviors with a host of inefficient practices, the
use of short-term contracts offering less than best value to the
government, and the associated increased workload on our shrinking
headquarters staffs. Continuing Resolutions can also delay critical
programs, including those with little to no margin for delay, such as
the Ohio Replacement Program. And it's worse than that: the fiscal
uncertainty sends ripples through the entire system--the industrial
base is hesitant to invest, and our people remain concerned about the
next furlough or hiring freeze or overtime cap. This unpredictability
adds to the burden on our Navy team and drives prices up.
So the challenges are increasing and funding is decreasing. America
remains the primary leader of the free world, with the most capable
military force on the planet. And we remain a maritime Nation whose
future is inextricably tied to the seas. Our Navy has tremendous
responsibilities to ensure that future is secure and prosperous. Within
those constraints, our fiscal year 2017 budget proposal reflects the
best portfolio of credible options to achieve our mission. Budget
constraints are forcing choices that limit our naval capability in the
face of growing and rising threats. The Navy's budget addresses our
gaps on a prioritized basis, and starts to accelerate our capabilities
so that we can maintain overmatch relative to our adversaries.
strengthen our navy team for the future
Without question, the most important part of our budget is our
investment in our Navy Team--our Active and Reserve Sailors, our Navy
Civilians, and their families. I am pleased that we were able to
provide a 1.6 percent pay raise for our Sailors this year, outpacing
inflation and 0.3 percent more than last year. Just as important are
the investments we are making to improve the environment for the Team.
As the Design makes clear, some of the biggest impacts that we can make
on our warfighting capability do not involve a lot of money, but
instead are changes to how we do business.
These changes can't come soon enough. As our platforms continue to
become more technologically advanced and missions become more complex,
our need for talented, qualified recruits will grow. Further, the
competition for that talent grows more intense every day. This budget
keeps us on a good path. Our Sailor 2025 program is a dynamic set of
initiatives, process improvements and management tools designed to
increase career choice and flexibility, provide advanced, tailored
learning, and expand support to our Navy families. In fiscal year 2017,
we begin to fully invest in the Sailor 2025 Ready Relevant Learning
initiative, which will begin to create a new way of training our
Sailors through mobile, modular learning, re-engineered content, and an
improved IT infrastructure.
In this budget, we fund a wide range of initiatives to strengthen
our Sailors individually and as a team. The Design highlights the
importance of our core values of honor, courage and commitment, as
demonstrated through four core attributes--integrity, accountability,
initiative, and toughness. We are implementing a strategy, headed up by
our 21st Century Sailor Office, to inculcate these attributes
throughout the fleet and improve Sailor readiness and resilience. We
continue to further develop a climate of dignity and respect throughout
the Fleet. We also look to eliminate the toxic behaviors that destroy
the fabric of the team--including sexual harassment and assault, hazing
and alcohol abuse. We have increased funding over the FYDP to address
sexual assault prevention and response, adding 24 new positions to the
Naval Criminal Investigative Service--on top of 127 additions in the
previous 2 years--to speed investigations while continuing our support
for programs aimed at prevention, investigation, accountability, and
support for survivors such as the Victim Legal Counsel Program.
As we seek greater efficiencies, planned adjustments allow us to
take modest reductions (3,600 Sailors in fiscal year 2017) in our
active duty end strength. These are consistent with advances in
training methods and with standing down the Carrier Air Wing 14. There
will be no reductions in force or any other force-shaping initiatives--
we will achieve this through natural attrition. Nobody will lose their
job.
One of my observations since taking office is that we can do more
to increase the synergy between our military and civilian workforces.
Your Navy civilians are integral to all that we do. They work in our
shipyards and aviation depots, provide scientific and technical
expertise in our labs, and guard our bases and other facilities. To
respond to increasing security concerns, we have invested this year in
increased force protection measures, including in those civilians who
keep our people and property safe. Some of the maintenance and
readiness shortfalls we are still digging out from were made worse by
civilian hiring and overtime freezes and a furlough in fiscal year
2013. Worse, these actions strained the trust within our team. This
budget adds a net of over 1,300 civilian positions in fiscal year 2017
to support additional maintenance, enhance security, and operate our
support ships, and continues the investments in our civilian shipmates
that help to forge one seamless team. Even as we implement these key
initiatives to address security and to recover readiness, we balance
that growth with reductions over the FYDP of 3,200 FTE (1.8 percent),
for a net reduction of 1,900.
strengthen naval power at and from the sea
That team, with our Marine Corps partners, is committed to our
mission, which must be conducted in the environment I described above.
The Design calls for us to strengthen naval power at and from the sea
to address the growing scale, congestion, and challenge in the maritime
domain. The Ohio Replacement Program (ORP) is paramount to that effort,
and remains our top priority. In my opinion, it is foundational to our
survival as a Nation. This budget funds the ORP; construction is
planned to start in fiscal year 2021. This start date is vitally
important to prevent any impact to continuous at-sea deterrence at a
time when it could be even more relevant than today.
To the maximum extent possible, we have also prioritized
shipbuilding and the industrial base that supports it. Our current
fleet of 272 ships is too small to meet the array of mission
requirements our Nation demands. In this budget, we remain on a path to
achieve 308 ships by 2021. This year, we are funding two advanced
guided missile destroyers with upgraded radars (DDG Flight IIIs with
SPY-6), two Virginia-class attack submarines, two Littoral Combat
Ships, and the procurement of an amphibious assault ship replacement
(LHA(R)). The Ford carrier remains under its cost cap and will deliver
in 2016; we are continuing to exercise strong oversight and discipline
to ensure the cost of her sister ships Kennedy and Enterprise also
remain under budget. And we have exceeded our shipyard investment
goal--we're at 8.1 percent, well beyond the 6 percent legislative
requirement.
As the Design emphasizes, we are fully committed to further
ingraining information warfare into our routine operations. This is
essential to the Navy's future. For example, we are increasing
procurement of the Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement Program
(SEWIP) Block II and III by 45 units. We are also investing in network
modernization afloat and ashore through 10 installations of the
Consolidated Afloat Networks and Enterprise Services (CANES) system in
fiscal year 2017.
To help remediate one of our most stressed areas, we have enhanced
our investments in the naval aviation enterprise. We are investing in
bringing fifth generation aircraft to the fleet, adding ten F-35Cs over
the FYDP. We are also replacing F-18 airframes that are meeting the end
of their projected service lives faster than projected, adding 16F/A-18
E/Fs over the next 2 years. Further, we are adding upgrades to the
Super Hornet to make it more capable in a high-end fight. And we are
updating our strategy to more rapidly integrate unmanned aerial
vehicles into our future air wing. Revisions to our unmanned carrier-
launched airborne surveillance and strike (UCLASS) program will help us
to meet current mission shortfalls in carrier-based surveillance and
aerial refueling capacity, and better inform us about the feasibility
of future additional capabilities we desire.
To meet an increasingly lethal threat, this budget bolsters our
investments in advanced weapons across the FYDP. We are buying 100
additional tactical Tomahawks, 79 more air-to-air AMRAAM missiles,
additional sea-skimming targets, and accelerating our investments in
SM-6 missile development in order to provide a full range of capability
enhancements to the fleet. However, budget pressures also caused us to
cut other weapons investments such as the Mk-48 torpedo and AIM-9X air-
to-air missile. Many of our production lines are at minimum sustaining
rates, and the low weapons inventory is a continuing concern.
achieve high velocity learning at every level
All of these investments will deliver important capabilities to
better posture us for the current and future environment. But, as or
more importantly, we must also adjust our behavior if we are to keep
pace with the accelerating world around us.
This budget reflects some of that increase in pace. We are changing
how we approach training and education to take advantage of new tools
and to push learning out to where our Sailors spend the bulk of their
time--their units. The intent is not to burden those units more, but to
empower their leaders and give Sailors the best tools to support what
science is increasingly revealing about how people learn most
effectively.
It also means that Navy leaders, up to and including me as the CNO,
must exercise full ownership of how we develop and acquire new
capabilities for the future. That ownership has four elements:
authority, responsibility, accountability, and technical expertise. I
am committed to exercising that ownership, and to creating or
supporting new ways to exercise it faster.
We are doubling down on an approach that relies more heavily on
experimentation and prototyping, connected at the hip with the Fleet,
to help meet mission needs while simultaneously helping us to better
define our requirements. We are pulling our more ambitious projects
closer to the present so we can learn our way forward, faster and with
better information. We are taking this approach with the Remote
Minehunting System, Large Displacement Unmanned Undersea Vehicle
(LDUUV), and UCLASS programs, and we will continue to seek additional
programs to which it can be applied.
We are also reexamining our processes and organization to ensure
they are best aligned to support a faster pace. This budget includes a
small amount of funding for the Rapid Prototyping, Experimentation, and
Demonstration initiative, a process we have already begun to implement
that ``swarms'' technical experts to Fleet problems, rapidly generates
operational prototypes, and gets them into the hands of Sailors and
Marines so we can continue to refine and improve them. We also are
standing up a capability along the lines of the Air Force's Rapid
Capabilities Office; we'll call it the Maritime Accelerated
Capabilities Office (MACO). This will concentrate requirements,
technical, and acquisition expertise on high-priority projects to fast-
track their development and fielding.
Finally, Congress has rightly pressed us to reexamine whether we
are being as efficient as we can be. Our budget reflects some of the
efforts that we are taking in that regard, but fundamentally, we are
focused on making every dollar count. I am taking a personal role in
that process, asking hard questions and pushing us to become more cost-
effective and agile as we apply a learning-based approach to all that
we do.
conclusion
This year's budget request represents a portfolio of investments
that employ our available resources to best effect. The gap between our
responsibilities and our funding levels represents risk--risk of
Sailors' lives lost, of a weakened deterrent, of a slower response to
crisis or conflict, of greater financial cost, of uncertainty for our
international partners--all of which affect the security and prosperity
of America. While it is impossible to quantify this risk precisely, I
believe the balance reflected in this proposal improves our prospects
going forward.
Such improvements are much needed. Concurrent with increasing
global challenges, budget pressures have led the Navy to reduce our
purchases of weapons and aircraft, slow needed modernization, and
forego upgrades to all but the most critical infrastructure. At the
same time, maintenance and training backlogs--resulting from continued
high operational tempo and exacerbated by sequestration in 2013--have
delayed preparation for deployments, which in turn has forced us to
extend units already at sea. Since 2013, eight carrier strike groups,
four amphibious readiness groups, and twelve destroyers have deployed
for 8 months or longer. The length of these deployments itself takes a
toll on our people and the sustainability and service lives of our
equipment. Further, these extensions are often difficult to anticipate.
The associated uncertainty is even harder on Sailors, Marines, and
their families and wreaks havoc on maintenance schedules, complicating
our recovery still further.
We cannot continue to manage the risks we face absent broader
change. As CNO, I will strive to keep the U.S. Navy on the road to
remaining a force that produces leaders and teams who learn and adapt
to achieve maximum possible performance. We will achieve and maintain
high standards to be ready for decisive operations and if necessary, to
prevail in combat. We will fight for every inch of advantage. In this
way, we will provide sufficient, credible, options to leadership in
order to guarantee America's security and prosperity now and into the
future. I very much look forward to working with you and your fellow
Members of Congress as we proceed.
Senator Cochran. Thank you, Admiral Richardson.
And we'll now turn to the Commandant of the Marine Corps,
General Robert B. Neller, for any comments, statement.
STATEMENT OF GENERAL ROBERT B. NELLER, COMMANDANT,
UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
General Neller. Chairman Cochran, Ranking Member Durbin,
distinguished members of the Committee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today.
Marines know that the Congress and the American people we
serve have high expectations of us. They expect us to be ready.
You expect us to be ready to answer the call to fight and win.
Today Marines are forward deployed in Iraq, Afghanistan,
the Far East and around the globe ready to respond to crisis.
The posture of our force would not be possible without the
support and actions of this Congress.
Our global orientation, maritime character and
expeditionary capability have been ably demonstrated during
this past year.
In 2015 Marines executed approximately 100 operations, 20
of them amphibious, 140 theater security cooperation events and
160 major exercises.
As we remain engaged in the current fight and maintain our
forward presence in order to respond to crisis, our enemies and
potential adversaries have not stood idle. They have developed
new capabilities which now equal or in some cases may exceed
our own. This is further complicated by a constrained resource
environment from which we must continue our current operational
tempo, reset our equipment, maintain our warfighting readiness
and at the same time, modernize the force.
As our attention is spread across the globe in a security
environment where the only certainty is uncertainty, we must
make decisions about our strategy and structure that will
determine our nation's military capability in the future.
The character of the 21st century is rapid evolution and it
is imperative that we keep pace with the changes. History has
not been kind to militaries that have failed to evolve. And the
change we see in the 21st century is dramatic.
The efforts of the 114th Congress have provided sufficient
resources to support the Marine Corps near term readiness and
we thank the Congress for that fiscal stability.
However, the fiscal year 2017 budget increasingly stretches
the Nation's ready force. Your Marine Corps finds itself
increasingly challenged to simultaneously generate current
readiness, reset our equipment, sustain our facilities and
modernize our future readiness.
Maintaining the quality of the men and women in today's
Corps is our friendly center of gravity, that which we must
protect. This is the foundation from which we make Marines, win
our Nation's battles and return quality citizens to American
society. Our goal is to ensure every Marine is set up for
success on the battlefield and in life and understands their
value to their Corps and to their Nation.
As the Marine Corps draws down to 182,000 Marines this
fiscal year, we continue to develop capabilities in fifth
generation aircraft, the F35B and C, cyber warfare, information
operations, special operations, Embassy security guards and our
security cooperation group.
The Congress' intent for the Marine Corps is to serve as
the Nation's force in readiness guides who we are and what we
do. Being ready is central to our identity as Marines. The
fiscal reductions and instability of the past years have
impacted our readiness.
Our resources have diminished. The Marine Corps has
protected the near term operational readiness of its deployed
and next to deploy units in order to meet current operational
commitments. This means we do not have the depth in readiness
on our bench that we would like to have.
Modernization is our future readiness. The recapitalization
of our force is essential to this future readiness with
investments in facility sustainment, equipment reset,
modernization, ground combat vehicles, aviation, command and
control and digitally interoperable protected networks.
With the continued support of Congress, the Marine Corps
will maintain ready forces today and modernized to generate
this future readiness.
The wisdom of the 82nd Congress, reaffirmed by the 114th
Congress, remains valid today. The vital need for a strong
force in readiness and Marines are honored to serve in this
role.
Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you
today and for your leadership in addressing these fiscal
challenges and our warfighting readiness. I look forward to
your questions.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of General Robert Neller
prologue
The United States Marine Corps is the Nation's expeditionary force
in readiness. The intent of the 82nd Congress defined and shaped our
culture, organization, training, equipment, and priorities. Marines
appreciate the leadership of the 114th Congress in reaffirming that
role, especially as the strategic landscape and pace of the 21st
Century demands a ready Marine Corps to buy time, decision space, and
options for our Nation's leaders. Congress and the American people
expect Marines to answer the call, to fight, and to win.
Our global orientation, maritime character, and expeditionary
capability have all been ably demonstrated during the past year. The
capabilities of our total force are the result of the planning and
execution of committed Marines and Sailors operating under the
leadership of my predecessors. These capabilities and the posture of
our force would not be possible without the support and actions of the
Congress. As our attention is spread across the globe in a security
environment where the only certainty is uncertainty, we must make
decisions about our strategy and structure that will determine our
Nation's military capability in the future. Today's force is capable
and our forward deployed forces are ready to fight, but we are fiscally
stretched to maintain readiness across the depth of the force, and to
modernize, in order to achieve future readiness.
Situation
The current global security environment is characterized by
violence, conflict and instability. Multidimensional security threats
challenge all aspects of our national power and the international
system. The expansion of information, robotics, and weapons
technologies are causing threats to emerge with increased speed and
lethality.
Over the last 15 years, the United States fought wars in the Middle
East, and your Marines continue to respond to crises around the globe.
There has not been an ``inter-war period'' to reset and reconstitute
our force. Your Marines and Sailors have remained operationally
committed at the same tempo as the height of our operations in Iraq and
Afghanistan. As we have remained engaged in the current fight, our
enemies and potential adversaries have not stood idle. They have
developed new capabilities which now equal or in some cases exceed our
own.
This unstable and increasingly dangerous world situation is further
complicated by a constrained resource environment from which we must
continue current operations, reset our equipment, maintain our
warfighting readiness, and at the same time, modernize the force.
Therefore, it has become necessary that we continually balance our
available resources between current commitments and future readiness
requirements. This requires pragmatic institutional choices and a
clear-eyed vision of where we need to be in 10-20 years.
What Marines are doing today...
Today, Marines remain forward deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and
ready to respond to crisis around the world. Marines and Sailors are
presently managing instability, building partner capacity,
strengthening allies, projecting influence, and preparing for major
theater combat operations. In 2015, Marines executed approximately 100
operations, 20 amphibious operations, 140 theater security cooperation
events, and 160 major exercises.
Our Nation has Marines on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan today,
and we anticipate our commitment could grow in the future. Marines
continue to advise, train and enable the Iraqi Security Forces and
other designated Iraqi forces with peer-to-peer advising and infantry
training. In Afghanistan, Marines continue to serve as advisors with
the Republic of Georgia's Liaison Teams (GLTs) in support of Operation
RESOLUTE SUPPORT. From forward-deployed locations afloat and ashore,
Marine tactical aviation squadrons continue to support operations in
Syria and Iraq. In 2015, aviation combat assets executed over 1,275
tactical sorties and 325 kinetic strikes that have killed over 600
enemy combatants and destroyed over 100 weapons systems and 100
technical vehicles.
Our Amphibious Ready Group/Marine Expeditionary Unit (ARG/MEU)
Teams continue to show their capability a flexible and agile maritime
force. In 2015, the Marine Corps deployed over 12,000 Marines with our
shipmates on Navy warships. This past year, five separate MEUs
supported every Combatant Commander, participating in exercises and
executing major operations. The 31st MEU, our Forward Deployed Naval
Force in the Pacific, performed disaster relief operations on Saipan
after Typhoon Soudelor passed through the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands (CNMI). Marines were ashore to support the relief
effort within 12 hours of notification and delivered a total of 11,000
gallons of fresh water and 48,000 meals.
As part of the New Normal your Corps deployed two Special Purpose
Marine Air Ground Task Forces--Crisis Response (SPMAGTF-CR) to US
Central Command and US Africa Command. These forces are tailored to
respond to crises and conduct security cooperation activities with
partner nations, but they do not provide the same flexibility and
responsiveness of an ARG/MEU. Our SPMAGTF assigned to CENTCOM today
provides dedicated Tactical Recovery of Aircraft and Personnel (TRAP)
support to Operation INHERENT RESOLVE, in Iraq and Syria, and
simultaneously provides a flexible force for crisis and contingency
response. In AFRICOM, our SPMAGTF supported Embassies through
reinforcement, evacuation, and operations to reopen a previously closed
Embassy in Central African Republic. Your Marines also supported
operations during the Ebola crisis and assisted with elections.
Finally, a SPMAGTF deployed to the US Southern Command in 2015.
SPMAGTF-SC's primary focus was the reconstruction of a runway in
Mocoron Airbase, Honduras and theater security cooperation and training
in Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala and Belize.
The Marine Corps' activities in the Pacific are led by Marine
Forces Pacific (MARFORPAC) headquartered in Honolulu, Hawaii, with a
forward stationed Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF), III MEF,
headquartered in Okinawa, Japan. III MEF contributes to regional
stability through persistent presence and Marines remain the Pacific
Command's (PACOM) forward deployed, forward stationed force of choice
for crisis response. The Marine Corps continues to rebalance its force
lay-down in the Pacific to support Defense Strategic Guidance (DSG),
with 22,500 Marines West of the International Date Line, forward-based,
and operating within the Asia-Pacific Theater. The planned end state
for geographically distributed, politically sustainable and
operationally resilient MAGTFs in the Pacific is a long-term effort
that will span the next 15 years. The Marine Rotational Force-Darwin
(MRF-D), based in Australia's Robertson Barracks, is in its fourth year
of operation. This year we will deploy approximately 1,200 Marines to
Darwin for a 60-month deployment.
The Marine Corps continues to work closely with the State
Department to provide security at our Embassies and Consulates. Today,
Marines are routinely serving at 174 Embassies and Consulates in 146
countries around the globe. Approximately 117 Embassies have increased
support in accordance with the 2013 NDAA. We have added 603 Marines to
the previously authorized 1,000 Marine Security Guards; 199 in new
detachments, 274 towards increased manning at current detachments, and
130 towards the Marine Security Augmentation Unit (MSAU). Additionally,
the U.S. Embassy in Havana, Cuba was reopened on July 2015, with
Marines serving at this Embassy as they do in any other.
Our partnering capabilities assure allies, deter adversaries, build
partner capacity, and set conditions for the readiness to surge and
aggregate with a Joint, Coalition or Special Operations force for major
theater combat operations. Partnering also trains our Marines for
environments in which we are likely to operate. In 2015, the Marine
Corps, in conjunction with Combatant Commanders and the Marine Forces
Component Commands, conducted more than 140 security cooperation
activities, including exercises, training events, subject matter expert
exchanges, formal education key leader engagements, and service staff
talks. Your continued support has allowed the Marine Corps to operate
throughout the world today; now we must ensure our readiness tomorrow.
five areas of focus
Today, in addition to supporting the Combatant Commander's
requirements, the Marine Corps is focused on near-term efforts in five
interrelated areas that are vital to achieving our future success:
People, Readiness, Training, Naval Integration, and Modernization.
Across these five areas, three major themes run throughout: maintaining
and improving the high quality people that make up today's Marine
Corps; decentralizing the training and preparation for war while
adhering to Maneuver Warfare principles in the conduct of training and
operations; and modernizing the force, especially through leveraging
new and emerging technologies. The future requires Marines to embrace
change to leverage the rapid advancements in technology at the pace of
the 21st Century in order to gain an operational advantage over any
potential adversary we may face in the future.
people
The success of the Marine Corps hinges on the quality of our
Marines. This is the foundation from which we make Marines, win our
Nation's battles, and return quality citizens to American society. The
Marine Corps will maintain a force of the highest quality which is
smart, resilient, fit, disciplined and able to overcome adversity.
Maintaining the quality of the men and women in today's Corps is our
friendly center of gravity. Our goal is to ensure every Marine is set
up for success on the battlefield and in life, and understands their
value to the Marine Corps and the Nation.
The Marine Corps continues to benefit from a healthy recruiting
environment that attracts quality people who can accomplish the
mission. Our recruiting force continues to meet our recruiting goals in
quantity and quality and is postured to make this year's recruiting
mission. We are on track to meet our active duty end strength goal of
182,000 Marines in fiscal year 2016, and we will look to maximize the
capabilities of each and every Marine. Where it makes sense, we will
look to leverage the unique skills of our Reserve Marines to align what
they bring from the civilian sector and better enable the readiness of
our Total Force.
As the Marine Corps completes our current draw down, competition
for retention will continue. We will strive to retain the very best
Marines capable of fulfilling our leadership and operational needs.
This is accomplished through a competitive career designation process
for officers and a thorough evaluation process for enlisted Marines
designed to measure, analyze, and compare Marines' performance,
accomplishments, and future potential. The Marine Corps continues to
retain quality Marines in a majority of occupational fields while
others, like aviation and infantry, are more challenging. An additional
challenge for all Marines is remaining focused on training for war
balanced against the volume of mandatory ``top down'' training
requirements not directly associated with warfighting.
Marine Leaders have a moral obligation to ensure the health and
welfare of the Nation's Marines from the day they make the commitment
to serve. We take this responsibility very seriously and strive to
maintain the trust and confidence of Congress and the American People
by immediately addressing any challenge to Marine Corps readiness and
finding solutions through our people and readiness programs. We have
reinvigorated the Marine for Life Program and continue to progress with
our Marine Corps Force Integration Plan (MCFIP), Sexual Assault
Prevention and Response Program (SAPR), Protect What You've Earned
Campaign (PWYE), Suicide Prevention and Response Program, our Wounded
Warrior Regiment, Marine and Family Programs, and Transition Assistance
Programs. The Marine Corps remains focused on solutions to address the
destructive behavior of sexual assault, suicide and hazing. The abuse
of alcohol has proven to be a contributing factor across the spectrum
of force preservation issues that impact the readiness of our force.
Our goal continues to be the elimination of this destructive behavior
from our ranks, and we believe that preserving our commanders' ability
to lead in this area is a vital element to reaching this objective.
readiness
The Congressional intent to serve as the ``Nation's Force in
Readiness'' guides who we are and what we do--being ready is central to
our identity as Marines. As a force, we will remain ready to fight and
win across the range of military operations and in all five warfighting
domains--maritime, land, air, cyber and space. The fiscal reductions
and instability of the past few years have impacted our readiness. As
resources have diminished, the Marine Corps has protected the near-term
operational readiness of its deployed and next-to-deploy units in order
to meet operational commitments. This has come at a risk.
The Marine Corps will continue to prioritize the readiness of
deployed and next-to-deploy units over non-deployed units. The majority
of our units are deploying ready while our non-deployed commands lack
sufficient resources to meet the necessary personnel, training, and
equipment readiness levels in order to respond today. However, to meet
Congress' intent that we remain the nation's force in readiness, the
Marine Corps requires a ``ready bench'' that is able to deploy with
minimal notice and maximum capability.
Our aviation units are currently unable to meet our training and
mission requirements primarily due to Ready Basic Aircraft shortfalls.
We have developed an extensive plan to recover readiness across every
type/model/series in the current inventory, while continuing the
procurement of new aircraft to ensure future readiness. The recovery
and sustainment of our current fleet is necessary to support both
training and warfighting requirements. Each type/model/series requires
attention and action in specific areas; maintenance, supply, depot
backlog, and in-service repairs. For example, in our F/A-18 community
we are 52 aircraft short of our training requirement and 43 aircraft
short of our warfighting requirement due to back log and throughput at
the Fleet Readiness Depot and our inventory of spares. If these
squadrons were called to on to fight today they would be forced to
execute with 86 less jets than they need. With the continued support of
Congress, Marine Aviation can recover its readiness by re-capitalizing
our aging fleet first as we procure new aircraft to meet our future
needs and support our ground forces.
Simultaneous readiness initiatives are occurring with our ground
equipment. Our post-combat reset strategy and Equipment Optimization
Plan (EOP) are key components of the overall ground equipment
``Reconstitution'' effort. As of Jan 2016, the Marine Corps has reset
78 percent of its ground equipment with 50 percent returned to the
Operating Forces and our strategic equipment programs. This strategic
war reserve is our geographically prepositioned combat equipment both
afloat and ashore where it makes the most sense to respond to
contingencies. We remain focused on this recovery effort and project
its completion in May of 2019. This service-level strategy would not
have been possible without the continued support of Congress and the
hard work of your Marines.
The Facility Sustainment, Restoration and Modernization (FSRM)
initiative and current state of facilities is the single most important
investment to support training, operations, and quality of life. The
2017 budget proposes funding FSRM at 74 percent of the OSD Facilities
Sustainment Model. This reduced funding level is an area of concern.
FSRM is a top priority to fix.
The sustainment of military construction (MILCON) funding is
crucial to managing operational training and support projects. Marine
Corps readiness is generated aboard our bases and stations. As we
transition to new capabilities and realign our forces in the Pacific,
adequate MILCON will be a key enabler for the Marine Corps' future
success.
Readiness is not just in our equipment supply and maintenance, but
in the quality and challenging nature of our training through the
mental, spiritual and physical readiness of Marines and Sailors across
the force. Readiness is the result of a variety of factors: commitment
by leadership, standards-based inspections, evaluated drills and
training exercises, and an understanding by all Marines and Sailors
that the call can come at any time. And we must be ready and able to
answer.
training, simulation and experimentation
The Marine Corps' training and education continuum requires
parallel and complementary efforts, from Squad Leader to MAGTF
Commander. Organizing and executing high quality training is a
difficult task. It takes time, deliberate thought, and effort. Our
approach to training must evolve. It will emphasize the basics:
combined arms, competency in the use of our weapons and systems, and
expeditionary operations; but it must reemphasize operations in a
degraded command, control, communications, computers and intelligence
(C4I) environment, camouflage/deception, operations at night,
operations in a nuclear, biological and chemical (NBC) environment, and
decisionmaking in rapidly unfolding and uncertain situations. We must
provide opportunities to experiment and work with the latest
technological advances.
Our war gaming supports the combat development process in order to
develop and refine emerging concepts, conceptualize force design, and
identify future capabilities and deficiencies within the future
operating environments. War gaming achieves this purpose by permitting
the dynamic, risk-free consideration of disruptive ideas and
capabilities which enable innovation and inform Service priorities. War
gaming also supports the development of operating concepts and
facilitates analysis of alternatives across the ROMO. The Marine Corps
is committed to the future development of a war gaming facility at
Marine Corps Base Quantico to enhance the study of the evolving
characteristics of, and the requirements for, successful warfighting in
the future. The Marine Corps is working to leverage virtual and
constructive training environments with better tools to train higher
level staffs and a focus on our leaders, from the Battalion to the
Marine Expeditionary Force level. Enabled by technology, we will
increase the amount of training each unit can accomplish in mentally
and physically stressing environments for all elements of the MAGTF
before they execute on a live training range or in combat.
Our current training schedule of major events will all focus on
building on our maritime based operational capability and at the same
time providing venues for experimentation. We will emphasize and
increase opportunities for force-on-force training and operations in
degraded environments in order to challenge Marines against a
``thinking enemy'' and maximize realism.
Demanding and challenging Professional Military Education (PME) is
the best hedge against uncertainty and its purpose is to prepare for
the unknown. Marines and Sailors of all ranks have the responsibility
to educate themselves. The Marine Corps University (MCU) educates over
75 percent of Marine Corps' Captains and Majors and provides PME
opportunities for 100 percent of our enlisted force. Our training and
education initiatives contribute to our readiness and enhance our
ability to integrate with the Naval and Joint Force.
integration with the naval and joint force
In order to be the Nation's expeditionary force in readiness the
Marine Corps must remain a naval combined arms expeditionary force. Our
naval heritage is based on more than tradition; it is mandated by law
as our primary service responsibility. Marines will reinforce our role
as a naval expeditionary force to create decision space for national
leaders and assure access for the Joint force as part of a naval
campaign. As the service with the primary Department of Defense
Directive and Title 10 responsibility for the development of amphibious
doctrine, tactics, techniques, and equipment, our capabilities are
reliant on the Nation's investment in our partnered Navy programs. This
requires the proper balance of amphibious platforms, surface
connectors, and naval operating concepts to shape our force explicitly
as part of the Joint Force, understanding where we will both leverage
and enable the capabilities of the Army, Air Force and Special
Operations Forces.
The Navy and Marine Corps Team require 38 amphibious warships, with
an operational availability of 90 percent, to support two Marine
Expeditionary Brigades, in order to provide the Nation a forcible entry
capability. The Marine Corps fully supports the Secretary of the Navy
and Chief of Naval Operations' efforts to balance amphibious platforms
and surface connectors that facilitate operational maneuver from the
sea and ship-to-objective maneuver. The Long Range Ship Strategy (LRSS)
increases the amphibious warship inventory to 34 by fiscal year 2022.
We appreciate Congress providing the funding to procure a 12th LPD and
the funding for a second ship with the same hull form.
The LPD and the LXR represent the Department of the Navy's
commitment to a modern expeditionary fleet. L-Class ships with aircraft
hangars and the command and control capabilities for the distributed
and disaggregated operations that have become routine for our ARG/MEU
teams. The Marine Corps fully supports the Navy's decision to use the
LPD-17 hull for the LXR program. This decision is an acquisitions
success story that provides a more capable ship, at lower cost, with
increased capacity, on a shorter timeline to better support how Marines
are operating today and are likely to in the future.
Steady state demand and crisis response sea basing requirements
must be met through creative integration of all platforms and
formations. This requires an integrated approach that employs warships,
alternative shipping and landing basing in a complementary manner.
Corresponding to the amphibious ship effort is our investment in
tactical ship-to-shore mobility because at some point in the naval
campaign, the landing force is going to land. The Amphibious Combat
Vehicle (ACV) is critical in the conduct of protected littoral maneuver
and the projection of Marines from sea to land in permissive,
uncertain, and hostile environments. Our planned investments are framed
by our capstone service concept, Expeditionary Force 21 (EF-21).
Working with our naval partners, we are aggressively exploring the
feasibility of future and existing sea based platforms to enhance the
connector capabilities of our LCACs and LCUs. We have a need to modify
traditional employment methods and augment amphibious warships by
adapting other vessels for sea-based littoral operations. Maritime
Prepositioning Ship squadrons have one Maritime Landing Platform (MLP)
that is effectively a ``pier in the ocean.'' These ships can move pre-
positioned war reserves into theater and serve as afloat staging bases
to receive and transfer equipment and supplies as part of an integrated
MAGTF or regionally oriented MEB. The end-state is a ``family of
systems'' designed to enhance mobility, interoperability,
survivability, and independent operational capabilities to further
enhance sea basing and littoral maneuver capabilities well into the
21st Century. The Marine Corps will continue to work closely with the
Navy to implement the 30-year ship building plan and to address the
current readiness challenges of the amphibious fleet.
The continued development of Information Warfare and Command and
Control capabilities are also required for the Marine Corps to operate
against increasingly sophisticated adversaries. This requires
investments in interoperable combat operations centers. We are
identifying and developing command and control systems and information
technology architecture to support operations and ensure our ability to
maneuver. Framed by service-level concepts like the Navy's Cooperative
Strategy 21 (CS-21), we will collaborate with the Navy on a Naval
Operating Concept revision in order to shape future naval campaigning
and naval expeditionary operations. This concept will include a greater
Marine Corps contribution to Sea Control operations through
interoperability with the Navy Composite Warfare Commander (CWC)
structure in order to disrupt, dismantle and defeat Anti-Access/Area
Denial (A2/AD) threats and optimize the single naval battle success on
and from the sea. Since Marines and Special Operations Forces (SOF)
remain forward deployed, we must create true integration models to
maximize the capabilities of the sea-based MAGTF, including command and
control (C2), alongside our SOF partners. The end state is a fully
integrated and ready Navy and Marine Corps team, trained and resourced
to support our joint operating concept.
modernization and technology
History has not been kind to militaries that fail to evolve, and
the change we see in the 21st Century is as rapid and dramatic as the
world has ever known. That said the Marine Corps' modernization and
technology initiatives must deliver future capabilities and sustainable
readiness. Marines will continue working to do what we do today better,
but equally important, must be willing to consider how these same tasks
might be done ``differently.'' The Marine Corps must continue to
develop and evolve the MAGTF, ensuring it is able to operate in all
warfighting domains. To do so Marines are invigorating experimentation
of new concepts in order to advance our capabilities.
We will continue to develop our concepts to take advantage of the
capabilities of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and all of our emerging
aviation platforms, particularly in regard to sensor fusion and
electronic warfare. Marines will continue to experiment with and
exercise new ways to get the most out of the MV-22 and challenge
previous paradigms in order to provide the most effective MAGTFs to our
Combatant Commanders.
We will establish and define, in doctrine, our distributed
operations capability in our MAGTFs by the end of fiscal year 2016.
With distributed capabilities, we must also ensure our forces are not
constrained at the littoral seams between Combatant Commanders. You can
also expect the Marine Corps to continue to pursue technologies that
enhance our warfighting capabilities such as unmanned aerial systems
(UAS) and robotics, artificial intelligence, 3-D printing, and
autonomous technologies that provide tactical and operational
advantage.
The Marine Corps Warfighting Lab leads our experimentation effort
to capitalize on existing and emerging technology and MAGTF level
exercises. In conjunction with our coalition partners, the Navy and
Marine Corps team has experimented with dispersed sea based SPMAGTFs,
integrated MAGTFs in Anti-Access/Area Denial environments, incorporated
emerging digital technologies with aviation platforms and our ground
forces, and conducted naval integration with interoperable Special
Operations Forces during Joint Exercises. We will continue to emphasize
experimentation during our exercises as a way to inform the development
of distributed doctrine and future operating concepts. Exercises serve
as a test bed for experimentation as we search for faster, cheaper and
smarter acquisition processes and programs.
The following equipment platforms and acquisition initiatives
require special mention:
Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV)
The ACV is an advanced generation eight-wheeled, amphibious,
armored personnel carrier that will support expeditionary maneuver
warfare by enhancing tactical and operational mobility and
survivability. The Marine Corps plans to procure 694 vehicles: 204 in
the first increment and 490 in the second increment. Our plan is to
have our first battalion initially capable in the 4th Quarter of fiscal
year 2020 and all battalions fully capable by the 4th Quarter of fiscal
year 2023. Your investment in this program provides the Marine Corps
with an advanced ship to shore maneuver capability for the Joint Force.
Joint Strike Fighter (F-35)
The F-35 is a fifth generation fighter that will replace the Marine
Corps' aging tactical aviation fleet of F/A-18 Hornets, AV-8B Harriers,
and EA-6B Prowlers. The F-35 will have a transformational impact on
Marine Corps doctrine as we work to both do what we're doing today
better and ``differently.'' The Marine Corps plans to procure 420
aircraft: 353 F-35Bs and 67 F-35Cs. The first F-35B squadron achieved
initial operating capability in July 2015, and our second squadron will
become operational in June 2016. The Marine Corps plans to complete its
F-35 transition by 2031. We believe the Congressional support
investment in this program will pay significant dividends for the
capabilities of the Marine Corps and the Joint Force.
CH-53K
The Marine Corps' CH-53K ``King Stallion'' helicopter will fulfill
the vertical lift requirement for amphibious and Joint Forcible Entry
Operations. This CH-53 transition is critical to increasing the
degraded readiness of the CH-53E community and decreasing the
platform's operations and maintenance costs. The Marine Corps plans to
procure 200 aircraft. The program achieved Milestone B in December
2005. The CH-53K's first flight occurred in October 2015 and our two
aircraft have flown 25.8 hours.
command, control, communications, computers and intelligence (c4i)
The modernization and technology effort of the Marine Corps
requires an integrated network that is deployable, digitally
interoperable, and supportive of rapid advancements in technology and
the evolution of combat capabilities. The Marine Corps Enterprise
Network (MCEN) establishes a comprehensive framework requiring the
development of command and control architecture to simplify and enable
operating forces to use services in a deployed environment. The
priority is to provide worldwide access to MCEN services from any base,
post, camp, station network, tactical network and approved remote
access connection. Our goal is to provide an agile command and control
capability with the right data, at the right place, at the right time.
Digital Interoperability (DI) is the effective integration of
Marines, systems, and exchange of data, across all domains and networks
throughout the MAGTF, Naval, Joint, and Coalition Forces, to include
degraded or denied environments, in order to rapidly share information.
This is a vital step in linking the MAGTF and the Joint Force to get
the vast amount of information collected on all platforms into the
hands of the warfighters that need it; in the air, on the ground and at
sea.
The Marine Corps' goal is to retain our tactical advantage across
the range of military operations with today's and tomorrow's systems.
Our end state is to field and operationalize ongoing programs and
continue to develop solutions that will enhance institutional
capabilities and retain our tactical advantage across the ROMO.
our challenges
The character of the 21st Century is rapid evolution. Our potential
adversaries have not stood still, and it is imperative that we keep
pace with change. Two years ago, the 35th Commandant, came before
Congress and testified that:
``...the 36th Commandant will reach a point, probably 2 years from
now, where he's going to have to take a look at that readiness level
and say, I'm going to have to lower that so that I can get back into
these facilities that I can't ignore, my training ranges that I can't
ignore, and the modernization that I'm going to have to do eventually.
Otherwise we'll end up with an old Marine Corps that's out of date.''
\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Gen Amos. Posture of the United States Marine Corps. CMC, March
2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is where we find ourselves today. The Marine Corps is no
longer in a position to generate current readiness and reset our
equipment, while sustaining our facilities, and modernizing to ensure
our future readiness. The efforts of the 114th Congress have provided
sufficient resources to support the Marine Corps' near-term readiness
and we thank the Congress for this fiscal stability. However, PB17
increasingly stretches the Nation's Ready Force. We are deploying
combat ready-forces at a rate comparable to the height of our
commitment to Operations IRAQI FREEDOM and ENDURING FREEDOM; we are
facing future facilities challenges as we try to sustain our current
installations; and we are struggling to keep pace as our potential
adversaries rapidly modernize. This is not healthy for your Marine
Corps or for the security of our Nation.
The Marine Corps is now on its way down to 182,000 Marines by the
end of fiscal year 2016. Although our recruiting force continues to
meet our recruiting goals we are challenged to retain certain
occupational fields like infantry and aviation. The 21st Century
demands capabilities in 5th Generation Fighter Aircraft (F-35), Cyber
Warfare, Information Operations, Special Operations, Embassy Security
Guards, and the Security Cooperation Group that advises and assists our
allies and partner nations. The Marine Corps must continue to develop
and retain these capabilities with quality Marines.
In last year's fiscal year 2015 budget we were compelled, due to
fiscal pressures, to limit and reduce training for our operating
forces. In this year's fiscal year 2016 budget our operation and
maintenance funding was further reduced by 5.6 percent. This reduction
has been carried forward into our fiscal year 2017 budget. Two years of
fiscally constrained operation and maintenance funds will force us to
employ a prioritized readiness model for our deploying forces and
prevents us from our desired readiness recovery, both in operational
training and facilities sustainment. This means the Marine Corps will
not have as deep and as ready a bench to draw from for a major
contingency.
Modernization is future readiness. The recapitalization of our
force is essential to our future readiness with investments in ground
combat vehicles, aviation, command and control, and digitally
interoperable protected networks. We have important combat programs
under development that need your continued support. The Amphibious
Combat Vehicle (ACV) will replace our Amphibious Assault Vehicle (AAV),
which is now over four decades old. The Joint Strike Fighter will not
only replace three aging platforms, but provides transformational
warfighting capabilities for the future. Our ground combat vehicles
like the Light Armored Vehicle (LAV) have an average age of 33 years
and our M1A1 tanks have an average age of 26 years. The Marine Corps is
grateful for Congress' support of our wartime acquisition and reset
efforts of the MRAP, HMMWV, and the contracting of the Joint Light
Tactical Vehicle (JLTV). In summary, the increasingly lean budgets of
fiscal year 2016 and fiscal year 2017 will provide increased readiness
challenges and cause shortfalls in key areas. This reality will force
tradeoffs.
conclusion
``One fact is etched with clarity; the Marine Corps, because of
its readiness to fight, will have a vital role in any future
war.'' \2\ Senator Mike Mansfield
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Hon. Mansfield. Fixing the Personnel Strength of the United
States Marine Corps, Adding the Commandant of the Marine Corps as a
Member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. 82nd Congress, 1st Session, House
of Representatives, HR 82-666, 30 June 1951.
Marines will continue to meet the high standards the American
people have set for us. As responsible stewards of the Nation's
resources, the Marine Corps remains committed to its auditability in
order to provide the best Marine Corps the Nation can afford. We will
therefore continue to produce highly trained Marines, formed into
combat-ready forces, and provide the capabilities the Joint Force
requires. The wisdom of the 82nd Congress as reaffirmed by the 114th
Congress remains valid today--the vital need of a strong force-in-
readiness. Marines are honored to serve in this role.
Marines are innovators and the history of the Marine Corps is
replete with examples of innovation out of necessity. With the
continued support of Congress, the Marine Corps will maintain ready
forces today and modernize to generate readiness in the future because
when the Nation calls, Marines answer and advance to contact.
Senator Cochran. Thank you very much, General.
We now call on Senator Durbin, the Senator from Illinois
for any questions he may have of the panel.
Senator Durbin. Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman.
And thanks to all of you, again.
General, the first conversation or the one we had recently
was a sad conversation because you were recounting the loss of
12 Marines in a helicopter incident off the coast of Hawaii.
And we talked about it at some length and it left, had a
lasting impression on me because it appeared that this was,
sadly, not an isolated situation.
And so I've tried to look into it a little more and to
understand it a little more and to really understand what the
subcommittee's responsibility is when it comes to a tragedy
like this.
And so I'd like to say a few things and then ask you and
the Secretary, if he'd like, to comment on them.
Twelve Marines were lost on January 14th when two Marine
CH-53E helicopters collided off the coast of Hawaii. A little
research tells me that those were training missions and that
half the crew on each of those aircraft were well seasoned,
veterans, instructors and the other half, of course, learning
in the process. It was an experiment or I should say, a mission
at night and might have involved night vision equipment.
There was some relief of command before that incident,
several days before, but I don't want to dwell on that
particular issue. I'll leave that to you as to whether it's
significant.
The reason I raise this issue now is that it turns out this
was not an isolated incident.
Last September a similar helicopter crash at Camp Lejeune
killed one Marine and injured another. Between May of 2014 and
that accident in September of last year, 18 Marines were killed
in 13 separate incidents. Aviation deaths in the U.S. Marine
Corps, fixed wing, helicopters and Ospreys, have reached a 5-
year high.
Now there have been analyses of these. I'm welcoming yours.
One of them was from a Retired Commander, Chris Harmer, who was
quoted in the Marine Times.
And when he was asked he said that, ``Maintenance flight
hours and the effect on overall safety are concerns often cited
by military leaders in the face of deep budget cuts by
Congress. Reduced flight time leads to increased deaths from
helicopter crashes.''
He said if you lose currency it's extremely difficult to
regain it. And he noted there was a 30 percent cut in O and M
in the military between 2012 and 2016.
AVIATION READINESS
The reason I want to bring this home is because this is a
trend which I know you are dedicated to stopping in terms of
the incidents that have occurred. But I want to find out what
we are doing. When we talk about increasing procurement and
such, I'm all for that, but if our budget is not designed to
prepare for readiness to protect the lives of the Marines, the
Sailors and others, then we are falling far short of our
responsibility.
This incident brought it to mind and I invite your
response.
General Neller. Well Senator, I appreciate the comment. And
we did share our discussion about the tragic event and the loss
of these 12 Marines and we still mourn their loss.
Just an update, the Air Mishap Board is still trying to
recover all the pieces of the plane and more importantly, all
the remains because of the weather and the depth. They were at
a certain depth where we have to use robotics. And they're on
the North Shore Hawaii which is, this time of year, is big
waves and swells. And so there's a salvage ship there and then
challenged to be able to get out there and do their business.
But we'll stay out until we can get to the bottom of what
happened.
In general, across the Marine Corps aviation enterprise we
have challenges. Every type model series is a little bit
different. I would say the CH-53 community is probably, right
now, the most challenged because of a variety of reasons,
available aircrafts, uncertain maintenance issues that go back
to a Navy MH-53 accident 3 years ago this past January.
So it's a maintenance issue. And when you don't have enough
airplanes to fly then your flight hours go down and it becomes
difficult to maintain your currency.
So in this case it's a parts and repair issue.
We're also in the middle of recapitalizing or changing out
every type model series that we have in our aircraft. The 53
will be the last. It will be replaced by the CH-53K which is in
our test and development right now. There's two prototypes that
have flown over 25 hours.
But that airplane, by the time, assuming it all goes on
track, we won't start to see that for several years.
So right now we've got to rebuild the readiness of the 53
fleet. That's partly getting better parts support, getting
these aircraft back in the depot, the reset that we might have
done after 15 years of war. We probably kept them in the
theater a little bit too long.
But each of these type model series has a different story.
Fixed wing aviation is, kind of, at the bottom of where it is.
Last week the Chief of Naval Operations(CNO) and I went to
the Fleet Readiness Center out in San Diego and they're
increasing their output because they have the funding, we have
stability. Part of that process was interrupted by
sequestration and government shut down and the workforce got
disrupted. And they've improved their process.
So there's a whole series of things that go into this. And
we have a plan and we believe we have sufficient funding to do
that. It's just not going to happen overnight.
So a combination of fielding new aircraft, more rapid
procurement, getting the depots to get more throughput,
increasing our parts support, then we get more ready basic
aircraft on the flight line and we increase our hours.
Senator Durbin. I'm going to yield because my time is up.
But what I'm looking--and I'll follow up with you and the
Secretary.
I want to make sure that as we look at the next year's
budget that we are digging ourselves out of this hole. It is a
hole created by budget cuts by this Congress which has,
obviously, endangered the lives of men and women who are
serving our Nation. We don't want that to occur. So I'll be in
touch with you as we follow through.
Senator Cochran. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Collins, the Senator from Maine, is recognized.
Senator Collins. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, let me begin by thanking you for your
extraordinary service. I'm aware that you are the longest
serving Naval Secretary, I believe, since World War I and that
is, bespeaks of your commitment to your country and to the
Department of the Navy and its personnel. And I just want to
begin by thanking you for that and recognizing that record.
I believe that your record of bolstering our Naval Fleet
will be one of your greatest legacies. Congress supported your
efforts to reverse the decline in shipbuilding. And Senator
Cochran and Senator Durbin have been absolutely instrumental in
providing leadership in that area.
Last year the Senate Arms Services Committee and the
Defense Authorization bill authorized an additional DDG-51
destroyer and this Committee appropriated a billion dollars
which is about two-thirds of its cost to try to help bridge the
gap between what our combatant commanders say that we need and
what we have.
I was looking at a map of where our ships are deployed
today in light of your wonderful quote from George Washington.
And the fact is they're everywhere. And as you said there is no
substitute for presence in our ability to project power.
DDG-51 SHIPBUILDING
Senator King and I sent a letter a few weeks ago urging the
Navy to include the balance of the funding for the third DDG-51
on the Navy's unfunded priorities list because the ship is
needed to fulfill Naval missions.
So I recognize that it's not the remaining one-third of
funding is not in the President's budget but could you please
describe how you would prioritize the need for this ship, its
importance to the fleet and your plans for getting it under
contract?
Mr. Mabus. Well first Senator, thank you and thank the
Committee for all the courtesies you all have shown to me.
Appearing before a Committee chaired by my fellow
Mississippian, who I admire greatly, has been one of the true
pleasures of this job.
And thank you for the authorization and particularly for
the appropriation, the incremental funding, of this additional
DDG-51. The DDG-51, as you know, is one of the backbones of our
fleet, brings amazing capability, particularly the ones we're
building now. And there is a mechanical reason why the rest of
the funding was not in the President's budget and that is that
the 2016 budget got passed by Congress after our budget locked
at the Pentagon.
It is on our unfunded priorities list, the remaining funds,
about 400, a little over $400 million is on our unfunded
priorities list. We think this is one of the very top
priorities, so you know and I do. And we look forward to
working with you to figure out how to get this money so that we
can get the ship under contract in, it's a 2016 ship and not a
future ship.
SOUTH CHINA SEA
Senator Collins. Thank you very much.
Admiral Richardson, I've been very concerned about the
build-up of the Chinese Navy. This is a real issue that
concerns me as China has been more and more aggressive.
A recent study by the Center for Strategic and
International Studies found that by the year 2030 the South
China Sea will, they describe it as becoming virtually a
Chinese lake as China builds a modern and regionally powerful
Navy.
Are you concerned that China will be able to challenge our
ability to achieve and maintain control of blue water ocean
areas including the Asia Pacific region?
Admiral Richardson. Senator, thank you for that question
and thank you for your support and the support of everybody in
Maine to build and maintain our ships in both Bath and the
Portsmouth Naval shipyard there. It's absolutely fantastic.
Senator Collins. Thank you for visiting.
Admiral Richardson. Yes, ma'am.
And that, you know, that effort relates directly to our
ability to counter these sorts of activities by the Chinese in
the South China Sea. And it is undeniable now that they have
moved towards militarization of some of those outposts with the
installment of radars, aircraft, you know, and surface to air
missiles.
The President on down has maintained our commitment that we
will keep those maritime lanes open. And we have, we continue
to advocate and endorse for that system of rules and norms of
behavior that have allowed us to prosper in the last 70 years
and indeed have allowed everybody in that region to prosper.
It's an ordered system but it's open architecture where
everybody can participate.
And we will, you know, I work very closely with Admiral
Harris and Admiral Swift, our commanders in the Pacific, to
make sure that they have all of the options that they need to
counter that, that our decision makers have all of the options
that they need to make sure that we can continue to sail, fly
and operate everywhere that international law allows.
As you pointed out, ma'am, an incredibly important part of
the world, about 30 percent of the world's trade goes through
the South China Sea. We absolutely need to maintain those sea
lanes open.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
OHIO-CLASS REPLACEMENT
Senator Cochran. Thank you, Senator.
I now recognize the Senator from Rhode Island, Mr. Reed.
Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Gentlemen, thank you for your service to the Nation and to
the Navy and to the Marine Corps.
And Mr. Secretary, your top priority, as I've heard you and
Admiral Richardson talk about, is the Ohio-class replacement
ballistic missile submarine. And you point out in your
testimony, Mr. Secretary, that back in the 50s when we were
beginning to deploy our strategic deterrence the 41 for freedom
slogan was used and there was relief from the top line,
basically, so that you could carry out this national objective,
not just a Navy program, but a national deterrence program.
A complement to that is what we've tried to do here in the
Congress with the creation of the National Sea-Based Deterrence
Fund which would help direct DOD resources in the construction
of the Ohio-class submarine.
Could you give us an idea of one, the need and also how you
would use these funds?
Mr. Mabus. Thank you, Senator.
The need is very clear. And we've been testifying about
that. I've had the privilege of serving with three great chiefs
of Naval operations. And all of us said that when the Ohio-
class replacement begins to be built, which it will be in 2021,
you know, that we have to have some relief on that because
otherwise other Navy programs would just be gutted including
attack submarines which and we've got to have these others.
And as you pointed out it's a national mission.
And we are deeply appreciative of the establishment of the
National Sea-Based Deterrence Fund. That fund has all the
authorities that we would need to use those funds for the Ohio-
class replacement and not only 41 for freedom added money, but
also the Ohio class, you know, when it was being built in the
late 70s through the early 90s, added money there as well.
And so we would have everything we would need to fund these
submarines. And as you know, the first one, which starts in
2021, we, Navy, has funded all the engineering, all the
research and development, everything coming up to that. And
we're funding about a billion and a half in 2021. OMB put in
another $2.3 billion in order to incrementally fund that first
boat.
But 2022, 2023 and then we will have 12 of these boats over
the next 15 years. And finding that national source of funding
and the appropriate mechanism, I think, is one of the most
important things that we and you will do together.
Senator Reed. I would.
It also strikes me as this would be the model that would be
used as the other services, principally the Air Force, replaces
their penetrating bomber and also the ground based missile
systems as we have to, basically, reinvigorate our entire
triad. And Navy is first because this submarine is ready to go
but succeeding that will be, I think, the same issue when it
comes to the Department of the Air Force, particularly.
So I think this is something that as a long term program
that we have to support. I hope we do.
One of the things that you've been able to do in the
submarine program and I give you a great deal of credit, you
and Admiral Richardson have processed this particularly is make
them probably the best value, if you will, in the shipbuilding
program. I'm somewhat parochial about this, but in terms of
ahead of schedule, below budget on each succeeding ship,
techniques that are learned and are being applied.
And just briefly can you comment, Admiral Richardson, about
how this is going to help, indeed control, we hope, the cost of
the Ohio and make it not only the best system in the world, but
the most affordable system?
OHIO-CLASS REPLACEMENT
Admiral Richardson. Yes, Sir, happy to do that.
Just as with Virginia, the first step in getting the Ohio
Replacement Program disciplined and under control is making
sure that we've got the requirements strictly defined and that
those are a fixed thing. And we are there.
We've spent a lot of time, particularly this past year in
not only making sure that we understand the requirements, but
also the capacity of the industrial base. And so, you know, I
want to bring you, the Congress, a program that has all the
elements in place for, essentially, a block buy of that entire
class. Now whether we decide to do it that way or not, is one
thing, but in terms of the technical risk, the industrial
stability and the strategic environment, all of those elements
I want to have in place.
What has enabled us to get to that level of success in the
Virginia program is one, that block buy strategy. And that
allows the industrial base to have the confidence that we are
there for the long term. They can make the capital investments
and streamline their production program so that they can wring
out every measure of efficiency and get on that learning curve
and drive costs down in every way.
That shipbuilding team is remarkable. It is a partnership
between the government and them in terms of driving that cost
down. You just have to visit the facility in Quonset to hear
them talk about how they're driving costs out of the submarine
at every step of the way.
We're going to leverage all of those lessons as we start
the Ohio Replacement Program. And we'll make sure that that
ship delivers on the projected cost and is suitable for the
foreseeable future.
Senator Reed. Thank you.
I think a very core concept point is in Rhode Island. I
recall.
Admiral Richardson. Sir, I don't think you've got that
geography right.
Senator Cochran. Senator's time has expired.
The distinguished Senator from South Carolina, Mr. Graham.
MILITARY READINESS
Senator Graham. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to put a plug in for the Portsmouth Naval shipyard.
I went there. It's awesome.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
Senator Graham. You're welcome, well-earned compliment.
Secretary Mabus, thank you for years of service. It's been
quite a ride for you. I really appreciate for what you've done
for the country.
Admiral, have you ever seen more threats to the homeland
than today, since you've been in the military?
Admiral Richardson. You'd have to go back to the Cold War
and the Soviet Union, sir, to see anything that compares today.
Senator Graham. Okay.
What about you, General?
General Neller. No. I'd say this is the most unstable
security environment I've observed.
Senator Graham. In the last 5 years has the optempo of the
Marine Corps been high?
General Neller. Yes, sir.
Senator Graham. Has the budget been cut?
General Neller. It has.
Senator Graham. Have we put people at risk by doing that?
General Neller. The four deployed forces, I'm confident,
are prepared to do their mission. But if we had to go further
into the bench those that are getting ready or that have just
come back, there would be risk.
Senator Graham. What about those who are training back here
at home?
General Neller. The ones that are getting ready to go,
Senator, I'm confident that they're able to get ready. But
there is some reduction in their ability when we're still
working on some of the gear and some of the modernization.
Senator Graham. Here's what you said about aviation
readiness. It's really my number one concern. You said this
yesterday.
``We don't have enough airplanes that we would call ready
basic aircraft. That means we're not getting enough flight
hours.''
Is that accurate?
General Neller. Yes, sir.
Senator Graham. Don't you think that's putting people at
risk?
General Neller. If those forces had to deploy they would be
at risk, yes.
Senator Graham. Even for training?
General Neller. Part of the getting ready is the training.
So we have a challenge.
Senator Graham. You're in a dangerous business even in
peacetime.
General Neller. It's always a dangerous business,
especially flying our----
Senator Graham. I hope that Committee understands that.
And I want to complement the Chairman and the Vice
Chairman. You're trying to help. But we really are putting
people's lives at risk, I think. That's just my personal
opinion.
Admiral, when it comes to the Navy, what's the optimum
number of ships that we should have given the threats we face?
Admiral Richardson. So I'll tell you that the force
structure assessment, our current best estimate of that is 308
ships. And we're going to reach that by fiscal year 2021.
Senator Graham. No, what's the optimum number?
Admiral Richardson. Senator, I'll tell you that that
analysis is from 2012, before we did--when we did that analysis
Russia had not started to----
Senator Graham. Has that number changed?
Admiral Richardson. Pardon me, sir?
Senator Graham. Has that number changed based on what China
and Russia has done?
MILITARY READINESS
Admiral Richardson. We've commissioned another assessment
of the force structures.
Senator Graham. When will we know about this?
Admiral Richardson. It will be done this year. So we're
stepping on the gas to get through this. And you know, given
that----
Senator Graham. Your best guess is that the assessment will
say we need more ships, don't you think?
Admiral Richardson. Yes, sir.
Senator Graham. Okay.
Mr. Secretary, you said we're going to go to--318 by 2021.
Is that correct?
Mr. Mabus. No, 308, Senator.
Senator Graham. I'm sorry, 308.
Mr. Mabus. Yes.
Senator Graham. By 2021?
Mr. Mabus. Yes.
Senator Graham. What if sequestration goes back in effect?
Is that still the same?
Mr. Mabus. If sequestration goes--well, we will get to 308
ships by 2021. They're still under the ships we have under
contract today, the ships that have been authorized and
appropriated.
Senator Graham. But if----
Mr. Mabus. Now what we're talking about, I'm sorry, what
we're talking about is what the fleet looks like past that.
Senator Graham. But what I'm talking about is sequestration
goes back into effect you're still going to build the ships to
308, right?
Mr. Mabus. We will still build the ships to 308 but the
fleet, past that, would decline precipitously.
Senator Graham. So what gives?
If sequestration goes back into effect somethings got to
give.
Mr. Mabus. Oh, every program gives. And even the
shipbuilding programs that the ships are under contract would
be at risk.
Senator Graham. So the ships are at risk and those who man
the ships would be at risk.
Mr. Mabus. I think sequestration puts every program at
risk. It puts everything we do at risk.
Senator Graham. Does the Marines? Do you agree with that?
That if we go back to sequestration you're going to make it
very difficult for the Marine Corps?
General Neller. I do, Senator.
Senator Graham. For the Navy?
Admiral Richardson. Senator, I'll tell you the first thing
that will go is that bench, the readiness. Those are the
accounts they get.
Senator Graham. As the threats go up our readiness and our
bench goes down.
Admiral Richardson. It's not a good trend.
Senator Graham. Okay.
If you captured somebody tomorrow in the Marine Corps who
is a high value target in the war on terror? What would you do
with them, General?
General Neller. Well right now based on their status as a
combatant, if they were a non-combatant or they----
Senator Graham. No, a high level, ISIL person, enemy
combatant. What would you do with them?
General Neller. It would be a policy decision. But we'd
have to have someplace to detain him. We'd have to have
somewhere----
Senator Graham. Do you know where that place is?
General Neller. Right now it's Guantanamo.
Senator Graham. Okay.
Can you use Guantanamo?
General Neller. Sir, I don't know the answer to that.
Senator Graham. I do. The answer is no.
Admiral, what would the Navy do?
Admiral Richardson. It would be in the same position, sir.
Senator Graham. So you really don't have a plan?
Admiral Richardson. From my perspective----
Senator Graham. Could you use Guantanamo Bay?
Admiral Richardson. Sir, you made it clear that the answer
to that is no.
Senator Graham. Okay. Thank you both.
Thank you all for your service.
Senator Cochran. Thank you, Senator.
The distinguished Senator from Montana, Mr. Daines.
Senator Daines. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
To follow up on Senator Graham's comments, by the way, on
Guantanamo. I was there Monday.
Two things.
Very, very proud of the men and women delivering that
mission in Guantanamo Bay.
And number two, there's plenty of vacancies available down
there that we should be putting these enemy combatants there
and holding them in a very secure and honorable way.
Secretary Mabus, Admiral Richardson and General Neller,
thank you. I welcome you here today and thank you for your
service.
The Navy and Marine Corps have long been the calling for
many in Montana including my dad, who was with the 58th Marine
Corps Rifle Company from 1957 to 1962. They say you don't get
to pick your daddy. I'm very proud of the one I have.
Today Montana is home to Marine and Navy personnel. In
fact, there's a Marine Reserve Unit located just about two
hours from my hometown of Bozeman. They were activated for
Operation Iraqi Freedom and most recently deployed on a
security operation in the Ukraine.
This Montana Marine Corps Reserve Unit represents the key
and versatile role you all play as we witness the growing
threats abroad. With the Marine Corps leading the special
operations fight against the Islamic State in Operation
Inherent Resolve and the Navy fueling our pivot to the Asian
Pacific theater, I'm pleased to have you both represented here
today.
In an effort to save time I'll submit many of my questions
for the record.
But I want to ask you about the threat of terrorism in two
places because I'm concerned we may not be paying enough
attention to it.
One is Southeast Asia where I spent 5 years professionally
back in the 90s as well as right here at home.
For General Neller, last year you told your Marines that
they would need to prepare for a new and different forms of
warfare. Following the attacks in Chattanooga we witnessed just
how vulnerable our service members are right here at home and
how real the new form of warfare really is. Terrorism is a
serious threat, not only for our military overseas that are in
the fight but it can strike anywhere, anytime, of course, here
in the homeland as well.
In Montana I was alarmed by the security for our Marine
Corps Reserve Unit. There was not even a fence protecting them.
We're requesting $426 million this year for military
construction. What steps is the Marine Corps taking to enhance
security for units assigned in local communities versus our
military installations?
SECURITY FOR RESERVE CENTERS AND RECRUITING FACILITIES
General Neller. Well Senator, thanks for the question.
On the reserve side we've got about 161 reserve centers, I
and Is, around the country. The majority of them have weapons.
And so when they're drilling or when there are Marines present
we have an active cadre there. There is somebody there who is
armed as long as that's in compliance with the local law.
The recruiters, we've gone through an increased training.
The recruiters in Chattanooga managed to get out. I think one
was wounded but because they were trained and they executed
their plan, they were able to safely egress the recruiting
center.
But there are things we need to do. A lot of it's force
protection, bullet proof the windows, harden the doors,
reinforce the training, do a better job of passing information
using just simple cell phone technology, kind of an Amber Alert
thing. So all that's in training but there's a money thing.
And our bill, we estimate for recruiting centers is about
$44 million. And so we're--it's going to take us some time to
get to that. But that's where we are and I think, I'm confident
on our bases and stations that we have.
They're hiring more law enforcement personnel and have
reinstituted additional training as far as if someone were to
get aboard the base that were unauthorized to be bearing a
firearm.
Senator Daines. Thank you, General.
Last week I had the opportunity to question the Army about
their operations in the Asia Pacific theater and the concerns
of terrorism in the region. General Milley listed it as number
three after the rise of China and the instability of North
Korea.
Given that the Asia Pacific is historically and currently
more your area of operation, I'd like to get your perspective.
The joint task force made up of the Army, Navy and Marine
personnel began to withdraw in 2014. But this year those same
terrorist organizations joined together and pledged allegiance
to the Islamic State. We witnessed the Islamic State strike
last month in Indonesia, there in Jakarta. Their presence in
the Asia Pacific is just as clear as it is throughout the
Middle East.
For Secretary Mabus, you're requesting $13 billion for the
Department of Navy in the Asia Pacific theater this year. How
much did terrorism in the region play a role in establishing
that amount?
Mr. Mabus. I can't break out that amount for you, Senator,
because when we request funds for sending our ships, for
sending our special forces, for sending Marines to an area we
do it as a multi-mission, multi-task thing.
Our Sailors, our Marines, our ships, those, as you pointed
out, onshore, on special task forces, have to be ready for
whatever comes over the horizon. And we certainly recognize in
places like you talked about where, and I've been to visit that
special task force, the rise of extremism and the fueling of
extremism and the transit of fighters into other regions and
Asia Pacific is not alone in that.
We are also having to deal with that in Africa. We're
having to deal with it around the world. And it's one of the
things that we are, particularly with our special forces and
our Marines on the ground, are training to and our deploying
ships have to be aware of.
Senator Daines. Alright. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Senator Cochran. Thank you, Senator.
Next Senator I recognize is the distinguished Senator from
Hawaii, Mr. Schatz.
Senator Schatz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Secretary Mabus, Admiral Richardson, General Neller, I
appreciate you being here.
General Neller, it's good to see you again.
I'd like to start by discussing our plan for Guam.
The decision to move Marines was made nearly 20 years ago,
as you know, in part to support the United States/Japan
alliance and to specifically address the concerns of the people
of Okinawa. We've had several iterations of this plan as the
Department of Defense has cut costs and right sized the number
of Marines to move to Guam. But today we are 6 to 9 months
behind constructing the Futenma Replacement Facility and at
least 2 years behind building up Guam to support Marines and
their families. And there is a shortage of amphibious lift in
the theater, as you know.
With all of these challenges, Admiral Harris recently
testified that 2025 is probably a more realistic timeframe for
moving Marines to Guam. And so, I think it's appropriate that
you're thinking about our plan evolve as the security,
political and fiscal environment continue to evolve.
And so my question for you is how much flexibility do you
have? How nimble are you?
I'm concerned that we're locked into a plan that may not
make any sense anymore logistically.
I understand ironclad bilateral relationship with Japan and
the commitment that our country made. And I also understand the
fiscal commitment that the Japanese Government has made. But
I'm wondering how much flexibility we have to respond to
circumstances?
FUTENMA REPLACEMENT FACILITY
General Neller. Well Senator, as you stated the whole move
and the realignment of forces and the approved implantation
plan was tied to the Futenma Replacement Facility and that's
delayed, partly due to demonstrators and lack of support by the
Governor of Okinawa. So, but now that's been dealing to the
movement to Guam.
So there's still some environmental issues as far as
training on Tinian but we're still committed to move to Guam.
We're taking a look and we believe we have some flexibility as
to how those forces go there. Are they PCS or do they resend
unit rotation?
We do have concerns about our ability to train once we get
there. And more importantly and this goes for anywhere that we
go in the Pacific because of the distances, we have concerns
about the strategic mobility and our ability to move and to go
to other areas for training.
So in short, we continue to look at this and adjust on the
margins. But there's a political decision that says the number
of Marines are going to be reduced on the Island of Okinawa.
And so we're still committed to support that and do our part to
make that happen.
And as we align the force and we look at Australia, the
Philippines recently approved a little more flexible
opportunities for us to train there and do things. So we're
continuing to look at it but we are behind and I would concur
with Admiral Harris' assessment that this thing just continues
to be pushed to the right.
Senator Schatz. Can you flush out the problem of strategic
lift in the region specifically, the Guam aspect of this?
General Neller. Right now there's four amphibious ships
that are home ported in Sasebo as part of our deployed Naval
force. They support primarily the 31st MEU which is underway
right now and headed to Korea for an exercise along with the
13th MEU off the West Coast.
So that's primary there. That's their primary mission. So
as we move the force around whether it be Guam, Australia, the
Philippines, we've got to be able to move them.
So as we realign the fleet and the more the fleet goes to
the Pacific, that will be mitigated to some degree because
there should be more amphibious ships out there.
There are other options of, you know, fleet packaging
whether we use different ships, more commercial type hulls,
like MPF ships that are Afloat Forward Staging Bases or high
speed vessels, or even strategic airlift. We have got to be
able to move off these islands. Guam is, there are some things
you can do on Guam but you still have to be able to get to
Tinian. And even though it's a fairly short distance so you
either have to go by ship or by plane.
So that's always been the challenge in the Pacific is your
strategic mobility and as we move the force around it makes it
a little more challenging.
Senator Schatz. Thank you.
And I'll submit a couple of questions for the record about
the need for additional submarine support and also our need to
reconsider what we're doing with our under sea tactical
training ranges, especially at the Pacific missile range
facility area, Barking Sands on the Island of Kuwai.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Cochran. Thank you, Senator.
The distinguished Senator from Missouri, Senator Blunt.
Senator Blunt. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman.
Admiral Richardson, I want to talk a little bit about
aircrafts. I know that your predecessor had real concerns about
how we were managing our tactical aviation shortfall. I think
Secretary Carter has also expressed some concerns, Secretary
Mabus, to you about that topic. And I'm sure others as well but
I did notice that one.
And I saw--I'm grateful that the Navy has added two Super
Hornets in fiscal year 2017 and 2014 and 2018. So I mean that
that would happen in 2018. It's also added money to try to
extend the lifetime of that fleet too, from 6,000 hours to
9,000 hours.
One, your sense of whether extending the life is what is
the best thing to do here.
And another, how many Super Hornets do you think the Navy
needs to support the fleet?
And how many do you have?
Admiral Richardson. Senator, I'll get back to you with the
exact numbers, let you know the total buy for aircraft.
[The information follows:]
The funded F/A-18E/F procurement objective is 568 aircraft; 562 of
which have been delivered. However, the Navy's Super Hornet fleet does
not have enough service life remaining to meet operational requirements
into the 2030s as planned. Therefore, the F/A-18E/F service life
extension program is a vital mitigation step, and frankly a good
business decision, to reduce risk in the Navy's Strike Fighter
Inventory Management strategy.
To alleviate overutilization challenges with the existing Super
Hornet fleet and decrease risk in the F/A-18E/F service life extension
plan, the Navy requires an additional two to three operational
squadrons of F/A-18E/F aircraft. The aircraft authorized and
appropriated in fiscal year 2016 combined with those included in
President's Budget 2017 begin to narrow the gap between inventory
capacity and demand. The Navy continues to evaluate all available
options to meet the total requirement necessary to achieve a
sustainable service life extension program and support the current
force structure.
STRIKE FIGHTER INVENTORY
Admiral Richardson. Yet right now we're in the position
where I'll just address the Strike Fighter inventory problem, a
writ large, if you will. And it's really, kind of, a three
vector approach that we are using to reconstitute our Strike
Fighter inventory and increase the number of ready basic
aircraft.
One is that we were recovering from the depot backlog of
the Legacy Hornets. And so, you know, that backlog came about
for a number of reasons.
One, we discovered some maintenance areas on the aircraft
that we didn't expect. And so we had a bigger job on our hands.
And then the impact of sequestration, hiring freezes, those
sorts of things, also slowed that down.
But we are, right now, hiring artisans to improve the
throughput of our depots.
We've also brought on some private sector help in Boeing
and L3 to help us increase the throughput. And the 2017 budget
funds that aviation depot at pretty much the maximum capacity
that they can put things through.
So part of our program is to get those aircraft through
their depot period.
Because those aircraft are backed up, the Legacy Hornets,
we've been flying the Super Hornet more to maintain the
readiness of our pilots. And so those aircraft are getting the
end of life faster. And so, as you pointed out, we've got a
request in both 2017 and 2018 to buy some Super Hornets to make
up for those losses and that increased use of that aircraft.
The buy in 2017, we expect, could be supplemented by some
foreign sales as well. And if not, you know, just below the cut
line on our unfunded list would be a buy to keep that----
Senator Blunt. That line open.
Admiral Richardson. That line open, yes, sir.
Senator Blunt. Let me ask another question here.
Do you still believe, as your predecessor did, that the
Growler, which is that same airplane differently equipped, is
likely to be a long term part of any flying package because of
its disruptive capabilities?
Admiral Richardson. Absolutely. It's part of getting our
aircraft into the fifth generation of warfare.
Senator Blunt. I have one final question. I might have a
couple more for the record. But I have one final question for
both General Neller and the Admiral, Admiral Richardson.
So Senator Gillibrand and I introduced some legislation
last year called the Military Families Stability Act which
would just provide more flexibility for families who need to
move early or stay a little bit later for work or educational
reasons.
MILITARY FAMILIES STABILITY ACT
I know that both of you, as many other people will argue
forever, that the strength of the military is the families of
the military. And as more families have, more spouses have,
professional obligations what happens to them also matters, I
think, as to whether or not people stay in the military,
whether people could, whether you could move your kids a month
earlier or keep them in a school a month later while the
serviceperson, first of all, would look at any available single
Sailor ability on the new post.
And I just wonder if either of you have either a personal
sense of when this might have made a big difference in your
career or how you feel about looking at families and the
professional spouse different and a working spouse, different
than perhaps we were, we did, in the past.
General.
General Neller. Senator, I think we all recognize that the
situation we have with our families is different than what it
was 10 or 15 years ago. And that the spouse may have a career.
And so we try our very, very best to work with every service
member, every Marine, to ensure that we take that into account.
There are some difficulties with that, particularly if
they're living on base housing. Living out in town they have a
lot more flexibility.
And we also are looking at that, do we really need to move
people to the degree and to the rate that we move them because
it costs us money. That said, there's an advantage to having
Marines go and see different parts of the Marine Corps as
opposed to staying in one single, geographical area.
So there's a balance there. But I can tell you we are very
conscious of working with every Marine and their families and
try to do what's right by them because we want them to stay.
And so we continue to work on that.
And as part of my discussion with our staff is that, you
know, we don't need to move people just to move people. And if
there's a way to keep people in a certain location longer
that's going to be more cost effective and beneficial to the
family than we certainly need to take a look at that.
Senator Blunt. Admiral.
Admiral Richardson. Sir, we've moved 21 times in our 33-
year career, you know, with five kids and my wife is piling up
the score for sainthood.
The family dynamic has changed. There's just a lot more
working spouses than there were when we first got into this.
That's just the facts of the matter.
I agree with General Neller's approach. We are taking,
really, a comprehensive approach to this dynamic because, well,
a move of any type is disruptive to a family. And if we can
minimize the amount of moves and let people pursue their
careers with fewer moves then that would be something that we'd
be looking at very hard.
I very much appreciate your interest in making sure that we
make that transition as smooth as possible and looking forward
to working with you to get into the details of that and
particularly addressing this new dynamic of working spouses.
Senator Blunt. Alright.
Thank you, Chairman.
Senator Cochran. Thank you very much, Senator.
Let me ask you one question about shipbuilding, and that
doesn't come as any surprise to know that is an interest of
ours in Mississippi. We have some shipbuilders in the Gulf
Coast area that are very important. And I know the Commandant
has made comments about the possibilities of accelerating some
contracts.
To what extent do you think we can do that within the
constraints of the budget or whether that's a good strategy or
not?
Mr. Secretary, I don't suppose you could?
Mr. Mabus. Senator, thanks to this Committee, thanks to
Congress, we got the 12th LPD, LPD 28, which will be a bridge
between the LPD line and the replacement for the LSD, the LRX.
Because we've made the decision to build it on the same
hull form we think we can build these faster, cheaper and get
them to the Marines faster because they need this additional
amphibious shipping.
And so the quality of work that's coming out of Pascagoula
and your neighbor in Mobile, the types of ships are the types
that we desperately need. And included in this budget as well
is a request for funding for the next big deck Amfil, LHA-8,
which would also--our Marines and Navy is in high demand for
amphibious ready group exercises and because it can take
aircraft up through and including the F35.
Admiral Richardson. Sir, if I could just add on to the
Secretary's points.
You know, that is a magnificent capability down there at
Ingalls. I had a chance to visit there. Those are also workers
that are hungry to drive every bit of cost out of the program
and are just magnificent. And the degree to which they've
recovered from Katrina is astounding and in a tale of heroism
and perseverance.
The only thing that I would say is that we've learned,
sometimes the hard way, that it's absolutely critical to get
the design of the ship complete before we start building. If we
don't get that right then it's just going to impact the cost
and schedule in ways that we don't want to see. And so we need
to just make sure that as we think about accelerating these
programs, we accelerate the design and that part of it so that
we're ready to build with a complete design.
Senator Cochran. Thank you.
Senator Blunt. Mr. Chairman.
Senator Cochran. The Senator from Missouri.
Senator Blunt. With the time I have another question or two
I'd like to follow up on on the issue of tactical aviation with
Secretary Mabus.
I know that, I think, that Secretary Carter expressed in
December of 2015 his concern on this topic. I would hope that
if the foreign military sales don't develop the way we think
they're going to that we can continue to watch that and do
whatever is necessary to keep that line open, particularly
since you anticipate 14 planes next year and if I understood
Admiral Richardson right, we'll see that near the top of the
list of unfunded priorities for this year.
And any other thoughts you might have about the Growler and
how it becomes part of any flying package.
Mr. Mabus. Senator, the continuation of that line is one of
the critical things for our tactical aviation inventory. The
profile, as you noted, in the budget is two for fiscal year
2017 and 2014 for fiscal year 2018. As the CNO said that that
profile presupposes some foreign sales to keep the line viable
and going in 2017. If those foreign sales don't materialize
then, I think, it would be imperative that we move some Super
Hornets into, more Super Hornets into that.
And as CNO said, right at the top of our unfunded
priorities list is an additional 14, not the 14 from the 2018
budget, but an additional 14 to 17 which would be a total of 16
going through there.
Finally, on the Growler, when we finish the current buy we
will have 160 Growlers in 15 squadrons. That is sufficient to
do the Navy's part of the electronic warfare.
But what we're in the process right now of doing is
studying what the needs are of the joint force because the Navy
is the only business in town now in electronic attack. And so
that study will be done in the next few months in terms of are
the 160 Growlers that we have procured enough to do all the
electronic missions across the joint force?
Senator Blunt. So just to verify that my math is right. If
you had what you've asked for in 2017 and 2018 on the plane
we're talking about and had the top, one of the top requests on
the unfunded budget, you'd be looking at 30 planes over the
next 2 years?
Mr. Mabus. That's correct.
Senator Blunt. Thank you, Chairman.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Cochran. Thank you.
Thank you, Senator Blunt.
Thank you all for your cooperation with our Committee.
We've had an excellent hearing. I appreciate very much the
courtesies and hard work that goes into this review.
Until then, unless the Senator from Missouri has some
comments.
Senator Blunt. Thank you.
[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. Ray Mabus
Question Submitted by Senator Susan M. Collins
women in combat
Question. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter recently announced that
women will have the opportunity, if qualified, to compete for combat
missions. Secretary Mabus, as I understand it, the Navy is well on its
way to implementing this policy--women have already been driving ships
and flying combat aircraft for more than 20 years. What is the timeline
for fully integrating women into Department of the Navy combat units,
particularly in the Marine Corps?
Answer. On March 9, 2016, Secretary Carter approved the final
Implementation Plans for the Full Integration of Women in the Military
including the Department of the Navy. Secretary Carter's approval
enables the execution of both Service plans for integrating women into
previously closed positions, occupations, specialties, and career
fields beginning by April 1, 2016. The Marine Corps has already
notified the 231 women who have successfully completed ground combat
arms MOS training at formal learning centers they can switch to these
previously closed jobs immediately if they choose to do so, and both
the Navy and Marine Corps are beginning the process of recruiting women
into all recently opened career fields. Full integration into combat
units will occur over a period time based on the results of the just-
beginning recruiting efforts and follow on MOS training.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Steve Daines
asia
Question. Secretary Mabus, you mentioned visiting the Joint Special
Operations Task Force--Philippines, in the Southern Archipelago region
of the Philippines. Do you see our commitment to this mission and to
the Filipino Army as a way to increase our presence in the region
during the threat of a rising China?
Answer. Our train-and-assist support to the Armed Forces of the
Philippines (AFP) was aimed at fighting terrorism, sharing information,
and conducting joint civil military operations. While Joint Special
Operations Task Force--Philippines (JSOTF-P) has been disestablished
since my visit, our partnership with the Filipino security forces has
been successful in drastically reducing the capabilities of domestic
and transnational terrorist groups in the Philippines. We continue to
maintain a Forward Liaison Element (FLE) as our partnership in this
area evolves.
Question. Secretary Mabus, what other ways can the US partner with
the Philippines to show our commitment as China continues to elevate
tensions in the region?
Answer. The Department of the Navy is supportive of the Republic of
the Philippines' efforts to improve its maritime domain awareness (MDA)
and increase its capability of exercising sovereignty in the face of
extreme maritime claims. To these ends, the Department of the Navy
supports:
--Further Excess Defense Article (EDA) transfers of ex-U.S. Coast
Guard high-endurance cutters (WHEC) to the Philippines to
bolster their maritime security capabilities.
--Continued expansion and deepening of our exercise and training
program with the Philippine Navy (PN) and Philippine Coast
Guard (PCG), planned to exceed 150 activities each year,
including: Maritime Patrol Aircraft (MPA) deployments each
month, EOD/special forces training, and at-sea exercises (e.g.,
BALIKITAN) with the PN and PCG focused on improving their
operational proficiency.
--Continuing to expand the Asia-Pacific Intelligence Information
Network (APIIN), a secure information exchange network that
facilitates information sharing on the South China Sea (SCS)
and other issues, to afloat PN vessels in addition to the 21
existing shore stations.
--Enhancing PN's and PCG's Command, Control, Communications,
Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance
(C4ISR) program with technical assistance and Foreign Military
Sales (FMS) support to enhance interoperability, improve
operational security (OPSEC), and bring Armed Forces of the
Philippines (AFP) command-and-control (C2) into the 21st
century.
--Continued efforts to encourage greater information sharing and the
establishment of a regional MDA network that could provide a
common operating picture (COP) and real-time dissemination of
data.
Question. Secretary Mabus, Naval Special Warfare Team One rotates
with Special Forces Group One in leading the Joint Special Operations
Task Force Philippines. However, Marine Special Operations Command has
been involved in the deployment cycle. Now that MARSOC is fully
operational and leading joint operations, like those against ISIL, What
steps can be done, should the mission footprint increase, to give the
Marine Corps an equal leadership role in this mission?
Answer. Marine Corps Special Operations Command (MARSOC) has led
multiple Special Operations Task Force (SOTF) deployments in support of
combat operations in Afghanistan, as well as a current Combined Joint
Special Operations Task Force (CJSOTF) in support of operations within
Central Command's area of operations. Due to the improving situation in
the Philippines, Joint Special Operations Task Force-Philippines was
deactivated in February 2015 and transitioned to a smaller foreign
liaison element. Since then, MARSOC has regularly deployed 14-man teams
to the region on a rotational basis, to continue to assist and advise
the Armed Forces of the Philippines.
The DON, in partnership with USSOCOM, continues to grow, develop,
and integrate Marine Corps' leaders, officers and enlisted, to fill
vital positions across the special operations enterprise. These include
key leadership billets at Special Operations Command, Pacific; Special
Operations Command, Africa Command; and one to be assigned at Special
Operations Command, Central Command in the summer of 2016.
Ultimately, MARSOC is a force provider to the Theater Special
Operations Commands, who determine how to best organize and employ the
task forces allocated to them. Should their footprint increase in the
Philippines, MARSOC will serve an integral role.
Question. Secretary Mabus, On March 9th the US Navy conducted
another freedom of navigation patrol through the South China Sea,
something incredibly important to the security in the region. However,
this time Chinese ships trailed the US ships and it is clear tensions
are escalating. What line of communications are open between US and
Chinese commanders during these operations?
Answer. Our primary means to communicate at sea is bridge-to-bridge
radio, or International Air Distress/Military Air Distress radio for
aircraft.
People's Liberation Army (PLA) Navy ships routinely shadow and, and
at times, actively try to interfere with U.S. naval ships and aircraft
conducting legal military operations IAW international law.
On March 9th, the oceanographic survey ship USNS HENSON (T-AGS 63)
was conducting routine operations in the SCS. This was not a Freedom of
Navigation mission. In this instance, USNS HENSON was operating in
international waters in the vicinity of the Paracel Islands when a PLA
Navy vessel approached too close and created a potentially unsafe
maneuvering situation. In this instance, a potentially dangerous
situation was avoided because of the recent positive improvement in
communications at sea and in the air between our units and theirs.
Through coordination by the various staffs of OSD, the Joint Staff,
U.S. Pacific Command, U.S. Pacific Fleet, and OPNAV, we developed the
multilateral Code for Unintended Encounters at Sea (CUES), the U.S.-
People's Republic of China (PRC) agreement on the Rules of Behavior for
Safety of Air and Maritime Encounters, a Crisis Communications Annex,
the bi-lateral Military Maritime Consultative Agreement (MMCA) talks,
and quarterly Defense Telephone Link (DTL) discussions with PLA Navy
leadership. DOD is positioned to manage the friction in the
relationship from the tactical level.
Question. Secretary Mabus, has the US used, or considered the use
of, unmanned aerial surveillance of the South China Sea?
Answer. Yes, the Navy's MQ-8B Fire Scout is supporting a Pacific
Fleet deployment with a combined detachment which includes an unmanned
MQ-8B Fire Scout and a manned MH-60 helicopter on the USS FORT WORTH
(LCS 3). The MQ-8B Fire Scout System delivers organic sea-based
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) support for the
Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) and/or any suitably equipped air-capable
ship. The Navy plans to deploy a MQ-8B with an additional radar
capability onboard the USS CORONADO (LCS 4) to the Pacific Fleet in
July 2016. Furthermore, the Navy intends to deploy the MQ-4C Triton
Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) to the Pacific Fleet in 2018. The MQ-4C
Triton will provide persistent broad area maritime ISR.
weapon modernization
Question. Secretary Mabus, does it concern you that your Marines
and Sailors on the battlefield are still using a 5.56 caliber, gas
operated, and magazine fed weapon system developed for the Vietnam War,
while you are simultaneously outfitting ships with laser weapon
systems?
Answer. The Department of the Navy continually works to ensure that
every Marine and Sailor is provided with the best equipment that our
budget and emerging technology will allow. The 5.56mm weapons carried
by Marines and Sailors today are not the same as those carried during
the Vietnam War. Although the original versions of many of our small
arms systems entered our inventory up to 30 years ago, current versions
are significantly modified and/or newly produced to provide enhanced
target detection, identification, accuracy, dependability, and
lethality.
The USMC Small Arms Modernization Strategy focuses on updating
current weapons in the short-term and developing next generation
weapons that will enter the fleet in the mid to late 2020s. In close
coordination with the Army, this strategy is a cost-conscious,
incremental approach to further improve accuracy, lethality,
ergonomics, and weight reduction.
Question. Secretary Mabus, what steps are you taking to identify
battlefield deficiencies and ensure funding for weapons development is
equally spread between personal combat weapons and large scale weapon
projects like the F-35?
Answer. Warfighting deficiencies, or gaps, are identified through a
number of existing processes within the Department. These include the
gap analysis phase of the Department of Defense (DOD) requirements
generation process and warfighter feedback from the operating forces.
As to funding balance, the Navy and Marine Corps participate in the
annual Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) process.
This is the process by which DOD allocates resources, while staying
within the fiscal budget and complying with the Secretary of Defense's
policies, strategy, and goals. Funding for all DON capabilities
reflects the evaluated optimal balance between requirements and
resources.
special purpose marine air ground task force
Question. Secretary Mabus, would you rather deploy a MEU or a
SPMAGTF in the CENTCOM AOR?
Answer. Afloat naval power retains the advantage of maneuver, and
the Navy/Marine Corps team of an ARG/MEU provides operational
flexibility and options to project force ashore that become more
limited when operating from a fixed ashore location.
In an environment where amphibious lift is limited, the Marine
Corps team is still able to build a task organized force, focused on
capabilities required by a geographic Combatant Commander, and deploy
credible combat capability. The underlying mission and risk analysis
shape the composition of the SPMAGTF which can be tailored to the
anticipated set of likely missions. SPMAGTF-CRs are not a one-for-one
replacement of the ARG/MEU. They are not as capable as an ARG/MEU Team
but provide credible forces to respond to specific crises. SPMAGTF-CRs
rely on host nation approvals for access, basing, overflight, launch,
post-mission recovery, and sustainment training, making them less
flexible than ARG/MEUs.
Both options provide a Marine Corps combat capability, organized
and trained for success, and deployed forward to support a Combatant
Commander.
______
Questions Submitted to Admiral John M. Richardson
Question Submitted by Senator Susan M. Collins
european reassurance initiative
Question. Admiral Richardson, you have expressed concern about
Russian challenges to U.S. and allied nations' partner activities in
the Eastern Mediterranean Sea and the Black Sea.
At $3.4 billion, the overall Department of Defense fiscal year 2017
budget request for the European Reassurance Initiative is four times
the amount requested last year, but the Navy's portion of this increase
is a relatively meager $52 million increase for additional exercises
and training.
Yet, Russian submarine and surface ship activity in the North
Atlantic and the Black Sea during the Cold War represented a primary
means by which Russia sought to hold U.S. and NATO strategic interests
at risk.
Have you reviewed the Navy's posture in that region to make sure
that we do not have any unintended shortfalls in understanding and
responding to Russia's maritime activities? I know the Committee would
be very interested in knowing if there were ways we could assist in
this regard.
Answer. The global posture and presence of U.S. forces is
constantly under review by key stakeholders including the Combatant
Commanders, Service Chiefs, the Joint Staff and the Secretary of
Defense. Russian maritime activities and capabilities show no signs of
decreasing for the foreseeable future.
The Department of Navy's fiscal year 2017 European Reassurance
Initiative (ERI) request is significantly greater than the fiscal year
2016 request. Specifically, the fiscal year 2017 ERI includes a request
for $2.5 million to improve all-source analysis and situational
awareness across U.S. and allied Theater Anti-Submarine Warfare (TASW)
systems, maintenance and training. In addition, $21.4 million was
requested to support two military construction projects to modify an
existing aircraft hangar facility and construct an aircraft rinse rack
in Keflavik, Iceland. These projects will accommodate P-8A maritime
patrol and reconnaissance aircraft on short duration/expeditionary
detachments.
The fiscal year 2017 request also includes support for exercise and
training activities by forward deployed ships alongside allies and
partners in the Mediterranean, Black and Baltic Seas. These exercises
provide not only U.S. Navy presence, but also enhance allies and
partners inherent capabilities and capacities. Beyond additional
exercise activities, requested fiscal year 2017 ERI funds would sustain
and upgrade U.S. and host nation information sharing/exchange, command
and control capabilities and overall collaboration across operations.
Navy will continue to review our needs and identify additional
requirements in theater as they arise in future budget cycles.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Brian Schatz
Question. Our undersea- and anti-submarine warfare capabilities
gives us an advantage over our adversaries.
I am concerned, however, about the state of the Navy's tactical
test ranges that support the undersea warfare mission. Our competitors
are closing the gap with us when it comes to undersea warfare and the
age of our test ranges undermines our ability to stay ahead of them.
In particular, the Barking Sands Tactical Underwater Range off of
Kauai is beyond its service life and beyond repair, and we need
continuous focus and investment in this range to preserve our
asymmetric capabilities.
What is the Navy's plan to replace and modernize this test range so
that we can sustain our edge in undersea warfare?
Answer. The Navy has developed a plan to modernize the underwater
instrumentation and shore-based equipment controls and displays of the
Barking Sands Tactical Underwater Range, using lessons learned from the
in-progress installation of the Undersea Warfare Training Range (USWTR)
off the coast of Jacksonville, FL. The plan also includes use of more
heavily armored seabed cables, routed through bore holes to prevent
abrasion in the surf zone. However, due to fiscal constraints, this
requirement is not funded in PB17 but will continue to be evaluated in
future budget cycles.
Question. Admiral Harris recently testified that he does not have
the attack submarines to meet his requirements in the Pacific.
I know you have to balance his requirements against those of the
other Combatant Commanders.
However, we face unique threats from multiple near-peer competitors
in the Pacific, so I am particularly concerned that we may not be
maintaining our undersea edge, which is our advantage over adversaries
in this part of the world.
What is the Navy doing to close this gap and meet Admiral Harris'
requirements?
Are there other assets the Navy could use to close this gap and
reduce our risk in the Pacific?
Answer. Navy sources both rotational and emergent Combatant
Commander (CCDR) force requirements for attack submarines (SSN) as
directed by the Secretary of Defense (SecDef).
CCDR demand for SSNs remains high and Navy is challenged with
existing force structure to meet all SSN requirements. Navy will source
approximately 55 percent of all CCDR demand for SSNs in fiscal year
2016.
The Optimized Fleet Response Plan (OFRP) is Navy's plan to recover
readiness and improve availability across the SSN force. Stable
funding, continued improvement in executing submarine depot
maintenance, and sourcing presence at sustainable levels are critical
to readiness recovery.
Navy is committed to sending our most technologically advanced
ships and aircraft to the Asia-Pacific region. This includes our most
capable DDGs, P-8A maritime patrol aircraft, and Virginia-class
submarines. Other assets, such as SURTASS, are also prioritized to the
Pacific as part of Navy's Theater Anti-Submarine Warfare strategy.
Incremental improvements, modernizations, and new technologies will
help maintain our undersea edge.
We continuously evaluate, in close coordination with Combatant
Commanders and the Joint Staff, the prioritization of our global force
laydown.
______
Questions Submitted to General Robert B. Neller
Questions Submitted by Senator Thad Cochran
amphibious-class warships
Question. Amphibious combat ships continue to be in very high
demand among our commanders. Could you describe to us the importance of
amphibious ships in executing the national defense strategy and share
your thoughts on how their production is going and how we could make it
even more efficient?
Answer. Amphibious warships are essential for our national defense.
In fact, to meet Combatant Commanders' demand for these ships would
actually require a fleet in excess of 50 ships. These ships provide the
nation with crisis and contingency response capabilities, the ability
to conduct forcible entry from the sea, humanitarian assistance, and
disaster relief. These warships also facilitate Theater Security
Cooperation exercises to build partner capacity and interoperability,
in addition to ensuring that Marines are always forward postured for
whatever other mission the nation might require.
Our stated requirement of 38 ships is designed to meet the Marine
Corps requirement to embark the assault echelon of two Marine
Expeditionary Brigades. We agreed to a fiscally informed, risk-assumed
fleet of 34 ships, of which 30 are currently in our inventory.
According to the Navy's current Long Range Shipbuilding Schedule, the
inventory will reach 34 in fiscal year 2022.
In conjunction with our partners in the Navy, we are always looking
for ways to make the procurement of amphibious ships more efficient. To
that end, we would like to thank the Congress for adding a 12th LPD.
The wisdom of this decision, coupled with the decision to build the
LX(R) on the LPD 17 hull form, accomplished a number of objectives: it
accelerated the production of the LX(R), reduced the cost, and
minimized the amount of design and engineering required to construct
the ship.
The procurement of amphibious warships could be made still more
efficient through the use of `block buy' acquisitions which would
provide certainty to the Services and to the industrial base. This
technique allows the industrial base to keep manufacturing lines open,
which increases speed to fleet by decreasing time between ship
construction projects, and eliminates the costs associated with
shutting down a manufacturing line and restarting it at a later date--
expenses which ultimately drive up the overall cost of a ship. Block
buys would also allow us to lock in cost savings for multiple ships at
a time. Finally, certainty on the funding source for the Ohio
Replacement Program would take pressure off of the entire Navy
shipbuilding account and allow for predictability and efficiency to be
achieved across the fleet.
asia
Question. General Neller, what role can the 31st Marine
Expeditionary Unit that patrols the Pacific play in counterterrorism
operations in Southeast Asia?
Answer. The Commander of Marine Forces, Pacific utilizes 31st MEU
for a wide range of missions throughout the USPACOM area of operations.
Leveraging our relationship with USSOCOM and Special Operations
Command, Pacific, the 31st MEU can bring a wide range of capabilities
to bear in support of SOCOM's CT efforts.
Additionally, COMMARFORPAC has been designated as the USPACOM
Senior Advisor to the Armed Forces of the Philippines. In support of
this mission, the 31st MEU routinely supports a variety of tasks in
support of Armed Forces of the Philippines capability and capacity
development programs.
Calendar year 2016 will see Marine Corps forces participate in 24
PHL-US MUTUAL DEFENSE BOARD ACTIVITIES that range from Subject Matter
Expert Engagements on topics such as Aviation, Amphibious, Logistical,
and Urban Operations, and Academics on the Military Decision Making
Process and Information Operations, to the introduction of Model and
Simulation into the training environment and large-scale events.
Finally, in 2015 and 2016 to date, the MEU and over 5,000 Marines
conducted five major training exercises that included BALIKATAN,
PHIBLEX, FREEDOM BANNER, and assault support exercises. Each year, the
MEU conducts training in amphibious operations, large scale ground live
fire, bilateral close air support, air assault, tactical air control,
and staff exercises.
weapon modernization
Question. General Neller, the Marine Corps announced it would no
longer be using iron sights for training and is upgrading to the use of
rifle combat optics for qualification ranges. Is there a cost
associated with adding RCO's for all training ranges?
Answer. No, there is no cost associated with this decision in the
current budget request. The decision to upgrade to the use of rifle
combat optics for qualification ranges was made in 2011, with the
decision to train and qualify with optics at our entry level training
centers following in 2012. The latter decision did require the
procurement of additional optics, but that purchase was completed the
same year and the optics fielded.
Question. General Neller, you have been firm on Marines having
`brilliance in the basics.' For example, you called out Marines for
relying on electronics and not knowing the basics of map and compass
techniques. Why would you want to only train Marines on the RCO,
something that could fail just like electronics, and take away from the
training on iron sites?
Answer. The RCO is a non-powered day scope that has no electronic
components and seldom fails. As the primary sighting system for our
rifles and carbines, it is essential that we train to use this
magnified optic to its full potential. We also field all of our
individual weapons with a backup iron sight and train Marines in its
use as a ``just in case'' measure.
Question. General Neller, you directed the Marine Corps to issue M4
rifles to those units still using the M16 last year. I applaud this,
given that the M16 is a rifle we have continued to upgrade since the
Vietnam War. What is the next step for small arms weapons
modernization?
Answer. The Marine Corps Small Arms Modernization Strategy (2015)
concentrates on updating current weapons in the short term and on
developing next generation weapons that will enter service in the mid
to late 2020s. In close coordination with the Army, this strategy is a
cost-conscious, incremental approach to improve accuracy, lethality,
ergonomics, and weight reduction. Our near-term strategy is to
implement small-scale improvements as technology and funding allow,
sustaining our small arms relevant to the current threat. Examples
include redistribution of M4 carbines to replace remaining M16A4s in
infantry battalions, a Quick Change Barrel for the M2A1 heavy machine
gun, and pursuit of lightweight light/medium machine gun tripods for
M240B and M249 machine guns. Our long term strategy (mid- to late-
2020's) seeks to achieve larger gains in capability through pursuit of
next generation weapons with the Army and other services. Envisioned
are an individual carbine, an automatic rifle, and a designated
marksman weapon for the squad that integrates advanced capabilities
such as optics, fire control, power, and enablers into a single weapon
system, as opposed to separate add-ons. This will optimize ammunition
configuration, manage recoil, reduce weight and size, suppress audible
and visible signature, exchange data (tagging, identification of friend
or foe, fire direction, fire control), and count shots.
Question. General Neller, Special Operations Command is able to use
carbon fiber wrapped barrels that can make the 82A1 50 caliber rifle
incredibly lighter. What steps has the Marine Corps taken to adopt this
new weapon technology for its standard infantry?
Answer. The Marine Corps is currently conducting market research on
carbon fiber wrapped barrels manufactured by PROOF Research. The barrel
manufacturer, based in Montana, has designed a prototype barrel that
could reduce the weight of our M40A6 sniper rifle by over three pounds.
A final configuration has not been determined as the barrels are still
under testing. The Marine Corps will continue to monitor and coordinate
with the US Army and USSOCOM for long term weapon improvement
initiatives to reduce weight while maintaining lethality.
deployment rotations
Question. General Neller, a 2015 GAO Report recommended that DOD
``determine whether opportunities exist to balance deployments across
the joint force'' in a study on the overuse of Special Operations
Forces. Has the Marine Corps seen an issue with the current deployment
cycle impacting its special operators?
Answer. Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command is our
Service Component to USSOCOM. Although MARSOC comprises less than 6
percent of USSOCOM manpower, Marine Special Operations Forces perform 9
percent of USSOCOM missions. MARSOC deploys regionally aligned Marine
Special Operations Companies (MSOC) to three Theater Special Operations
Commands--USAFRICOM, USCENTCOM, and USPACOM--and task organizes these
units, based on their assigned mission, with both Special Operators and
Marines with key enabling specialties such as intelligence analyst,
Joint Tactical Air Controller (JTAC), signals intelligence, and
mechanics.
MSOCs are regionally aligned to the TSOCs supporting USAFRICOM,
USCENTCOM, and USPACOM requirements and maintain a 1:3 deployment-to-
dwell ratio, meaning one MSOC is always deployed with three MSOCs in a
recovery and individual training period or pre-deployment training
which includes Marine Special Operations Team deployments. This 1:3
deployment-to-dwell ratio allows MARSOC to meet TSOC requirements on an
enduring cycle without sacrificing personnel, equipment or unit
readiness.
MARSOC can also deploy Special Operations Task Force Headquarters
(commanded by a lieutenant colonel) and Combined Joint Special
Operations Task Force Headquarters (commanded by a colonel). When
MARSOC deploys the Task Force Headquarters, the Marine Corps frequently
augments MARSOC with Marines from the operating forces and the reserve
component.
Individual personnel tempo can be a challenge with certain enabling
Military Occupational Specialties. Enlisted Marine Special Operators
maintain an acceptable deployed to dwell ratio which allows them to
balance deployments with recovery and time to attend MOS enhancing
schools to gain additional SOF skills. JTACs and Signals Intelligence
Marines are experiencing a more challenging deployment to dwell ratio.
Although our Service special operations component is able to
effectively balance unit and personnel readiness with operational
requirements, there continues to be a demand signal well above our
ability to meet TSOC requirements. However, by providing MSOCs on a 1:3
deployment-to-dwell ratio, we ensure Marine Special Operations Forces
are not overused.
Question. General Neller, has the Marine Corps considered leaning
on its Force Recon companies to handle the impact of the high
deployment cycle that MARSOC has been dealing with? If not, why not?
Answer. We are always looking at ways to optimize how we tailor our
deploying forces to meet Combatant Commander requirements. Although
assigned to SOCOM, MARSOC routinely deploys with other force elements
of the Marine Corps especially in critical high demand/low density
skills that enable our Marine Special Operations Companies and Marine
Special Operations Teams to deliver exceptional capability in support
of Commander, SOCOM and Geographic Combatant Commander requirements.
Currently, our Force Reconnaissance companies are providing
elements in support of our Marine Expeditionary Units. The capabilities
contained within the Force Reconnaissance companies are providing the
enhanced skills necessary to our Marine Expeditionary Units to meet
emerging Geographic Combatant Commander requirements.
To meet the Marine Expeditionary Unit requirements, our Force
Reconnaissance companies are maintaining a similar deployment to dwell
ratio as that found in MARSOC.
Question. The Marine Corps Reconnaissance MOS (0321) and the
Critical Skills Operator MOS (0372) are both listed as critical MOS's
in need of recruits. 0372 Marines were built from 0321s, and both have
extensive skills overlaps. What consideration has the Marine Corps
taken to combine the two, and why does the Marine Corps keep both
separate?
Answer. The 0321 Reconnaissance Marine and 0372 Critical Skills
Operator are indeed critical and complementary and, though they have
similar skills, they perform very distinct missions. Our 0372 Critical
Skills Operator is trained and employed under the auspices of United
States Special Operations Command while our 0321 Reconnaissance Marines
train and execute their operational duties in support of the Marine Air
Ground Task Force (MAGTF).
While these MOS's both demand overlapping skills related to
shooting, moving, and communicating, the 0372 MOS requires additional
advanced individual and collective skills in order to accomplish the
USSOCOM specified missions assigned to them, such as Foreign Internal
Defense, Unconventional Warfare, and Preparation of the Environment.
USSOCOM has determined that these skills demand rigorous screening and
assessment programs to succeed within such mission criteria.
Our Reconnaissance Marines serve directly as the MAGTF's ``eyes and
ears,'' sensing and shaping the tactical environment to enable MAGTF
maneuver. The 0321 Reconnaissance Marine provides our MAGTF Commanders
a sensor on the ground that possesses the military judgment and
understanding of Commander's intent necessary to develop the
battlespace and facilitate our operational and tactical maneuver.
Moreover, it is the 0321's unique amphibious reconnaissance
capabilities which are essential to bring the landing force ashore in
the execution of our Service mandate to conduct Amphibious Joint
Forcible Entry.
special purpose marine air ground task force
Question. A Special Purpose Marine Air Ground Task Force is cited
to cost around $26 million per fiscal year (SPMAGTF-CR-AR as an
example), and a Marine Expeditionary Unit (31st as an example) is cited
to cost around $16 million per fiscal year. What extra skillsets does a
commander gain when employing a SPMAGTF compared to a MEU?
Answer. A typical SPMAGTF-CR-AF rotation consists of $5 million in
direct operational costs and $8 million in fixed support costs for a
total of $13 million per rotation. At two 6-month rotations per fiscal
year, this equates to $26 million per fiscal year. A typical 31st MEU
rotation consists of $3.2 million in pre-deployment training, deployed
operational costs, and overhead/support costs, and $5 million in
transportation costs for a total of $8.2 million for a typical 6- to
7-month rotation. At two rotations per fiscal year, this equates to
$16.4 million per fiscal year. Note that estimates for the 31st MEU do
not include blue-dollar operating costs for amphibious ships and crews
or for Marine Aviation, all of which support the MEU, thus distorting a
cost comparison between the MEU and the SPMAGTF by understating the
fully burdened cost of deploying a MEU.
A commander gains no ``extra'' skill sets when employing a SPMAGTF
compared to a MEU. SPMAGTF-CRs are not a comparable replacement to the
Amphibious Ready Group (ARG)/Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU). They are
not as capable or flexible as an ARG/MEU Team, but provide credible
forces to respond to specific crises. SPMAGTFs are organized, trained,
and equipped with narrowly focused capabilities. They are designed to
accomplish a specific mission, often of limited scope and duration, and
tailored to a specific area of responsibility. They may be any size,
but normally they are a relatively small force--the size of a MEU or
smaller. For example, SPMAGTF-CR-CC is task organized with organic
Marine Corps fixed wing tactical aviation and other enablers to achieve
its mission in support of Operation Inherent Resolve. SPMAGTF-CR-AF has
a different set of enablers to achieve specified tasking in support of
its assigned geographic combatant commander.
The three-ship ARG/MEU remains the most capable forward-deployed
MAGTF in providing crisis response, deterrence, and decision time
across the range of military operations. Marine Corps forward-deployed
capabilities support the National Strategy and protect vital national
interests through the forward positioning of crisis response
capabilities thus giving national leaders decision space to examine
other options. Each ARG/MEU is fully prepared to respond to a list of
13 missions from and within the maritime domain.
Our amphibious capability creates four strategic benefits for a
nation dependent on its ability to exploit its command of the littorals
to project influence and power:
--Freedom of action: Amphibious forces can use the maritime domain as
a base from which to conduct operations. They can loiter
indefinitely in international waters and maneuver ashore at the
time and place of their choosing.
--Deterrence: While a standoff strike is sometimes an adequate
response, other situations require the rapid insertion of
sustainable combat forces to underscore the Nation's commitment
to an ally or to protect our National Security interests.
--Assured access: Amphibious forces contribute unique and essential
capabilities toward the nation's ability to take advantage of
the freedom of the high seas to enter a region without regard
to access constraints and impediments and to sustain sea-based
operations almost indefinitely without need for in-theater
host-government support.
--Uncertainty for adversaries: A credible forcible-entry capability
compels potential adversaries to invest in a broad range of
systems and spread their defenses over larger areas of concern.
special purpose marine air ground task force
Question. General Neller, would an increased amount of readiness
funding for the Marine Corps alleviate the need for Special Purpose
Marine Air Ground Task Force in CENTCOM AOR and allow it to be replaced
by a Marine Expeditionary Unit in the Mediterranean?
Answer. Unless additional funding is provided to increase the
quantity of operationally-available amphibious warships, the
requirement for a crisis response SPMAGTF in CENTCOM will remain for
the foreseeable future. The quantity of operationally-available
amphibious warships is insufficient to meet the day-to-day requirements
of the Geographical Combatant Commanders. Consequently, some areas,
such as the Mediterranean, lack full Amphibious Ready Group-Marine
Expeditionary Unit (ARG/MEU) presence year round.
The paucity of operationally available amphibious warships, ongoing
fiscal constraints, and the tragic killings of a U.S. ambassador and
three fellow Americans in Benghazi, Libya led to the creation of crisis
response SPMAGTFs. Born out of the ``New Normal,'' crisis response
SPMAGTFs were intended to provide limited crisis response and small
unit-level security forces, and participate in combatant commander
theater security cooperation events. Crisis response SPMAGTFs help
mitigate presence and capability gaps when an ARG/MEU is not
operationally available. However, crisis response SPMAGTFs do not
replace the ARG/MEU as the optimal crisis response force.
As the optimal crisis response force, the ARG-MEU's inherent
responsiveness provides timely capabilities that far exceed all crisis
response SPMAGTFs. Previous Commandants and Chiefs of Naval Operations
have testified that over 50 operationally-available amphibious warships
are required to meet the demand generated by day-to-day requirements of
the Geographical Combatant Commanders; there are simply not enough
amphibious warships to meet global requirements.
In light of the ``New Normal,'' crisis response SPMAGTFs provide a
vital capability in areas that lack full ARG-MEU presence year round;
but no SPMAGTFs can replace an ARG-MEU. Readiness funding that
increases the quantity of operationally-available amphibious warships
and protects crisis responses SPMAGTFs are in the vital interests of
the nation.
desert tortoises
Question. General Neller, how much in total has it cost the Marine
Corps to comply with the endangered species act covering the desert
tortoise, which resides at the Marine Corps 29 Palms training center?
Answer. There are two components to the costs of Marine Corps
compliance with the Endangered Species Act (ESA) related to the desert
tortoise at Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center 29 Palms (MCAGCC).
The first component involves ongoing ESA compliance requirements
for the desert tortoise on the existing MCAGCC. The Marine Corps spent
$17.8 million from fiscal year 2005-2016 on this first component of ESA
requirements related to the desert tortoise.
The second component involves the costs associated with the 150
thousand acre land expansion authorized by National Defense
Authorization Act fiscal year 2014. A total of $22 million has been
obligated to date since fiscal year 2013, and an additional $28 million
is estimated to cover future costs for surveys, monitoring, and other
activities to ensure the success of desert tortoise relocation through
fiscal year 2045. In total, the Marine Corps anticipates spending
approximately $50 million from fiscal year 2013-2045 to cover ESA
requirements for the desert tortoise related to the 150 thousand acre
land expansion.
In total, the Marine Corps has spent approximately $39.8 million
since fiscal year 2005 to comply with the Endangered Species Act (ESA)
related to the desert tortoise at MCAGCC 29 Palms, and projects another
$28 million in future costs to achieve successful relocation of the
desert tortoise.
Question. General Neller, it was reported on March 8th that it
would cost $50 million to have the Desert Tortoise removed from the
training areas, what steps is the Marine Corps taking this time
compared to your previous efforts?
Answer. The Marine Corps has not previously undertaken a desert
tortoise relocation of this magnitude. The relocation is being done to
support large-scale Marine Expeditionary Brigade combined-arms, live-
fire and maneuver training on the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center
29 Palms (MCAGCC) that includes the newly acquired lands. For the
planned large-scale translocation, MCAGCC developed a relocation plan
that has been coordinated with the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service and incorporates existing desert tortoise research and lessons
learned from failures and successes of other relocation efforts. In
2006 MCAGCC successfully relocated 17 adult tortoises which had 100
percent survivorship for the 3 years of post-relocation monitoring.
______
Question Submitted by Senator Brian Schatz
Question. Based on an assessment of your force structure, the
current demand from the Combatant Commanders, and the appropriate
amount of lift to support a forcible entry with two Marine
Expeditionary Brigades, the Marine Corps says it requires 38 amphibious
ships.
Currently, there are 30 amphibious ships in the fleet. Given the
current fiscal constraints, the Navy and Marine Corps will accept some
risk with the current plan to grow the fleet to 33 amphibious ships,
potentially 34 ships.
How does the shortage of amphibious ships affect your ability to
operate across the range of military operations and what risks will the
Marine Corps face if it does not have its requirements met?
Answer. The Chief of Naval Operations and the Commandant of the
Marine Corps have determined the force structure to support the
deployment and employment of 2 Marine Expeditionary Brigades (MEBs)
simultaneously is 38 amphibious warfare ships. Understanding this
requirement, and in light of the fiscal challenges faced by the nation,
the Department of the Navy has agreed to sustain a minimum of 34
amphibious warships. However, Combatant Commander demand is more
realistically assessed in excess of 50 amphibious warships.
Shortfalls in the amphibious warship inventory have multiple
negative effects. This must be viewed as a two-faceted problem of
inventory and availability. A decreased inventory has negative effects
on both overall capacity and maintenance. For instance, our existing
inventory of 30 ships will, at current maintenance rates, only yield
approximately 21 operationally available amphibious warships at a given
point in time. This puts the nation at risk of being unable to embark
the 2 MEB assault echelon required for a forcible entry capability.
Further, as ships are stressed due to increased use, they require more
maintenance, driving up maintenance costs and compounding the problem
of availability.
While this 34-ship force accepts risk in its role of providing
combat support and combat service support elements of a MEB, it has
been determined to be adequate in meeting the needs of the naval force
within today's fiscal limitations. This inventory level also provides
the needed capacity for a forward presence and a MEB/Expeditionary
Strike Group (ESG) to respond to a crisis or contingency. Any
shortfalls below 34 will negatively affect our ability to ensure
constant presence, and our ability to immediately respond to tasks on
the lower intensity end of the range of military operations with Marine
Expeditionary Units.
Further, this negatively impacts our ability to serve as the
nation's expeditionary force in readiness and to prevent incidents from
escalating beyond small scale crisis. For instance, we have a
noteworthy lack of maritime presence in the Mediterranean. To mitigate
this, the Navy and Marine Corps are exploring opportunities to deploy
Marines on non-combatant auxiliary platforms, a less-than-ideal
workaround necessitated by the current fiscal environment. Auxiliary
platforms are not a replacement to the capabilities and survivability
of amphibious warships. Furthermore, this shortfall has forced the Navy
and Marine Corps to explore ways to distribute elements of a single
Amphibious Ready Group (ARG)/MEU across Combatant Commander boundaries
to provide some measure of coverage in various regions. Again, this is
not an ideal method when compared to the preferred employment of the
full ARG/MEU as an aggregated three-ship force which can bring to bear
its full capability.
Finally, shortfalls negatively affect our ability to train.
Conducting amphibious operations with our joint services is not just a
matter of putting Marines on Navy ships. Those units must have the
opportunity to operate with each other during their workup to establish
relationships, tactics, techniques, procedures, and build
interoperability.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Cochran. The Committee stands in recess until we
call the Chair.
[Whereupon, at 11:44 a.m., Wednesday, March 2, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]