[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.A.S.C. No. 117-75]
HEARING
ON
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023
AND
OVERSIGHT OF PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED PROGRAMS
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SEAPOWER AND PROJECTION FORCES
meeting jointly with
SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS
of the
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ON
POSTURE AND READINESS OF THE MOBILITY ENTERPRISE
__________
HEARING HELD
MARCH 31, 2022
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
48-664 WASHINGTON : 2023
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SEAPOWER AND PROJECTION FORCES
JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut, Chairman
JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia
JIM COOPER, Tennessee VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri
DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey SAM GRAVES, Missouri
ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
JARED F. GOLDEN, Maine, Vice Chair MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin
ELAINE G. LURIA, Virginia JIM BANKS, Indiana
SARA JACOBS, California JACK BERGMAN, Michigan
Vacancy JERRY L. CARL, Alabama
Jay Vallario, Professional Staff Member
David Sienicki, Professional Staff Member
Naajidah Khan, Clerk
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS
JOHN GARAMENDI, California, Chairman
JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut MIKE WALTZ, Florida
JACKIE SPEIER, California JOE WILSON, South Carolina
JASON CROW, Colorado AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia
ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan, Vice JACK BERGMAN, Michigan
Chair MIKE JOHNSON, Louisiana
JARED F. GOLDEN, Maine MARK E. GREEN, Tennessee
ELAINE G. LURIA, Virginia LISA C. McCLAIN, Michigan
KAIALI'I KAHELE, Hawaii BLAKE D. MOORE, Utah
MARILYN STRICKLAND, Washington
Sapna Sharma, Professional Staff Member
Ian Bennitt, Professional Staff Member
Naajidah Khan, Clerk
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
Courtney, Hon. Joe, a Representative from Connecticut, Chairman,
Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces................. 1
Garamendi, Hon. John, a Representative from California, Chairman,
Subcommittee on Readiness...................................... 5
Waltz, Hon. Mike, a Representative from Florida, Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Readiness...................................... 5
Wittman, Hon. Robert J., a Representative from Virginia, Ranking
Member, Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces......... 3
WITNESSES
Lessley, Lucinda, Acting Administrator, Maritime Administration,
U.S. Department of Transportation.............................. 8
Van Ovost, Gen Jacqueline D., USAF, Commander, U.S.
Transportation Command......................................... 7
APPENDIX
Prepared Statements:
Courtney, Hon. Joe........................................... 39
Garamendi, Hon. John......................................... 43
Lessley, Lucinda............................................. 60
Van Ovost, Gen Jacqueline D.................................. 45
Wittman, Hon. Robert J....................................... 41
Documents Submitted for the Record:
[There were no Documents submitted.]
Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:
[There were no Questions submitted during the hearing.]
Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:
Mr. Bergman.................................................. 71
Mr. Carl..................................................... 71
Mr. Norcross................................................. 69
Mr. Scott.................................................... 69
Mr. Wittman.................................................. 69
POSTURE AND READINESS OF THE MOBILITY ENTERPRISE
----------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, Meeting
Jointly with the Subcommittee on Readiness,
Washington, DC, Thursday, March 31, 2022.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:20 p.m., via
Webex, Hon. Joe Courtney (chairman of the Subcommittee on
Seapower and Projection Forces) presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOE COURTNEY, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
CONNECTICUT, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON SEAPOWER AND PROJECTION
FORCES
Mr. Courtney. [We have] the legally required presence of
members here, so I am going to start again with the obligatory
hybrid announcement.
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I call to order this
joint meeting of the Seapower and Readiness Subcommittees of
the--Seapower and Readiness Subcommittees of the House Armed
Services Committee.
First some administrative technical notes. Members are
reminded they must keep visible on screen within the software
platform for the purposes of identity verification. Members
must continue to use the platform's video function while
attending the hearing unless they experience connectivity
issues or other technical problems that render the member
unable to fully participate on camera. If you experience
technical difficulties, please contact the committee staff for
assistance. When you are recognized video will be broadcast via
television and internet feeds. You will be recognized as normal
for questions. If you want speak at another time, you must seek
recognition verbally.
Please mute your microphone when you are not speaking, and
remember to unmute prior to speaking. Please be aware that
there is a slight lag between when you start speaking and when
the camera shot switches to you. Please remember to keep the
software platform's video function on for the entirety of the
time that you are attending this hearing. If you leave for a
short period of time for reasons other than joining a different
proceeding, please leave your video function on.
If you are leaving to join a different proceeding or will
be absent for a significant period of time, you should exit the
software platform entirely. Please be advised I have designated
a committee staff member to mute unrecognized members'
microphones if necessary. Please use the platform's chat
feature to communicate with staff regarding technical or
logistical support issues.
Finally, if you see a 5-minute countdown clock on the
software platform's display, but if necessary, we will remind
you that your time is up. With that said, I want to make a few
opening remarks.
Again, it is a pleasure today to have with us General
Jacqueline Van Ovost and Ms. Lucinda Lessley, who again are
just outstanding public servants. And, you know, I think a lot
of us have had the opportunity to speak with both witnesses
recently and want to thank them for their engagement ahead of
today's hearing.
General, as this is your first appearance before these
committees, I would like to welcome you and congratulate you as
you finish your sixth month as the commander of USTRANSCOM
[U.S. Transportation Command].
I want to note that this is the first of our posture
hearings following release of the 2023 budget. It is fitting
that we are starting with the focus on the important role that
our air and sea mobility capabilities play in our Nation's
defense. We are seeing that actually play out right now, the
impact of the work that the mobility enterprise does. As
General Van Ovost and her team pointed out to me recently, our
mobility forces have conducted over 200 missions in support of
the effort to deliver weapons and supplies to the brave people
fighting in Ukraine.
Today, the ships and the aircraft that comprise our sealift
and airlift capabilities are challenged by readiness
shortfalls, obsolescence, and evolving threat landscape.
Congress has acted on a bipartisan basis in past years to
address some of these issues. And I fully expect that our
panels will continue this work as we develop this year's NDAA
[National Defense Authorization Act].
I would like to note a few priorities as we begin our
discussion. First, with full authorization and funding now in
place, the Tanker Security Program [TSP] is now the law of the
land. This effort has taken on new importance with the recent
decision to close the Red Hill fuel facility. And we are eager
to get this program underway. I look forward to an update on
the standup of this program.
Second, I remain very concerned about the path forward on
recapitalization of our sealift fleet. In just a decade, nearly
three quarters of our fleet will reach the end of their service
life. The 2023 budget [requests] funding to produce two
additional used ships, in addition to the seven already
authorized and funded but not yet in place.
I remain firmly committed to the three-prong strategy that
we have adopted of cost-effective life extensions for current
ships, procurement of a discreet number of used ships, and the
start of a domestic new-build effort. Right now we are seeing
the first of the five national security multi-mission vessels
under construction today at the Philly [Philadephia] Shipyard,
revitalizing that shipyard and employing hundreds of new
shipbuilders.
Congress, led by this panel, initiated this program a
number of years ago with flexible contracting authorities to
enable the cost-effective construction of these new boats. And
we have done the same for a future new-build sealift program.
We will continue to look [at an] all-of-the-above plan for
sealift, rather than the either/or choice between used or new
ships.
Third, we remain laser focused on the requirements of our
aerial refueling and tactical airlift fleets. In particular,
the congressionally directed Mobility Capability Requirements
Study 2020 outlines clear requirements for our tactical airlift
fleet, comprised of our C-130s, underscored the need to extend
and recapitalize the strategically critical fleet. We must
continue to examine the budget to ensure that these
requirements are met.
Lastly, I want note my appreciation to Acting Administrator
Lessley for her work on restarting the Sea Year program at the
U.S. Merchant Marine Academy [USMMA]. The academy and the Sea
Year program play a critical role in the support and training
of our mariners. That is exactly why I and others feel so
strongly about ensuring that it has the tools and policies in
place to respond to serious concerns about student safety while
at sea.
We have more work to do, and I look forward to hearing more
about that today and how we, Congress, MARAD [U.S. Maritime
Administration], and the maritime academies can work
collaboratively to ensure the continued success of the academy.
I would like to finish by just noting that today is the
last day of his role as majority staff on the Seapower
Subcommittee, Phil MacNaughton. Phil has been a valued member
of this subcommittee since 2014 and has assisted me over the
years over and over again. He has had a profound impact on work
we do here for the men and women who serve and defend our
Nation. And I am deeply grateful for all he has done to help
myself and every member of our subcommittee. Today is his last
hearing because he then moves up to policy staff lead for the
full committee, and we all look forward to his leadership in
that important new role. I would also like to officially
welcome our new staff lead, Jay Vallario, who will assume
duties tomorrow.
Again, thank you to both witnesses. The old saying that
Omar Bradley--that strategy is for amateurs, logistics is for
professionals. You two are both consummate professionals. We
really are thrilled to have you here today. And with that, I
will now yield to Mr. Wittman for opening remarks.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Courtney can be found in the
Appendix on page 39.]
STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT J. WITTMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
VIRGINIA, RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON SEAPOWER AND
PROJECTION FORCES
Mr. Wittman. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to echo
your accolades for Phil. Phil MacNaughton has been incredible.
In fact, I tell folks before Phil was on the staff, I put my
life in his hands multiple times as he flew aircraft with us in
or onboard. So Phil, thank you for your steady hand there in
that aircraft. And thank you, too, for your steady hand here on
the committee. I consider you a friend and an incredibly
talented professional on the staff. You have done a great job
in working together to do a lot of things for our Nation's
defense, especially our Navy and Marine Corps team and Air
Force. Thank you. Our Nation's better off for your service. So
we appreciate that.
And I want to thank Chairman Courtney for yielding, and
especially thank Chairman Garamendi and Ranking Member Waltz
for participating in another joint hearing this month to
discuss our mobility forces.
The people of Ukraine have been fighting valiantly against
Vladimir Putin's Russian invasion. And Ukrainian forces have
particularly targeted an overextended Russian logistics line
causing Russian forces across multiple axes to grind to a halt.
If there is anything in this war that we can use as a
lesson learned, it is the value of our logistics forces and
their need to pace with combat forces. Unfortunately, as I
review our Nation's mobility forces, I see many areas that will
cause dangerous parallels with the Russian logistics failures.
For example, the Air Force has proposed to reduce our
tanker force structure by 24 aircraft over the next 2 years.
Navy continues to underinvest in surge sealift forces,
particularly harming the Army and the Marines. Navy and Marine
Corps are programmed to pull the plug on a list of maritime
prepositioned forces.
And while there has been much stated need about our
requirement to invest in our intertheater connectors, Army
continues to reduce watercraft while Navy and Marine Corps
efforts to support light amphibious warships and next-
generation logistics ships continue to slip to the right. And
just to add some additional logistics woes, the Red Hill
debacle highlights the inadequacies of our malpositioned fuel
stores throughout the Indo-Pacific.
In my estimation, our mobility and logistics forces are in
a clear decline. To be frank, the administration talks about
our pacing challenge of China and the acute threat of Russia,
but their budget requests continue to have more bark than bite.
On the other hand, they just may not understand the basics of
warfare that requires strong logistics to sustain our combat
forces forward. We have to deliver a comprehensive strategy to
address our acute shortcomings.
I would propose a strategy that expands our Tanker Security
Program; that ensures our intratheater connector strategy that
is coupled with a prepositioned force appropriate for the
Pacific distances our forces will be required to traverse; that
we also have an adequate surge sealift force; that we have
adequate bulk fuel stores positioned at the correct locations
before we pull the plug on Red Hill.
Fortunately, we have the correct witnesses to help us
better hone our logistics strategy as we prepare our fiscal
2023 markup. I look forward to reviewing this varied list of
issues during our discussions today.
In closing, I am reminded of our foremost military
tactician, Sun Tzu, who indicated, the line between disorder
and order lies in logistics.
I remain convinced that we should reject the disorder
offered by our current logistics vision and work with my
Democrat colleagues to correct the more egregious elements of
this failing budget request.
Again, I appreciate Chairman Courtney, Chairman Garamendi,
Ranking Member Waltz for all of their effort and support on
this important hearing. And again want to give my undying
gratitude and thanks to Phil MacNaughton and wish him all the
best in his future. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wittman can be found in the
Appendix on page 41.]
Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Wittman. I will now yield to
our colleagues from the Readiness Subcommittee, Chairman
Garamendi for opening remarks.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN GARAMENDI, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
CALIFORNIA, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS
Mr. Garamendi. I just moved. Done. Social distancing. I
will just finish up here. I won't go back to Billy Long,
although, that might be a useful way to hasten all of these
hearings. The second is just ask that my opening statement be
in the record since most of this was covered by your opening
statement, Mr. Courtney.
There are a couple of things that I do want to bring up,
and this builds on what our colleague, Rob Wittman, just
raised, and that is the totality of logistics. The tanker
program is a good start, but it is not even a sufficient start,
just good to get started.
Over the last several years, we have heard repeatedly about
sustaining the fight, CSBA's [Center for Strategic and
Budgetary Assessments'] ``Sustaining the Fight: Resilient
Maritime Logistics [for a New Era],'' ``Strengthening the U.S.
Defense Maritime Industry''; from the Department of
Transportation, ``Goals and Objectives of a Stronger Maritime
Nation.'' All of these fit together. They fit together in a way
that we should spend this year's NDAA building a national
maritime security strategy that goes all the way through the
steps necessary to be able to support our military wherever
they may be around the world. Airpower is certainly a piece of
that. But it is the ocean that will transport 90 percent of all
of the material. And we are simply not there.
From the continental United States to the most distant
possible point of war, we do not have in place today the fleet,
the ships, the vessels, the personnel to sustain ourself. And
so let us work on that and look at doing it in a way in which
we can actually afford it.
The budget for the Navy, as Mr. Wittman said, doesn't seem
to be enough. It will never be enough to build the fleet
necessary to handle the transportation, the logistics. I
believe we can do that using the fleet that we presently have
and build that fleet. It is call the Jones Act fleet. If that
fleet were made militarily useful, subsidized with programs
that already exist not only for the marine, but also for the
air, I believe we can make this happen. So I want to pursue
that. That will be my goal, and part of my questions will go to
that effect. With that, I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Garamendi can be found in
the Appendix on page 43.]
Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Garamendi. Your statement is
entered without objection. Congressman Waltz, ranking member
from Readiness, you are now recognized.
STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE WALTZ, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM FLORIDA,
RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS
Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Chairman Courtney, and Ranking Member
Wittman, Chairman Garamendi. And I also want to join you in
thanking our witnesses here today from MARAD and TRANSCOM. I
think we are all in agreement here that our ability to confront
future adversaries absolutely and fundamentally depends on
sealift, airlift, and ground logistics, and their ability to
distribute the goods the warfighters need.
You know, as several have mentioned, and I think we are
going to be talking about for the foreseeable future, and we
have to look no further than Russia's current blunders and
stalled convoys in Ukraine to understand the importance of
logistics. And sustainment, and everyone has had their
logistics quote. And my favorite is logistics wins wars, and it
loses wars. Obviously, the Indo-Pacific region subjects our
forces to the tyranny of distance, and it will be contested.
And nearly all of our forward combat unit equipment will have
to move by sea.
As many on this committee have been working for quite some
time, and I hope to add to this effort, dealing with the fact
that our ships are old, some are close to obsolete, our turbo
activations have yielded inconsistent and troubling readiness
rates in the past several years, combatant commanders plan for
85 percent success rate.
And so we absolutely have to--I think we have all been
talking about it for a while, as least as long as I have been
here--we have to really start taking meaningful actions so that
surge and sustainment sealift is ready to deliver.
And I think it is also as important--and I do appreciate
the Department's briefings in the last few weeks on how
important it will be to have access to fuel in Indo-Pacific.
But, again, I am concerned about our timeline to fully get
there so that the combatant commander has the full access that
he needs.
The decision to close Red Hill has absolutely forced and I
think accelerated the larger conversation about operational
requirements for fuel in the region. A path forward to make us
more secure is becoming clearer, but again we have a long way
to go. And the Tanker Security Program is absolutely a good
start, but is in its infancy. Loitering, inter- and
intratheater operations, I think it is clear will require
additional vessels than the 10 accounted for by the TSP. And
intratheater assets like lightering and smaller operational
support vessels are critical to success. Yet, at least thus
far, I have yet to see a plan or a model to truly employ them.
So I look forward to hearing our witnesses' perspective on
whether TSP should be expanded, and on whether some other model
is being contemplated to support requirements. Reliance on
commercial partnerships, as we have discussed in the last few
days, absolutely can be advantageous, expeditious, critical to
the mission, but I am concerned about some inherent risks in
those relationships.
And I look forward to your updates and what your
organizations are doing to pursue hardening, particularly
against cyber threats, and to mitigate against challenges posed
by CCP [Chinese Communist Party] influence, both direct and
indirect, soft power and hard power.
The bottom line is we can no longer rely on ensured access
to surge and sustain our forces. I know that TRANSCOM can
influence but not direct service budget decisions. However,
TRANSCOM should be concerned by any action, including fleet
reductions and delayed recapitalization resulting in
unacceptable risks to forced projection. Our threats are
evolving. Mobility enterprise absolutely must keep place.
And, lastly, I would like to mention global household
goods. I appreciate, particularly with you, ma'am, our recent
discussions on the topic. I have a better understanding of the
current state of play with the ongoing challenges to the award.
But TRANSCOM has to get this right. This is a no-fail mission.
It is too important to retention, to our service members and to
their families who already sacrifice so much.
So moving forward, I absolutely plan to stay engaged and
focused on ensuring that our service members are put first by a
moving delivery model that is competitive and transparent and
accountable.
And, finally, I absolutely, General Van Ovost, want to
thank the men and women of your command, particularly, when it
comes to the heroic work they are doing to support the effort
in Ukraine and for the Afghanistan withdrawal. Afghanistan, in
particular, I believe will be a stain on our moral conscience
and has undermined our credibility around the world. But when
TRANSCOM was given the order, they absolutely performed a
nearly impossible task.
So, again, I thank the witnesses. I look forward to having
a candid discussion. I yield back.
Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Waltz. I now recognize General
Van Ovost for her opening remarks.
STATEMENT OF GEN JACQUELINE D. VAN OVOST, USAF, COMMANDER, U.S.
TRANSPORTATION COMMAND
General Van Ovost. Chairman Courtney, Chairman Garamendi,
Ranking Member Wittman, Ranking Member Waltz, distinguished
members of the committee, good afternoon. It is my honor to
join you today with my senior enlisted leader, Fleet Master
Chief Donald Myrick, to represent the men and women of the
United States Transportation Command. Every day I am immensely
proud of their contributions to our Nation's defense.
TRANSCOM operates an agile and resilient logistics
enterprise comprised of our military components, commercial
partners, and industry teammates delivering for our Nation, our
allies, and our partners around the world. We project and
sustain the world's most capable military force. The speed and
reliability at which we execute these missions demonstrates our
Nation's resolve and serves as a deterrent to our adversaries.
However, the world is evolving, and the complex, contested
environment that is emerging will test the future readiness of
our enterprise, and challenge TRANSCOM's ability to deliver a
decisive force for high-end conflict when needed. It is
imperative that we evolve into a more agile, resilient mobility
force through focused modernization and recapitalization of our
capabilities to ensure that we remain ready now and into the
future. My top readiness concern remains sealift, as 70 percent
of our government-owned surge sealift ships will approach the
end of their service life in 10 years.
I greatly appreciate your support on the authorization and
funding of the first steps of our sealift recapitalization
effort. The funding for five used ships in the fiscal year 2022
omnibus appropriation will enable us to continue this vital
process. And we look forward to working with the Navy to
satisfy restriction in current law to execute these purchases.
Next, air refueling is critical to our joint force's
ability to deploy and employ an immediate force. I appreciate
your continued support to funding KC-46 recapitalization
program and the critical modifications to the KC-135 aircraft.
We must continue to modernize and recapitalize our aging air
refueling assets to ensure they remain agile, resilient, and
relevant for the future fight.
One last and very critical thought. Cyber is an area of
significant vulnerability for TRANSCOM. As we are inextricably
linked to commercial industry, and 90 percent of our systems
operate outside the Department of Defense Information Network,
so we remain focused on strengthening the partnership with our
transportation providers to mitigate cyber vulnerabilities. As
such, cyber resiliency and digital modernization initiatives
are a top priority.
In closing, I would like to say that I am pleased to join
Acting Maritime Administrator Lessley. And I thank her for
MARAD's continued partnership with TRANSCOM in meeting the
challenges of global maritime mobility. Administrator Lessley
and I had the opportunity to visit the U.S. Merchant Marine
Academy [USMMA] at Kingspoint, an institute whose graduates
play a vital role in our Nation's defense and economy.
Nearly 85 percent of the Navy's strategic sealift
officers--these are military officers that integrate commercial
vessels into military fleets during operations--are alumni of
Kingspoint. This is a skill set that will be in high demand as
we operate in the contested logistics environment.
I would like to thank you once again for your leadership
and the support that you provide for our service members. And I
look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of General Van Ovost can be found
in the Appendix on page 45.]
Mr. Courtney. Thank you, General. I now recognize Acting
Administrator Lucinda Lessley from the Maritime Administration.
STATEMENT OF LUCINDA LESSLEY, ACTING ADMINISTRATOR, MARITIME
ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Ms. Lessley. Good afternoon, Chairman Courtney, Chairman
Garamendi, Ranking Member Wittman, Ranking Member Waltz, and
members of the subcommittees. Thank you for the opportunity to
discuss the Maritime Administration's role in supporting the
Nation's strategic sealift capabilities. Thank you also for
your support during my tenure at MARAD. Let me also offer my
congratulations to Phil. I have had the honor of serving as the
Acting Maritime Administrator for more than a year now.
Without question, it has been a year of unprecedented
challenges. However, the Biden-Harris administration has been
working to meet these challenges by strengthening both our
merchant marine and sealift, and by quickly implementing a
historic investment in our Nation's ports and inland and near
coastal waterways.
MARAD deeply appreciates the support of Congress and,
particularly the leadership of the members of this committee
and of these subcommittees for your support for our sealift
capabilities. That said, the average age of the vessels in the
Ready Reserve is more than 46, which makes recapitalization
critical to maintaining readiness.
Equipment casualties have increased, and the challenges of
replacing obsolete equipment make ship activations and
operations more difficult. MARAD has, of course, awarded our
vessel acquisition manager contract and two used vessels were
selected for procurement in 2021.
The first vessel was delivered to MARAD this month, and
delivery of the second vessel is imminent. However, the rate of
recapitalization is limited by the number of vessels we are
authorized to purchase. Separately, as has been mentioned,
construction is well underway on the first two of five national
security multi-mission vessels with the first expected to be
delivered to MARAD in early 2023.
The Maritime Security Program [MSP], which encompasses 68
commercial vessels, remains the heart of sustainment sealift
and in addition, as also been discussed, the newly funded
Tanker Security Program will begin to address the need for more
U.S.-flag product tankers capable of transporting fuel to meet
both national economic needs and the DOD's [Department of
Defense's] contingency requirements.
We thank you very much for your support for the TSP in the
NDAA. That said, meeting the DOD's sealift needs requires not
only vessels but also qualified mariners. MARAD remains
concerned about our ability to quickly assemble an adequate
number of qualified mariners if an extended mobilization were
to occur.
We are especially mindful of the consequences of the
pandemic on mariners. COVID [coronavirus disease] has obviously
made what were already very hard jobs harder. And we are
concerned that some have decided to seek employment in less
challenging environments.
Further, it is critical that our merchant marine and indeed
our entire maritime industry draw on the talents of all
Americans who share a passion for the sea and for logistics. As
such, all vessels and all maritime workplaces must uphold the
essential values of mutual respect and dignity and ensure that
all workers have an equal chance to excel on the basis of their
competency and professionalism.
Last year, we made the difficult decision to briefly pause
the Sea Year training aboard commercial vessels at the Merchant
Marine Academy so we could institute new safety policies
intended to help prevent sexual assault and harassment, support
survivors, and strengthen the culture of accountability.
In response to a request from Members of Congress, we
developed a program called ``Every Mariner Builds a Respectful
Culture'' or EMBARC. This program enumerates new safety
requirements for vessels that carry academy cadets. MARAD will
not place cadets on commercial vessels that have not enrolled
in EMBARC.
We have also instituted new policies at the Merchant Marine
Academy itself to improve the support we provide to our cadets
at sea, and to try to remove barriers to reporting when assault
or harassment do occur. Cadet embarcations resumed in December
of 2021 initially on training vessels and on vessels operated
by the Navy, the Military Sealift Command, and the U.S. Coast
Guard.
We offer our deepest thanks to General Van Ovost whom we
were honored to host at the academy last week, as well as to
Admiral Mewbourne and Admiral Wettlaufer, and to Admiral
Schultz, the Coast Guard Commandant, as well as Rear Admiral
John Mauger for their support of our midshipmen and our efforts
to improve safety. With their assistance, we believe that all
members of the Merchant Marine Academy class of 2023 should be
able to accumulate the sea time needed to graduate on time.
We also thank the Coast Guard for their extraordinary
partnership in leading efforts to improve safety for mariners
with the adoption of the new procedures in ship safety
management plans.
As of today, five commercial companies have enrolled in
EMBARC. And I urge every U.S.-flag carrier to enroll as quickly
as possible. We know we have many miles to go, but through
continuous process review, we will work to identify areas where
our policies fall short and improve them. And we will support
urgently needed culture change across the maritime industry.
Thank you so much for the opportunity to address you on the
state of our Nation's sealift as a component of the mobility
enterprise. And I ask that my written statement be entered into
the record, and I am happy to answer any questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Lessley can be found in the
Appendix on page 60.]
Mr. Courtney. Without objection, your statement is entered.
Again, as we now start questions, I just want to announce,
unlike past meetings, we going to institute a 5-minute rule for
all members, including chairs and ranking members. We have a
vote coming up, and lots of members here today. So we want to
make sure everybody gets a chance to ask their questions. And
that includes me. So you can start the clock running.
I would like to start with the Tanker Security Program.
Obviously, as you both know, it was about a 3-year journey get
that to the President's desk; that was signed a couple of weeks
ago. And it originated in our subcommittee. And I realize the
ink is barely dry, but can you just kind of give us sort of an
early preview about how you see implementation, particularly
with the Red Hill developments.
General Van Ovost. So, Mr. Chairman, I will defer to MARAD
on implementation. But let me talk a little bit about Red Hill.
The validation of the military requirement for the Tanker
Security Program came out of the 2021 study, which was done--
did not have Red Hill in mind. The Tanker Security Program
ensures that we would have U.S.-flag, U.S.-crews shipped in the
Pacific to meet our needs.
Separately on the Red Hill plan, we will be chartering
three to four vessels to place fuel on the water, which gives
us both a diverse capability as well as a dispersed capability
in the Pacific. Having fuel on the water allows us to exercise
and improve the readiness of our mariners by doing CONSOL
operations, consolidated operations on the water, and testing
out maybe lighterage operations so we could think about TSP in
the future, how to close some more gaps in the future in TSP.
But, again, those vessels are going to be long-term charted
separately from the TSP program.
Ms. Lessley. Thank you so much, General. So our plan is to
do a rulemaking as quickly as possible, and then begin the
enrollments. And we hope to have these processes completed by
the end of the calendar year.
Mr. Courtney. That is great. It is faster than it took us.
So, Administrator, I would like to spend a minute just on again
the national security maritime training vessels that are under
construction at Philly Shipyard. You know, I think an important
aspect of that program is the contracting model, which kind of
eyes glaze over when you sort of start talking about that.
But it really actually is a significant approach that MARAD
took, that I think is, again, showing good results. And maybe
you can just sort of talk about that and whether or not that
contracting model really could be applicable in terms of other,
you know, sort of serial production for other types of vessels.
Ms. Lessley. Thank you so much for the question. We are
extraordinarily proud of the effort underway. And as you
mentioned, it is a unique model. We use a vessel construction
manager to oversee the construction at the yard.
And that has enabled us to bring best commercial practices
to bear. We also ensured that we had very mature designs. We
are on track, currently under schedule to receive the first
NSMV [national security multi-mission vessel], the Empire
State, in April of 2023.
The model is available and can certainly be adapted as
needed to support other types of vessel construction. You know,
we certainly are--continue to track very closely, but are,
again, very pleased with it and would certainly offer this and
any other technology or skill that we have to benefit the rate
of recapitalization.
Mr. Courtney. Great. Thank you. And, lastly, you know,
General, if you could just sort of give a general--we are in
unclassified setting obviously--just sort of description of how
things are going in Ukraine and whether we are meeting the
demand to the greatest extent possible.
General Van Ovost. Thank you, Chairman. I am immensely
proud of the men and women of Transportation Command, and our
industry partners, and our National Guard and Reserve forces
who have all marshaled to support the effort in Ukraine.
We work very closely with European Command [EUCOM] as they
integrate with Ukraine and prioritize the needs of Ukraine, so
that we are able to ship and get it close to Ukraine and onward
moved very quickly as we managed not only the nodes or the
airports and seaports to get stuff there, but the people that
work there and the flow in.
So we are working very closely with EUCOM to ensure that
they can absolutely get that as quickly as possible.
Mr. Courtney. Great. Thank you to both witnesses. And I
will recognize Mr. Wittman for 5 minutes.
Mr. Wittman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank both of our
witnesses. General Van Ovost, I want to start out with talking
about intratheater connectors, specifically in the INDOPACOM
[U.S. Indo-Pacific Command]. And it appears that in INDOPACOM,
those intratheater connectors are going to allow us to operate
in that contested space. Things like the Army watercraft, the
Navy next-generation connector ship, the Marine Corps light
amphibious warship [LAW]. All those things are incredibly
important.
If you are to believe Admiral Aquilino and Admiral
Davidson, which I do, they have stated that the risk is now,
and that intratheater connectors are incredibly important to
bridge the tyranny of distance to be able to operate
effectively in the INDOPACOM.
In your estimate, is there a deficit today, as we speak,
with intratheater logistics connectors as I spoke of? And how
essential are these programs in allowing logistics to flow in
any of the COCOM's [combatant command's] plans, in any of the
OPLANs [operation plans], all the elements of things that you
have to implement as part of your jurisdiction.
General Van Ovost. This is a critical question.
Intratheater movement is very important, especially the
distances we are talking about in the Pacific, and the fact
that we will be under multi-domain attack, essentially, when we
do this. And we foreshadow it in our studies that came out last
summer. We are in the midst of an intratheater, multi-modal
study for the Pacific.
And in that study we are looking at a mix of what it is
going to take to move logistics around for all of the
components. And that agnostic of strategic or tactical airlift,
surface lift, work with our allies and partners, and
prepositioning. That study will come out this summer.
But as a preview, we are short. We do believe that we would
need more capability, especially with the lighterage-type
ships, as you spoke about, between what the services are
purchasing, commercial lighterage-type ships, and blue, I'll
call, foreign friendly force support, and a combination of that
is what we will need in the Pacific to move fuel around.
Mr. Wittman. Let me ask you about our bulk fuels for
wartime reserve. Do you think that the INDOPACOM wartime
reserves are going to be available at the required quantity, at
the required time, based on the framework that has been put in
front of us on the closure of Red Hill?
General Van Ovost. Yes, this is also another good question
as Admiral Aquilino has laid the posture, his posture, and war
reserve requests for the Indo-Pacific, which does require more,
as we spoke about earlier, dispersed and diverse sources of
fuel for which the opportunity to take some fuel out of Hawaii
and places on the water, and also take some fuel out of there
and place it forward closer to the point of need, we believe
will actually reduce the risk that we have. So it was not our--
the laydown was not calculated with respect to what was in
Hawaii. We are certainly going to use it to our advantage.
Mr. Wittman. Very good. Thank you.
Ms. Lessley, you spoke about having TSP ready to go, I
think you said, by September. There is also a rulemaking
element that has to be part of that. Can you tell us when do
you anticipate finalizing the rules and fielding the 10-ship
Tanker Security Program?
Ms. Lessley. Great. Thank you, yes. So, again, our hope is
that we will have the rule finalized and begin the enrollment
process this calendar year. We understand the urgency of it,
but also, you know, DOD is not the, or DOT [Department of
Transportation], is not single actor in this process. But we
will be moving as quickly as possible, again, with the goal of
having the rule finalized and at least beginning the enrollment
process, if not having completed that this calendar year.
Mr. Wittman. Very good. General Van Ovost, can you tell us
the importance of the Maritime Security Program to make sure
that you have the capability to carry sustainment cargos to
support our warfighter and not having to rely on foreign
carriers in a time of conflict to be able to accomplish that?
General Van Ovost. Thank you. As you know, our organic
capabilities are insufficient to meet our military requirements
around the globe, and we are absolutely inextricably linked. So
the Maritime Security Program [MSP] gives us that guaranteed
access. And it is a great value for the dollar to ensure that
we can have U.S.-flag, U.S.-crewed ships available to support
us into the future.
Mr. Wittman. Very good. Mr. Chairman, I cannot compete with
Joe Wilson's cell phone, so I am going to yield back.
Mr. Courtney. Thank you. The chair now recognizes Mr.
Garamendi, chairman of the Readiness Subcommittee.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Several things.
First, General Van Ovost, thank you very much for the
continuing communication, particularly yesterday's
communication. Ms. Lessley, the same, thank you for your year
of work acting, acting in the most extraordinary way to get the
job done, and we thank you for that.
A couple of things. I am going to follow up on, again, what
Mr. Wittman had brought up and what I had discussed in my
opening comments. The report to Congress on the long-range plan
for construction in naval vessels for fiscal year 2022, you go
in to look at it here--I think there is two roll-on/roll-offs
that they're talking about here, and woeful shortage from what
is needed and what would be built.
The bottom line is the Navy isn't going to build--pay for
and build or own a sufficient quantity of logistical ships.
In particular, Mr. Wittman, these ships that you are
talking about, those that are intratheater ships.
The reality is that we have to find another way to do that.
And we actually do have a way to do that, the MSP program. So
my question to both of you is could the MSP Program contract
beyond its current range of ships, which are mostly bluewater,
oceangoing, to move into those intratheater ships that was
discussed a few moments ago? So let's start with MARAD here,
and then we will go to TRANSCOM.
Ms. Lessley. Thank you. My understanding is there is a 60-
vessel limit. So any kind of change would require a change in
the authorizing statute.
Mr. Garamendi. Guess what we do? We change the law. So if
the law were to be changed, could you go about contracting for
other kinds of vessels that meet the intratheater requirements?
Ms. Lessley. We can certainly carry out any
responsibilities that we are assigned.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you. General.
General Van Ovost. Thanks. I will say that, you know, any
kind of capability to increase our ability to maneuver around
in the Pacific would be helpful. We would have to take a look
from a military necessity to see if more than 60 ships--what
exactly--what that number might be and what the return on
investment might be. And we certainly, from an analytic
standpoint, can support MARAD in that way. But, again, I am a
huge fan of MSP because we get great capability for very few
dollars.
Mr. Garamendi. Exactly. So very, very few dollars. Probably
a 10th or less of the cost of having the Navy to build them.
And the Navy doesn't have the budget to build them anyway.
So the other piece of this puzzle is the--really stated in
the goals and objectives of ``A Stronger Maritime Nation'';
this was from the Department of Transportation. And,
specifically, the issues here go beyond just the ships. They go
the to shipyards, to the mariners, to the totality of a
maritime nation. We basically have lost our maritime nation. It
has declined and continues to decline. We have an opportunity
to rebuild it and to position the United States to have a
robust maritime nation.
Ms. Lessley, if you could speak to this report and how your
organization might interact in meeting some of the objectives
of the report?
Ms. Lessley. The National Maritime Strategy you are
speaking of was delivered in March of 2020 to Congress. We have
a number of initiatives underway that are supporting near-term
objectives; the TSP obviously one of them. The initiation of
our effort to recapitalize the Ready Reserve. Another thing
laid out in there was, you know, expanding our educational
opportunities. So last year, we did designate 27 institutions--
--
Mr. Garamendi. I am going to--I am going to--I have got 30
seconds, so I'm just going to wrap up here. Thank you very
much. We will go into detail offline. The bottom line of this
is if we develop a National Maritime Security Program that uses
the Jones Act fleet, makes them militarily useful, along with
the current MSP program, we could do this at a fraction of the
cost, and those ships would then be available when needed in an
emergency or otherwise. I am going to pursue this. I think
there is support for that amongst the committees here. We
simply have to meet the logistics requirement. We cannot do it
today. I yield back.
Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Garamendi.
The chair now recognizes the Ranking Member Mr. Waltz of
the Readiness Subcommittee.
Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you for
everyone's questions. I share a lot of those concerns.
General Van Ovost, I appreciate your engagement. I just
want to spend a minute to continue our discussions on global
household goods [GHG]. And as we discussed, I am hearing from
industry, from associations, even from a Ms. Meagan Harless who
led in 2018 the Change.org petition of so many service members
with issues about the program. Even though she had issues with
the program then, she doesn't like the direction it is going on
top of industry and associations and others. And they are all
ringing the alarm bells about the current construct of GHG and
about the current awardee.
And I think what underlies it--and I share the concern, as
we have discussed--is removing competition from our--from our
military moves. And I realize--and we have discussed that
currently there's about 900 companies. But, really, it is about
a handful that the government's actually dealing with that have
been subcontracts. But we are going from that construct to one,
to one single provider.
And I think, you know, members of this committee as we see
across the services, we see across combatant commands, I think
we have seen time and time again the issue with going to one
contract or to one provider. I fear that this will become kind
of the joint strike fighter of military moves, as I shared with
you, where things take too long, or are over cost, and the
government doesn't have a backup plan.
So here is my concern and my question. Since 2018, when
military members raised a lot of concerns--the customer
satisfaction surveys have actually improved up to 94 and 95
percent, which could always be better, but it is pretty darn
high. But the goal of the program, of the construct it is now
with GHG, is to go back to 91 percent, and then work its way
back up to the mid 90s. And the awarded bidder has a customer
satisfaction down in the 80s.
And, you know, we are at the same time going to be asking
them to increase the amount of moves they are doing by five-
fold, while also increasing their customer satisfaction that
currently is subpar.
And so how does TRANSCOM move forward with one company that
served the smallest number of moves amongst the major companies
that are currently moving, at a higher cost with the lowest
satisfaction rate? Help me square that circle.
General Van Ovost. Thank you for that question. I too am
concerned for our members and their families, and we have got
to get this right. But I am confident in our solicitation and
the structure of a single move manager as an integrator
structure, right?
Today, we lack the accountability necessary for our
families and for Congress. And the structure we have now, and
that we have set up, and that the GAO [Government
Accountability Office] has reviewed very thoroughly, adds both
carrots and sticks to the single move manager. And we have a
continuous evaluation process for up to 28 metrics, every
month, that we will be able to foresee any concerns with the
single move manager.
And this not only gives us the insight we need to ensure
accountability, it gives the transparency to our military
members and their families.
And while with any new contract there is risk, we have
factored that risk into our transition plan very carefully,
from the IT [information technology] capability to capacity
building, with checks along the way. The bottom line is I fully
am confident that this contract will provide the quality
capacity that our service members and their family deserve and
that you have asked for.
Mr. Waltz. General. Sorry, yeah, not to interrupt you,
since we are time-limited today. I just want to share with you
this is a bipartisan concern. I pulled up Chairman Garamendi's
question to your predecessor about a year ago that asked about
the lack of a contingency plan, the lack of a backup plan.
We are not asking--the answer was we are not going back to
the current construct. We are not asking that. I think what we
are asking is if this doesn't work, we plow ahead and it
doesn't work--as you hope it will particularly with new IT
systems being developed as well, we know how government IT
goes--what is the backup plan?
And since I am out of time, I just want to ask that our
teams explore those options. And will you work with me to
explore some type of contingency? And we all know contingencies
and backups are the hallmark of any type of prudent planning?
Will you work with me on that, General?
General Van Ovost. I will.
Mr. Waltz. Thank you, and Mr. Chairman, I yield my time.
Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Waltz. The chair now
recognizes Congresswoman Slotkin from Michigan.
Ms. Slotkin. Hi, there. Thanks for being with us. And,
General Van Ovost, it is great to see you again and share a
room with you again. You know, I guess I have been struck over
the past almost year now how logistics have become sexy, right?
Everybody's talking about logistics. Everybody's gotten
religion on logistics. Whether they are watching the Russians
fail at some of the basics of logistics in Ukraine.
Whether you're from the private sector, and you are
suddenly really focused on logistics because of some of the
supply chain anguish we have been having. The pullout of
Afghanistan and watching the in extremis logistics that had to
go on that no one felt proud of as we watched on TV.
So I have really seen the conversation--or feel like the
conversation has shifted, and it highlights what a great job we
do on logistics, right? That it is not simple stuff.
I guess what I have also seen is the rise of importance of
the private sector in helping, when needed, to get things from
point A to point B. So whether that was in Afghanistan, how
private airline companies came and partnered with us to help
when we needed--when you needed to move folks over to Kabul.
Whether that is now the private sector helping us get
humanitarian assistance to the borders with Ukraine.
You know, whether it is humanitarian disasters, weather
disasters. I just feel like there is going to be more and more
partnership over the next 10 years where the military and the
private sector are going to have to partner.
So my question is, you know, we were talking about your
experience in Afghanistan. Do you have all the authorities you
need to bring in the private sector, the patriotic private
sector, when we need them the most? And if not, what could we
help you with to ease that ahead of need?
General Van Ovost. Thank you for recognizing that we could
not do this without not just our private sector, but with our
allies and partners who give us that access, basing, and
overflight to make the impossible probable. And especially, as
you spoke out to Afghanistan, I want to thank the emergency
programs such as CRAF, our Civil Reserve Air Fleet.
We actually activated CRAF Stage 1 almost seamlessly. And
not only activated it, but deactivated it. We were very
transparent with our commercial partners. They were very
appreciative, and they came on and volunteered, you know, and
were very patriotic all throughout there.
So I don't suspect we are going to see anything where we
won't go together with our allies and partners and our
industry. Indeed, in the first security cooperation deliveries
for Ukraine was done by one of our commercial partners directly
into Kyiv. So very proud of them. I have the authorities
necessary, as the TRANSCOM commander, to work and be
transparent with our commercial partners.
Then I go through the Secretary of Defense should I need to
activate an emergency program. But I am just so proud that our
industry has been leaning forward and supporting us all the
way.
Ms. Slotkin. So I would just say if as you continue to do
your job around the world you feel like there are things where
ease of administration would help you, please come to us before
the need. You know, we will always be here if there is a real
crisis, but it is always better to practice and execute those
authorities before we are in a crisis.
And then, lastly, we talked very, very briefly about the
theater of the Arctic, right? And we know that that is a very
difficult--the geography there is very, very difficult. In
light of Russia invading Ukraine and making--given how much
territory they have above the Arctic Circle, can you give us--
paint us a picture of what it is like doing logistics in the
Arctic?
General Van Ovost. Certainly. That is an area of concern. I
have been working very closely with NORTHCOM [U.S. Northern
Command] on the plans for defense of the Arctic area. And, in
general, you know, power projection is a little harder, but we
have been doing exercises with the command on how to support
it. We support it generally from the United States as we
project forward. And so I am happy with the progress we were
making, but it is not done yet. There is some posture that we
will be working on with NORTHCOM into the future.
Ms. Slotkin. Yeah, I would just say that we have all, I
think, probably been happy that the Arctic hasn't been a place
of military tension. But I think that we in this committee and
in general in Congress need to be thinking more about that
becoming a more difficult space to operate just given the
Russian interests up there. With that I yield back.
Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Congresswoman Slotkin.
The chair now recognizes Congressman Kelly from
Mississippi.
Mr. Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you,
witnesses, for being here.
General Van Ovost, I am from Mississippi, and we proudly
have the C-17 Globemaster IIIs and the 172d Air Wing in
Jackson. We also have KC-135s, the 186th Wing in Meridian,
Mississippi, which is very close to my hometown. Both of those
are backbone. I want to echo Ranking Member Waltz's thing about
the global household goods contract. I echo his sentiments on
that.
I also--just because all of my questions are going to be
about C-17s and KC-135s, I understand theat 70 percent are
maritime fleet. And I want to echo what Mr. Wittman and others
have said about our maritime fleet and making sure we have the
capacity to do the job that we need, in-time logistics, not
just-in-time logistics, so that we are prepared for that.
On the C-17s--I know a lot of our foreign partners these
guys have been a workload in Afghanistan, again in Ukraine. And
a lot of our international partners are getting state-of-the-
art digital analytics capabilities in their C-17s. We have a
project going on at Joint Base McGuire to see how that works
here and how it affects that.
Assuming that this pilot is successful at McGuire Air Force
Base, how does that affect the other 222 C-17s throughout our
fleet and making sure that they have those capabilities to work
in a contested environment?
General Van Ovost. Thank you, Congressman. Again, I
reiterate our friends from Mississippi have been doing great
work. And I rely on the expertise of the Guard and Reserve
who--they have been bringing it really strong when it comes to
innovation and support for these aircraft, especially as they
age. And as you said, the C-17, the ability to immediately
deploy combat power is a strategic comparative advantage that
one else has.
So while I won't talk about the Air Force, but I do know in
my previous role that what we do is we take successful pilot
programs and expand them as fast as possible. And, again,
through the Guard and Reserve, that is the fastest way we can
expand across the fleet.
Mr. Kelly. And I just--you know, sometimes we want to
change Guard units and their missions. And I am not hearing any
of that talk, but I just--I caution you against that. I will
tell you it is not just the pilots and the experience that we
lose with pilots and whether they're KC-135s or C-17s; but
those maintenance crews are better than anything you can ever
have on Active Duty because of the longevity that they do those
missions.
And so we don't need to change those things when we don't
have to when we are talking about refueling our C-17s. Because
if we do, we lose all of that maintenance experience as well as
the pilot experience.
Talk a little bit about the KC-146 remote vision system. We
have had our issues with that. We are still working through
those. The identified solution is not available until fiscal
year 2024. And during that time do we have sufficient aerial
refueling capacity to allow retirement of legacy tankers in
2022--and fiscal year 2022 and 2023?
General Van Ovost. Yeah. I agree. We just completed a
study, Mobility Capability Requirements Study. And as I look at
the total capacity of air refueling now that the KC-46 is a bit
delayed coming online, we are at elevated risk should we have
multiple wartime demands, [what are] called stacked demands on
this aircraft.
However, there are mitigation opportunities that I am
working with the combatant commanders on. And indeed now that
the new National Defense Strategy has come out, we are taking a
relook at the requirements for air refueling, especially when
we think about refueling in a contested environment and in the
Pacific. So today I can meet our wartime demands.
Mr. Kelly. You know, and I know any time we divest and get
new capabilities, it's a sliding risk scale of what you give
up. I just think the world environment that has changed in the
last month or 6 weeks with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, I
just hope we relook that. And I don't know what the right
answer is. And I know you guys, that is what you get to do as
senior level commanders is manage that risk for the Nation. And
I trust you to do that. I just want to make sure we are looking
at those. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Kelly. The chair now
recognizes Mr. Norcross from New Jersey.
Mr. Norcross. Thank you, Chairman. General, I have followup
on the question concerning the 135s, but he talked about the
next 2 years. I want to talk about a little bit further out
when the current buy of 179 KC-46s end, yet we still have the
135. What are your plans for replacing the 135 past that? It is
a couple years old. In fact, most maintainers weren't born when
that came online? Can you give us some clarity on that?
General Van Ovost. Thank you. The KC-46 is the first step
in our refueling capitalization program. As you mentioned, the
contract for 179 will still have the KC-135, which then would
be an average of 46 years old. So it is important that we
continually recap that. So we are working with the Air Force on
what the future requirements of an air refueling platform might
be.
Now the KC-46 does have some key capabilities that I would
like to see going into the future. It is part of the network,
it's connected. And it can do more--it is a multi-modal. It can
do drogue and probe stick boom refueling.
So as we create the requirements, we will be working with
the Air Force on what we expect to be a continuous
recapitalization program of the refueling fleet.
Mr. Norcross. Thank you. So from the sky I'm going to move
it back down to Earth. Red Hill is retiring. The plan, moving
more diversified, more forward; and when we support that single
point of failure that Red Hill could be at some point. But now
we're putting all this fuel at sea, we have the Tanker Security
Program.
Can you touch base a little bit on what the security
protocols and posture of those tankers floating around in open
ocean, not only from those who would do us harm from nations,
but from terrorists.
General Van Ovost. Certainly. The charter tankers, the
long-term charter tankers, we are going to have about 30
million gallons, which is about 3 percent of the reserve
requirement for INDOPACOM for their needs. So it is a small
percentage. But, importantly, it is diverse. It is going to be
on the move. It is much harder to target something on the move
than it is in a fixed location on a certain land area.
And so an on-the-move target, I think, is one way. The
other way is the fact that we have many diverse locations with
respect to land based. So, again, diversifying more towards the
south and east. And for the rest, I would like to either take
that for the record or go to a classified session.
Mr. Norcross. Thank you. Look forward to it. Yield back.
Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Norcross. The chair now
recognizes Mr. Gallagher from Wisconsin.
Mr. Gallagher. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. General Van Ovost,
last year I asked your predecessor a series of questions about
the near-term readiness of our strategic lift capabilities to
sustain the fight over Taiwan in 2025, not 2045. The response I
got at the time was that we had to wait for the then
forthcoming China task force report and the global posture
review. That that would provide better insight. Those reviews
have since been completed.
The National Defense Strategy has been transmitted in
classified fashion to this committee. So I would like to ask
some of those same questions. Starting with just when you look
across the maritime lift enterprise, to the extent you can talk
about this in an open session, how does our current capacity
stack up against what we would need to fight and win if we had
to go to war in the Indo-Pacific tomorrow?
General Van Ovost. As alluded to earlier, we have an aging
sealift fleet. And with the Ready Reserve Force at 46 years
old, the reliability is less than we would like it. So when I
think about total capacity, I think about that and our ability
to contract capability into the Pacific.
So right now today, while I am concerned, I think that we
can meet the mark today, but we have to continue to focus on
ensuring that the ships will be available when we need them,
and that they will remain reliable throughout a conflict on the
maritime side.
Mr. Gallagher. So how--I mean, the bottom line is what
would be the biggest gaps that concern you, if we are thinking
on a 2025 timeline?
General Van Ovost. So the biggest gaps I see with respect
to just ensuring that we have the total square footage that is
necessary, and that we have the mariners that are necessary,
which is why, you know, the maritime industry is so important
to us as a maritime nation. We will need their expertise. As
they have come in peace and war to support us, we want make
sure we can still recruit and retain our great maritime
warriors.
Mr. Gallagher. So how can Congress best help fill those
gaps on that timeline? Is it just a question of funding? Is it
the Maritime Security Program? What are the ways that we can
fill the gaps.
General Van Ovost. I will speak to my part, and I will pass
it to MARAD. But, certainly, sealift recapitalization on a
schedule that ensures that we are able to replace the current
ships that are unreliable with ships that we can continue to
use and have a high reliability. And then over to MARAD.
Ms. Lessley. I actually would totally agree with the
general. I mean DOD sets the requirements, but we will continue
the recapitalization as quickly as we can. As we discussed,
there is a limit right now on the number of ships that we can
buy. We are authorized, but we are contingent on action by Navy
to buy more than four right now. So we are actively engaged in
buying the next two. But actions outside of our control have to
happen before we can continue the purchases.
Mr. Gallagher. Is our present network of bases and
alliances in the Indo-Pacific optimized for our maritime lift
needs in support of both the blunt and contact layers?
General Van Ovost. Congressman, I will have to get back to
you on optimization. As the INDOPACOM commander has come up
with a new to be posture, that answer would be in the
classified realm. So I would like to be able to take that and
get back to you.
Mr. Gallagher. How does the closure of Red Hill potentially
impact our fuel reserves and our demands in the Pacific?
General Van Ovost. The closure of Red Hill does not really
affect our fuel reserves. In fact, Red Hill is not fueled to
the maximum amount. Over time, we have been reducing the fuel
out of Red Hill and positioning it to more favorable locations.
Mr. Gallagher. So last year when I asked your predecessor
about our ability respond to and sustain a war over Taiwan in a
way that gives us physical, psychological, and temporal
advantage was the phrase your predecessor used. I didn't really
get necessarily a response.
I guess what I am driving at is if the proverbial stuff
were to hit the fan tomorrow over Taiwan, what would be our
biggest shortfalls? And what would be our ability to sustain
that war? I only have 14 seconds, so you may be able run the
clock out on me.
General Van Ovost. Certainly this is about contested
logistics and our ability to maneuver with the force and
provide the capabilities they need on the timing and tempo that
they need. And we are doing various things to try to get after
those gaps right now.
Mr. Gallagher. Thank you.
Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Gallagher. The chair now
recognizes Mr. Langevin, who is on the screen.
Mr. Langevin. Very good. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Can you
hear me okay?
Mr. Courtney. I hear you fine, Jim.
Mr. Langevin. Very good. Thank you. I want to thank our
witnesses for your testimony today. I will begin, if I could,
with General Van Ovost. General, TRANSCOM's sea fleet is
obviously a critical component of transporting equipment across
the world. However, Military Sealift Command relies heavily on
agreements with commercial partners to provide sealift
capabilities. Obviously, these partners are vulnerable to cyber
attacks, which is deeply concerning to me and to my colleagues,
especially due to the Russian Federation potential for
offensive cyber operations.
So I wanted to ask, how are you working with these
commercial partners to ensure that they are bolstering their
cyber defenses? And are you prepared to respond in coordination
with U.S. Cyber Command to any cyber intrusions that may occur?
General Van Ovost. Thank you for bringing up this critical
question. Cyber operations absolutely pose significant threat
to logistics and supply chains. And cyber attacks will slow and
degrade our ability to continue to move forces forward when
necessary.
So when working with our commercial partner, we have a
number of initiatives with them. We are now doing--they are
doing self-assessments on their cyber readiness and then
providing them to us on a year-to-year basis. And we are
watching that get better and better. Indeed, these cyber
assessments are being briefed out to their C-suite level so we
know that they are focused on this concern.
We also have been working several pilot programs with
CYBERCOM [U.S. Cyber Command and CISA [Cybersecurity and
Infrastructure Security Agency] to share intelligence and
threat information across to our transportation service
providers. But we know it is not going to be one and none. We
are going after persistent threat within our cyber realm. And
we always have to be on alert.
So we will continue to leverage these programs coming out
of CYBERCOM and CISA, and ensure that our transportation
service providers have access to them to improve their
cybersecurity.
Mr. Langevin. Thanks. So let's drill down just a minute on
that, the self-assessment. What are we doing in terms of third-
party validators to ensure that those assessments, you know,
are worth more than just the paper they are written on? What
type of red-teaming do they need to do as they are doing these
self-assessments?
You know, I can remember early on in my career when I first
started doing the deep dive on cyber. And I wanted to know how
secure we are in terms of our critical infrastructure, like our
electric grid. And I was told everything is fine, you know, we
have got this.
And, clearly, they did not, and we were really
underprepared as a country. What are you doing in terms of
validating these self-assessments? And what does that mean?
What does a self-assessment entail?
General Van Ovost. Certainly. Thank you. We are running a
pilot program, for Cyber Command, the first one to try those
third-party assessments. We have completed one, and we are just
about to complete the second one, and a third one is ongoing.
For the first one was one of our partners, our large
industry partners, and they did very well. In other words, it
matched what their self-assessment was, this third-party look.
And we are shoring up our tactics, techniques, and procedures
right now, and we are going to continue to do that. So I am
heartened by the fact that they are taking it seriously and
that a third party can objectively look at it and declare the
same.
Mr. Langevin. Okay. Thank you. Anything else that you could
offer in terms of the steps that you are taking in making sure
that TRANSCOM itself as a whole is more resilient to cyber
intrusions and continuously evaluating your cyber readiness?
General Van Ovost. Thank you. That is one of my top
priorities. We have a number of initiatives going on with
CYBERCOM for the USTRANSCOM network. With first respect to
hygiene, we are moving to the Cloud very aggressively. We are
the pilot project for CYBERCOM to enable zero trust on one of
our networks. And we are trying to harden our terrain,
essentially modernize so that we can secure our terrain.
Mr. Langevin. Very good. Those are a helpful list of things
you identified; moving in the right direction. I see that my
time is almost expired, so I will submit the other question I
have for the record. And thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Langevin. The chair now
recognizes Mr. Scott.
Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Lessley, it is not
often that we have somebody from the Department of
Transportation in this committee. So I am glad you are here. I
know we have been talking about the value of the cadets at
Kingspoint, the service that comes out of Kingspoint. I want to
point out to you that there is a significant difference in the
way a cadet at Kingspoint is--treated may not be the right
word, but--than any of the other service academies.
My understanding is that a midshipman at the Naval Academy,
for example, receives $1,185 a month to help pay the cost. They
receive insurance. Where at Kingspoint, I don't believe they
receive the stipend or the insurance. Is that correct?
Ms. Lessley. I don't know about the stipend. I mean, I have
to take that for the record.
Mr. Scott. Okay. I know I am correct on the insurance. I
just--my suggestion to the Department of Transportation would
be that if we want more merchant mariners, that we should find
some equilibrium between the way the cadets are treated, the
midshipmen are treated at the Merchant Marine Academy and they
are treated at the Naval Academy or at the Coast Guard Academy
or any of the other academies. I just--as we have our
discussions with candidates, that is an issue.
And we only have about 280 a year that are actually
admitted to the Merchant Marine Academy. So if we invest
$25,000 a year per plebe, midship--whatever the proper
terminology is--it is just simply not that much money for us as
a country. And the investment that we make I think would be a
very good one.
And I would encourage you to look at that and look forward
to further discussions with you on that. So I would appreciate
if you would commit to at that and get back to us on that.
Ms. Lessley. Certainly.
Mr. Scott. General, I have 31 law enforcement agencies in
the State of Georgia that have already donated 2,200 vests with
body armor to the people fighting in Ukraine.
I am told through the National Guard Bureau that they
believe that they could accumulate as many as at 10,000 vests
for the people that are currently fighting in the Ukraine. Is
it possible for TRANSCOM to get those vests to the people on
the front line defending Ukraine?
General Van Ovost. First of all, I applaud them for trying
to help out Ukraine. And there is a cell, a planning cell, that
is taking donations and working to get them to Ukraine. And
what we can do is pass you the information for that cell.
Mr. Scott. Yes, ma'am. I would appreciate the further
information. Because I know there are a lot of people in our
National Guard and in our law enforcement, many times they are
the same people that are ready, willing, and able to send that
excess inventory to people that are fighting for freedom. And
we want to get that to them as soon as possible.
One other question about transport. My understanding is
that we have 643 T-72 tanks in various NATO inventories. They
are ready to use. They are easy to maintain. Ukrainians should
be able to operate them. If we wanted to get those tanks to
Ukrainians, does TRANSCOM have the needed airlift and sealift
to backfill?
General Van Ovost. Yes, Congressman. So moving tanks around
is what we do with our commercial industry partners. So if
European Command, and the administration is authorized to move
some tanks out of Europe and needs to be replenished, we
absolutely would be able to support with that, and we would
work with the Army on what they would need.
Mr. Scott. Thank you. My time has almost expired. Ms.
Lessley, I am very serious about the way we handle the Merchant
Marine Academy. I think that that would be money well spent to
equalize, if you will, the way we treat the men and women that
go to Kingspoint with the other academies.
Ms. Lessley. Thank you so much. Thank you. We will get back
to you.
Mr. Scott. Thank you. I yield the remainder of my time.
Mr. Courtney. That you, Mr. Scott.
Ms. Speier, who is on the screen, is next, from California.
Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for
presenting to us today.
Let me start with General Van Ovost, given that most of our
partners for sealift capabilities are in the civilian sector
and don't have the appropriate communications security measures
in place, what has TRANSCOM done to reduce the risk of
intercept or other intrusions in the sealift communications?
General Van Ovost. Thanks for that question. We are working
with our Military Sealift Command to provide, when necessary,
carry-on secure communications as well as our tactical
advisors, our tactical officers, which are essentially our
merchant mariners, to support them should they need for
tactical maneuvering or to do communications or move
intelligence to support their movements.
Ms. Speier. So do we have any evidence of hacking going on
in the communications areas of these entities?
General Van Ovost. I would have to get back to you in a
classified setting to provide that information.
Ms. Speier. All right. Thank you. We are now 4 years past
acknowledging the legacy moving program is a failure. Yet a new
contract is still not in place. I serve as chair of the
Military Personnel Subcommittee and Mr. Gallagher as ranking
member, and we do hear from families, especially during COVID,
that there were not crews to pick up their household goods, or
that the goods never showed up.
These families were told that they had to just move their
belongings themselves or plan for their stuff to be moved after
they left the local area. So what has TRANSCOM done to prevent
this from happening in the upcoming move season?
General Van Ovost. Yeah, thank you for that question. You
know, COVID has absolutely demonstrated--the labor shortage has
demonstrated the current flaws in the current program. And that
is something that with a multiyear contract, a single
integrator hopefully, you know, there would be a quality
capacity available.
And we would be able to manage that capacity better so that
we wouldn't have to tell people to do your own move yourself.
So while the GAO ruled completely favorably towards
TRANSCOM and towards the allotting of this contract, we are in
the Court of Federal Claims now. So it will be another 6 months
before we can begin the process with this contractor. In the
meanwhile, we are not waiting. We are doing things like
enhancing communications, making claims easier, giving options
to our family members on when they can get pickups and
deliveries, giving them better transparency, and removing
personally identifiable information from these slips when we
have to go overseas, which is normally part of the customs
process.
So we are trying to hit after every pain point possible to
relieve our families from any burden.
Ms. Speier. Well, it sounds like they are going to go
through another move season in which they are going to be held
responsible for moving their own belongings. Is that right?
General Van Ovost. There is still a labor shortage, but we
will do everything we can to ensure that the current
contractors can provide capacity for the move season. But the
labor shortage affecting the economy is also affecting the move
industry.
Ms. Speier. All right. Thank you.
Ms. Lessley, the Merchant Marine Academy cruises are now
back on the Sea Year. And we have been very troubled by the
reports of sexual assault and sexual abuse among the academy
students. So you do have a new reporting system in place.
Can you tell us about it? Is it working? And are there safe
options for reporting and ensuring the victims are able to
access services?
Ms. Lessley. Thank you. So we have made a number of
changes. First, as we have talked about, we've put new
requirements on the carriers that--commercial carriers that
carry our cadets. We have also instituted a new
Superintendent's Instruction at the academy and revised our Sea
Year guide. We have also given satellite phones that enable
voice communication to every cadet at sea.
In terms of--we still have the same process of restricted
and unrestricted reporting. That hasn't changed. You know, we
are confident that these measures will improve safety. However,
we have built into all of them a process of continuous review
and improvement. We have engaged a subject matter expert to
come and look at the EMBARC program, and will continue to
engage experts and seek opportunities to make improvements
wherever possible. By no means are these measures the final
ones. They are just steps in what is going to have to be a
continuous process of removing barriers. And there have been
too many barriers. And I am convinced that there are still
barriers to reporting. We are committed to doing that. And it
is primary focus for me and for the entire Maritime
Administration.
Ms. Speier. Ms. Lessley, my time has expired, but I would
appreciate the opportunity to meet with you privately to go
over more information and more data that we have uncovered. I
yield back.
Ms. Lessley. I would welcome that. Thank you.
Mr. Courtney. Thank you. The chair now recognizes Mr.
Wilson from South Carolina.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much, Chairman Courtney. And
thank both of you for your service. General Van Ovost, I am
grateful that the Air Force sustainers at Joint Base
Charleston, South Carolina, who bolster the ability to project
power across the globe through substantial airlift capability.
We appreciate that Joint Air Base Charleston maintains one
of the largest fleets of C-17 aircraft in the Air Force,
providing a significant portion of Air Mobility Command's
global reach airlift capacity. How vital is the C-17 platform
to meet TRANSCOM's mission requirements? Is the Air Force fleet
of C-17s sufficient to meet TRANSCOM's demands for airlift
logistics?
General Van Ovost. Thank you for saying that. At
Charleston, the men and women of the air wings there have
performed admirably. They are the first ones we call when we
need something overnight. Whether it was their work in
Afghanistan for the retrograde, or whether it was in Ukraine,
we use them extensively. So thank you for the great experienced
aviators that you have there and maintainers. They are amazing.
As I said, they answer the call every day. I look at the
fleet. It provides the immediate force. I mean, it is the
deterrent force for our Nation. So keeping that aircraft
healthy is a focus of mine. But when I look at the Mobility
Capability Requirement Study, it shows that we do have the
aircraft that we need, but we have been flying them a lot.
So we do need to be thinking about how would we
recapitalize such a great aircraft. And I am working with the
Air Force on what those requirements might look like.
Mr. Wilson. I know it is personal. I actually would go to
the Charleston Air Force Base when I was growing up for kids'
day. And so they would have young people see the capabilities
there. And it is heartwarming when I see the Palmetto State
flag around the world and the very capable people in--and my
dad is an Air Force veteran, and it really has great meaning.
And, Ms. Lessley, I was very grateful to visit our NATO
[North Atlantic Treaty Organization] allies in Bulgaria and
Romania last summer as part of a congressional delegation. With
our current forward deployed troop presence in Novo Selo
training area and MK Air Base, the strategic ports of Varna in
Bulgaria and Constanta in Romania are of vital importance to
our logistics chain. With the murderous presence of the Putin
warships in the Black Sea, what are the limitations on
commercial vessels? And how does it affect the deployment and
sustainability in the region?
Ms. Lessley. I think I am going to have to take that
question back. You know, in a general sense, there are--we put
out guides to mariners about certain areas and risks that are
involved there. And we do have some vessels underway right now
supporting DOD operations. But I will get back to you on the
specific question that you have asked.
[The information referred to was not available at the time
of printing.]
General Van Ovost. I can just add, on the Department of
Defense requirements--I can't speak to the civilian
requirements moving civilian goods. But from a Department of
Defense perspective, we have not really been affected by the
activities in the Black Sea with respect to moving the force.
So we have been able to maneuver around the current areas of
operation.
Mr. Wilson. Well, having visited Novo Selo and MK Air Base
a number of times, it is really so encouraging and inspiring.
The people of Bulgaria would love to see Varna developed. The
people of Romania would like to see Constanta, and how
important the Black Sea sadly is today.
And then, General, the disastrous surrender with 13
Americans murdered, leaving Americans behind in Afghanistan
ceded control of strategic bases to the murderous Taliban. Both
Bagram and Kabul were major stopover locations capable of
landing and servicing C-17s on worldwide missions. How has our
ability to transport equipment and personnel been limited
across CENTCOM [U.S. Central Command] without these bases.
General Van Ovost. Congressman, we have not been limited
because we are not flying in and through Afghanistan. It is a
landlocked nation, and we do not have a lot of airways that we
require to move U.S. military capability through. Our routes in
and through Central Command are robust and distributed.
Mr. Wilson. Is there any potential for a base, say, in
India?
Mr. Courtney. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you for your service.
Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Wilson.
The chair now recognizes Mr. Banks from Indiana
Mr. Banks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. General, Admiral
Richard at STRATCOM [U.S. Strategic Command] recently described
the importance of things like EMP [electromagnetic pulse]
hardening for future tankers given that China and Russia are
both nuclear-armed states. Based on evolving threats to aerial
refueling operations, what are your top priorities for
capability and capacity for the future aerial refueling fleet?
General Van Ovost. Thank you for that question. I think
about that a lot with respect to contested environment and what
we need to be successful at echelon in a contested environment.
And what that takes is we need to make sure our platforms are
connected into the network; that they can see the battle, so
that they become more survivable. And they can make decisions
at echelon knowing the--the scheme of maneuver.
At Transportation Command, we used to just deploy the force
and sustain the force. Now, we have to deploy the force,
sustain the force, and maneuver the force because of the
contested environment. So all of our platforms, whether that is
air or surface, need to be connected. And we need to be
connected in a secure way.
Mr. Banks. Over the past year, the KC-46 has been cleared
to take on more operational taskings from TRANSCOM, and is now
able to refuel 70 percent of all the receivers in the DOD
inventory. Do you expect to clear more receivers for
operational refueling this year, General?
General Van Ovost. [Inaudible] I work with our air
component, Air Mobility Command. They have cleared all of the
F-22 and F-35 fifth-gen. So they are at 85 percent clear.
In addition, they are doing exercises around the world to
exercise our logistics chain and ensure that they can mobilize
in the small packages and generate receiving tanker capability
while they are forward.
So I am--I am heartened by the exercising that they are
doing. They are also providing some capacity to TRANSCOM for on
a day-to-day basis to do refueling. I think this is the fastest
way to fully operationally capable by having the crews get out
there and do reps and sets on that aircraft.
Mr. Banks. To what degree would you say that the KC-46 is
now helping to relieve stress on the air refueling fleet?
General Van Ovost. The KC-46 has been doing what we call
coronets, which is taking fighter aircraft around the world.
And they have also been doing quite a bit of the air refueling
insides and doing some exercises in places like Red Flag and up
in Alaska.
So, again, getting reps and sets on how we would actually
fly the airplane in combat is what they have been doing. That
has been offloading our KC-135s and KC-10s so that those can
actually deploy forward on, say, into the CENTCOM AOR [area of
responsibility] or into the EUCOM AOR to do deployments
forward.
Mr. Banks. In your written testimony, you highlighted the
importance of continuing to replace Eisenhower era KC-135s with
the KC-46. The current KC-46 program would buy 179 aircraft.
That 179th tanker will be delivered in 2029. By that time,
hundreds of KC-135s may still be flying at an average age of 70
years old.
Is it your expectation that the 180th modern tanker,
whatever it may be, will start delivering as soon as the
current program of record completes?
General Van Ovost. We have been working with the Air Force
on a recapitalization plan that will ensure that we can
continue to recapitalize. Because we recognize that a 70-year-
old aircraft is very hard to maintain, and the reliability on
the road would not be good. So we are working with the Air
Force on the requirements for the follow-on tanker, if you
will. And we would hope, as you see in the budget, that they
have placed some money to try to take a look at that future
refueler.
Mr. Banks. Would you say there is a sense of urgency to do
that?
General Van Ovost. I would say there is a sense of urgency,
yes.
Mr. Banks. Last July, the House Armed Services Committee
heard testimony that the threat from man-portable air defense
systems known as MANPADS is proliferating. One month later, we
saw a coalition transport aircraft deploying counter-missile
defensive flares over Kabul. And now we are witnessing a
significant inflow of thousands of MANPADS into Ukraine.
General, can you characterize the state of the MANPADS
threat facing TRANSCOM airlift assets such as C-130s and C-17s,
and the importance of developing new protection technologies
for those systems such as engine infrared suppressors.
General Van Ovost. Yes. The contested environment does
include surface-to-air and MANPADS. And I think about every day
where our aircraft go and what threats that they face. So as we
assess where they go, we ensure that they have the capabilities
required to defeat that threat, and we do a very thorough risk
assessment with the type of mission. And we [inaudible] many
mitigating areas that in case--to reduce the overall risk.
That said, new capabilities like our large IR [infrared]
counter--large aircraft IR countermeasure systems are a key
measure that we want to have in our aircraft in the future.
Mr. Banks. Thank you. My time has expired.
Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Banks.
The chair now recognizes Mr. Moore.
Mr. Moore. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you for being here. I
think it is very clear, particularly what is going on with the
Ukrainian conflict, that logistics is vital to the warfighter.
I am encouraged by some of the failures we have seen from the
Russian side. I am also encouraged by the investments that we
are trying to make.
We are not there yet, but I am encouraged to see us--that
TRANSCOM and MARAD have been making investments. We will
continue to--we have and we will continue to--I have it on good
authority the gentleman from Alabama will also be talking about
the KC-46.
But I am not going to delve into this. I would like to
highlight the efforts of the 151st Air Refueling Wing out of
Roland R. Wright National Guard Base in Utah. I am dovetailing
off of my colleague from Indiana.
The KC-46 is failing to meet expectations in terms of
delivery, performance, and capability. Growing pains are
expected from any new platform, but we cannot continue to
ignore the role the KC-135 will continue to play across our
global combatant combats, particularly for the National Guard.
The KC-135 must bridge the gap between full integration of a
fully operational KC-46.
At the 151st, they have used their own money from their
National Guard and Reserve Equipment Account [NGREA] to
implement groundbreaking and innovative modernizations to the
KC-135. They are taking this on themselves.
Due to their creativity, ingenuity, and foresight, the
151st has the first tanker to be on the link with the Advanced
Battle Management System and the first to possess the ability
to connect with other combat platforms. They are continuing to
work on other modernizations to improve fuel efficiency and
give the KC-135 the ability to buy back airspace in a contested
environment. Best of all, these essential modernizations are
directly transferable to the KC-46 when the KC-135 is
eventually retired.
This is a gap. They are working to fill this gap and
modernize to make it a more effective aircraft that can be
transferred to the KC-146.
My question, and General Van Ovost, what has your team done
to complement modernization efforts on the KC-135? And do you
support further modernization funding to help bridge this gap
between the 46 and the 135?
General Van Ovost. Thank you. You've hit on a key point. We
must continue to modernize the KC-135 today to make it more
relevant and resilient in the contested environment. As I spoke
briefly earlier, the most important for the survivability is to
ensure that they are on that network. And so the innovative and
amazing airmen from your wing that have come up with ideas on
how to put together a Link 16 and bring it onto the aircraft
for the first time that we then used in exercises, has been
very, very helpful. And as I talk to my air component about how
do we expand that and get it very quickly?
And I call it MacGyvering. How do we just get it on the
airplane and get it into the hands of the aircrew so that they
can improve their tactics, techniques, and procedures. And
really this is where I think our Guard and Reserve really bring
it strong with respect to innovation.
And so I appreciate the Guard using their NGREA funds to do
this testing and training. And I appreciate them thinking about
fuel efficiency. Again, many of those folks work or maintain
airline aircraft, and they understand fuel efficiency and the
ways to get after it.
Mr. Moore. Are you aware of any test efforts to keep the
135 operable in a contested environment?
General Van Ovost. I am. I am. As I said, the contested
environment is here right now. And there are numerous
modifications that Air Mobility Command is trying to place into
the KC-135. This is a little bit a matter of scale with the
number of airplanes that they would have to modify.
But they are trying to make--not only make the airplane
more relevant and survivable, but frankly there are areas where
parts obsolescence are a problem, and they've [indaudible]
after just replacing stuff that they can't fix anymore. So it
is a large modernization program, but they are working it very
hard.
Mr. Moore. And just to kind of drive this point home.
Because I know you are not going to be able to give me an exact
dollar figure on what you would be willing to support right
here. But back to this concept of are we able--are we further--
can we further support modernization funding? What are the key
biggest challenges to being able to find a way to do that?
Because we recognize the problem.
We recognize we have a very talented and engaged leadership
team in Salt Lake City. Congressman Stewart and I work closely
with this group. It is an honor to serve them. And you are
right, they are taking it on their own. What are the key
challenges that are going to keep us from being able to
modernize here?
General Van Ovost. I think that as I work with the air
component on the ability to get the funds for those
modernization packages for the KC-135 just to keep it going.
And then again I appreciate the efforts of the team from Utah
as they bring it strong, in innovation [inaudible] they are
doing their own test and engineering. We are doing our very
best in the Air Force with Wright Patterson to get the
engineering capacity to them so we can leverage their
knowledge.
Mr. Moore. I welcome you to visit, I will be there to greet
you, and hope that you would be willing to accept that
invitation.
Mr. Courtney. Great. Thank you, Mr. Moore.
The chair now recognizes Mr. Bergman.
Mr. Bergman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess I would
associate with several of my colleagues' comments here on the
concern over the household goods situation.
General, what I heard you say was there was a previously,
to a level, a lack of accountability, so then therefore hire an
integrator. I guess my question was does this move to hire an
integrator, does that insulate your bureaucracy--even hard for
me to say--your bureaucracy from being held accountable?
General Van Ovost. Congressman, I am accountable for global
household goods.
Mr. Bergman. But you will be gone in a period of time, and
your bureaucracy will be intact. And I appreciate your willing
to be held accountable. And I think as commanders, we have to
look long term, past our time in command. And there are no easy
decisions here. But I guess I would--I would like to hear you
and others say, I will make sure that the--when I am gone and
someone else takes the command, that the bureaucracy that they
are inheriting feels a sense of urgency and accountability for
whatever that mission is.
Because in the end, we can't have a ready force without the
families being adequately taken care of because then that
relieves the stress on that deployed member of that family to
get the job done.
So, Ms. Lessley, did I understand correctly, you referred
to a couple of times the Navy plan for building ships are
getting an okay from the Navy. Can you kind of put a little
meat on that bone for me as far as what that really means?
Quickly, because we have only got 3 minutes here. I mean, what
does that really mean for the Navy to control your
shipbuilding.
Ms. Lessley. Well, we are authorized to buy nine total
ships, but we can't buy more than four until the Navy submits a
plan for new-build.
Mr. Bergman. So is that an optimal--going back to
bureaucracies and how we are set up, is that optimal? I mean,
is that--I mean, you have to jump through more hoops than you
would like to to have the Navy okay it?
Ms. Lessley. Well, it is not the Navy okay, it is just that
we are, I guess, coupled is the word. You know, the Navy has to
take an action, and then we can take an action. I would not
opine----
Mr. Courtney. If the gentlelady would suspend for 1 second.
To answer Mr. Bergman's question, actually it was an Act of
Congress that said that the Navy [inaudible] needs to send over
a new-build plan by 2028.
Mr. Bergman. So we can change that.
Mr. Courtney. We can, but on the other hand, we can also
have a very good discussion about the fact that, you know, many
of us believe that we should do both. We should be buying used,
but there should be a new-build plan. And, frankly, there has
been a lot of frustration about the fact that that has not
happened.
Mr. Bergman. Well, thank you for bringing it to light.
Mr. Courtney. Yes, and I won't count your time against--
this time against you.
Mr. Bergman. No, that is okay. That is okay. Lastly, on a
different subject, but it goes along. If we are going to have
ships, no matter who builds them or who okays it, is the
Merchant Marine Academy optimally structured to educate the
future merchant mariners, if that is an appropriate term, the
men and women who will man these ships, in some cases
potentially maybe design ships or looking forward to, or,
connect them, as the General said, are to--to ensure they are,
number one, their ability to operate in a contested
environment, but their ability to evolve, if you will, with the
future fight? Because in the end, you can build machines and
ships, but you also have to prepare the men and women to sail
them.
Ms. Lessley. Thank you so much for that question. Another
congressional requirement, actually in the NDAA, was that the
National Academy of Public Administration do a study of the
Merchant Marine Academy to examine many--the question that you
just raised. And this is a very small part of that study here.
We have a number of challenges at the Merchant Marine Academy,
those that we are trying to work through right now. One is
infrastructure. There are just suboptimal infrastructure
components at the academy.
We are--and I know time is short, but we are trying to
establish at the academy the ability to manage projects using
project management discipline so that when we invest taxpayer
resources, we get----
Mr. Bergman. Let me ask you in a slightly different way. Is
what we are trying to do putting positive band-aids on it, or
is it time to really take a real relook at the Merchant Marine
Academy and see can we actually look at it going forward? Is
that part of the----
Ms. Lessley. It is absolutely--so just to enumerate
quickly. Infrastructure is an issue. Sexual assault and
harassment is an issue. Diversity equity inclusion is an issue.
But to your point, the curriculum is extremely compressed. The
report recommends that we examine whether to move to a 5-year
curriculum so that we can not only do what needs to be done to
ensure they graduate with their licenses, but to prepare them
for the evolutions of technology, the environment, and for
serving in a contested environment.
We are setting up a task force as was recommended by the
report and required by the NDAA to help us look at those
questions. I think those are the absolute right questions to be
asking. We are fundamentally committed to making sure that we
address the challenges, and that we position them to meet the
Nation's needs going forward.
Mr. Bergman. You know, you are making me look bad because
you are going over my time. And I am going to get challenged by
the chairman here. So I appreciate the detailed answer because
they, they deserve that, if they are going to be our future
leader.
Ms. Lessley. If the chairman will indulge, I completely
agree with you. And I feel extraordinarily passionate about
this. The midshipmen who are there are extraordinary Americans
who have chosen a life of service. But we need to ensure that
the academy, its facilities, its programs, and its education
prepare them for that life of service and meet the service that
they are giving to the Nation. Thank you.
Mr. Bergman. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I apologize for going
over.
Mr. Courtney. No apologies necessary. Again, just for the
record, the acting administrator worked on the Hill under
Congressman Cummings and did oversight on the military academy.
So she is actually the absolute perfect person to be on the job
to address this issue.
The chair now recognizes Mr. Carl from Alabama.
Mr. Carl. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you for both
of you for joining us today. I appreciate it. And, General, I
appreciate the service y'all are giving [inaudible] Ukraine. We
should be very proud of that. Thank you. And history will
record that.
My question is to you. None of the KC-46s--I am going to
repeat that--zero of the KC-46s are fully mission capable. And
we have only had 56 of the 179 that we ordered actually
delivered. So they are well behind in production. I am
frustrated about this plane.
And I want to be very honest. I know that it is not your
bailiwick. But I am obviously coming to a point here. These
planes can't be used for refueling so many of our aircraft. You
are saying 85 percent. Well, that 85 percent--if I am in the
other 15 percent, and I am up in the air, that makes a huge
difference. So we are having to rely more and more on these KC-
10s and KC-135. And I think it is embarrassing for this country
to have a 60-year-old plane; to put a crew in that plane to
risk their life to go up to refuel these planes.
I think it is just off the scale, and we need to do more
about it. There is more of a demand now for the air refueling
considering the Indo-Pacific situation we are in than we
currently have available.
So my question to you, General, is this. In your opinion,
can the A330s greater play a role in the payload and in the
range fitting what TRANSCOM needs, refueling needs, and maybe
get our warriors what they actually need to service our airmen?
General Van Ovost. You've hit on a passionate point for me
as well. Air refueling is the backbone of global mobility and
our ability to project and sustain and employ a joint force
around the world, bomber task forces, fighter forces. So it is
a critical capability that we must have. And so we absolutely
need a plan to continue to recapitalize those aging aircraft,
you know, beyond the KC-46 current contract. I will leave it to
the Air Force to determine the capacity and capabilities. As we
will try to define the requirements for them, I will leave it
to them to work an acquisition plan. But rest assured, we are
keeping our eye on the capabilities and capacity we need in the
future contested environment, not simply what we are just doing
today.
Mr. Carl. So how has the 330 performed for you so far.
General Van Ovost. We do not have the A330 in our
inventory, but I am aware that it is flying with other nations.
Mr. Carl. Right. Exactly, which we are refueling behind.
General Van Ovost. Which I understand U.S. aircraft are
refueling behind.
Mr. Carl. Thank you. Another quick question for you. The
majority of the Military Sealift Command fleet is over 40 years
old. We are all here. We know that. Congress has not been
provided an adequate shipbuilding plan. The current plan does
not reflect what we need over the next 30 years. And I am
disappointed that the plan was not delivered within the budget.
In your current position--this must be frustrating for you,
I am sure if anyone, so I understand that. My question to you
is how will this impact TRANSCOM ability to move troops and
cargo from this day forward?
General Van Ovost. Yeah, thank you. I am hopeful as I watch
the first two used ships being purchased through MARAD and the
Navy, these are the first critical steps of a much longer
sealift recapitalization plan. I am thankful for the
appropriation of up to five used ships in the fiscal year 2022
omnibus, but I do recognize we can only purchase two of those
until the Navy has submitted their plan.
I understand they intend to submit their plan here soon.
And I am also anxious to see how we can work together to
continue to recap in a comprehensive program going into the
future.
Mr. Carl. Thank you. Chairman, I yield my time.
Mr. Courtney. Great. Thank you, Mr. Carl. So thank you
again to the witnesses. Before we close, Mr. Garamendi had a
final closing thought.
Mr. Garamendi. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. The issue of
Red Hill has bounced around this committee hearing a few times.
We did not focus in this hearing on the remediation, and the
issues in Red Hill. That will be in a subsequent hearing.
General Van Ovost, we have talked about this, and I am sure
you will be prepared when the time comes with all of the
appropriate people. With that, I yield back.
Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Garamendi. Again, thank you,
General Van Ovost and Acting Administrator Lessley, for your
outstanding testimony. Obviously, the interest level this year
based on, you know, past years' experience was definitely very
intense. And I really appreciate your great answers and look
forward to working with you and your staff as we move towards
markup. And with that--sorry.
Mr. Norcross. Say goodbye to that guy on your left. Thank
you on behalf of all the members.
Mr. Courtney. That is right. This is it.
Mr. Norcross. You've helped us tremendously, and you helped
your country.
Mr. Courtney. We still have his cell phone. So, anyway.
Okay. Thank you. The hearing is now adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:12 p.m., the subcommittees were
adjourned.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
March 31, 2022
=======================================================================
=======================================================================
PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
March 31, 2022
=======================================================================
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING
March 31, 2022
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. WITTMAN
Mr. Wittman. In order for the United States Merchant Marine Academy
to have appropriate oversight of its activities, a strong and proactive
Board of Visitors is necessary and consistent with Federal law as
described in 46 USC 51312. Given several unfortunate incidents
involving USMMA over the last 5-7 years, the committee is concerned
that the Department of Transportation and Maritime Administration are
not enabling the USMMA Board of Visitors to provide effective
oversight. Acting Administrator Lessley, are you the designated Federal
official under 46 USC 51312(g)(2)?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Wittman. Acting Administrator Lessley, is there a current
charter adopted which governs the activities and establishes a schedule
of meetings for USMMA Board of Visitors? If not, can you provide an
update on the Department's plan to convene the Board of Visitors for
the purpose of adopting the Charter?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Wittman. Acting Administrator Lessley, under current law, the
U.S. Merchant Marine Academy Board of Visitors is to convene
periodically in accordance with the Charter. Can you provide the dates
of all previous meetings of the USMMA Board of Visitors over the last 4
years? Can you provide dates for any previous visits of the Board of
Visitors to USMMA over the last 4 years?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Wittman. MARAD created the EMBARC (``Every Mariner Builds a
Respectful Culture'') standards and checklist to address a complicated
set of issues, and involved coordination among a number of different
stakeholders. The draft EMBARC standards were disseminated on November
23, 2021, with the final documents published less than a month later.
Is there agreement and consensus from industry and other key
stakeholders that these documents and checklists will effectively
address the SASH [sexual assault, sexual harassment] problems and risks
faced by Sea Year cadets?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Wittman. In 2016, MARAD suspended Sea Year for SASH concerns,
only resuming in January 2017 after the Shipboard Climate Compliance
Team (SCCT) screening program for Sea Year eligibility was established.
What data collection and analysis was done on SASH incidents from
January 2017 to identify possible deficiencies of SCCT and to ensure
that the new EMBARC provisions are sufficient to eliminate SASH and
behaviors that enable it?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
______
QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. NORCROSS
Mr. Norcross. What is the status of the Tanker Security Program and
what is the security posture of fuel tankers in INDOPACOM?
General Van Ovost. [No answer was available at the time of
printing.]
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. SCOTT
Mr. Scott. What is the role of TRANSCOM in the development of
sustainable smart ports for Africa? Do you have the resources and
authorities you need to formulate and implement roadmaps/action plans
that enable ports to meet the sustainable smart ports status? What
impact will sustainable small ports have on TRANSCOM'S mission?
General Van Ovost. [No answer was available at the time of
printing.]
Mr. Scott. The Military Sealift Command established the Tactical
Advisor (TacAd) program to address training gaps. Does the TacAd
program address the systemic issues of training large union pools of
mariners and--in some cases--high turnover rates? Does the TacAd
program address the greater strategic demand that all U.S.-licensed and
unlicensed mariners prepare to accomplish the mission during a
contingency or crisis? Are civilian ships prepared to go to war with
little to no tactical training?
General Van Ovost. [No answer was available at the time of
printing.]
Mr. Scott. How can the Maritime Administration, Military Sealift
Command, U.S. Coast Guard, and industry partners work closer together
to prepare civilian mariners to operate with naval and joint forces in
crisis or conflict?
General Van Ovost. [No answer was available at the time of
printing.]
Mr. Scott. What are the dangers of relying on foreign-flagged
vessels to deliver cargo to a war zone? How can this be avoided in the
future in another Desert Shield/Desert Storm scenario?
General Van Ovost. [No answer was available at the time of
printing.]
Mr. Scott. What operational changes can be made to enhance the
relationship between MARAD and the Department of Defense?
General Van Ovost. [No answer was available at the time of
printing.]
Mr. Scott. Should the United States and NATO rethink the use of
traditional convoy operations?
General Van Ovost. [No answer was available at the time of
printing.]
Mr. Scott. What bilateral agreements have MSC and MARAD entered
into with allies and partners to meet U.S. sealift needs, identifying
specific ship-by-ship matches of projected shortfalls with available
allied ships that would be available to augment the U.S. fleet in a
crisis?
General Van Ovost. [No answer was available at the time of
printing.]
Mr. Scott. Is swift U.S. reinforcement of Europe with personnel and
war cargo critical to deterrence?
General Van Ovost. [No answer was available at the time of
printing.]
Mr. Scott. Is the replacement of 40-year-old surge shipping with
20-year-old commercial ships a viable strategy?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Scott. What is MARAD doing to encourage U.S. ship construction
for both Jones Act deep-draft ships and the international trade.
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Scott. What does the drawdown in both Army and Marine Corps
prepositioning forces mean for the availability of vessels for surge
sealift missions and the loss of mariner jobs?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Scott. The United States is a maritime nation. Should there be
more State maritime academies in this country? What is the recommended
number of State maritime academies needed? What incentives, if any, are
available to convince States to establish State maritime academies?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Scott. Should the merchant marine be included in future joint
maritime strategies?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Scott. Will the United States be able to turn to its civilian
merchant mariners to transport critical supplies through contested
waters in a future war against an enemy with a large navy?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Scott. The Military Sealift Command established the Tactical
Advisor (TacAd) program to address training gaps. Does the TacAd
program address the systemic issues of training large union pools of
mariners and--in some cases--high turnover rates? Does the TacAd
program address the greater strategic demand that all U.S.-licensed and
unlicensed mariners prepare to accomplish the mission during a
contingency or crisis? Are civilian ships prepared to go to war with
little to no tactical training?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Scott. Should training to gain the proficiency and confidence
to deliver goods while sailing through a contested environment be a
requirement to maintain a U.S. merchant mariner license?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Scott. Should a naval-interoperability course be added to the
Department of Naval Science at Kingspoint? If not, why not?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Scott. How can the Maritime Administration, Military Sealift
Command, U.S. Coast Guard, and industry partners work closer together
to prepare civilian mariners to operate with naval and joint forces in
crisis or conflict?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Scott. Can MARAD do more to advertise civilian merchant mariner
employment opportunities to service members leaving the military?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Scott. What are the dangers of relying on foreign-flagged
vessels to deliver cargo to a war zone? How can this be avoided in the
future in another Desert Shield/Desert Storm scenario?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Scott. What operational changes can be made to enhance the
relationship between MARAD and the Department of Defense?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Scott. Should the United States and NATO rethink the use of
traditional convoy operations?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Scott. What bilateral agreements have MSC and MARAD entered
into with allies and partners to meet U.S. sealift needs, identifying
specific ship-by-ship matches of projected shortfalls with available
allied ships that would be available to augment the U.S. fleet in a
crisis?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Scott. What plans does MARAD have to conduct a study on
alliance and partner shipping in the Indo-Pacific theater that could be
used to inform efforts to augment maritime shipping in that theater in
a crisis, thereby freeing up U.S. shipping for use elsewhere?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Scott. What can be done to increase the pool of potential
mariners?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Scott. Is swift U.S. reinforcement of Europe with personnel and
war cargo critical to deterrence?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
______
QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. BERGMAN
Mr. Bergman. Ms. Lessley, I have a question about the American
Marine Highway program, which is run by MARAD. Do you plan to have
finalized the next round of project designations for the American
Marine Highway program by the end of April, so those newly designated
entities can compete for funding this year?
Ms. Lessley. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
______
QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. CARL
Mr. Carl. Congress has noted in the recent emphasis on fuel supply
chain integrity, especially in light of the recent events in the
Ukraine. As far as the South China Sea area of operations, how critical
is fuel supply chain resilience, especially for our naval and air
forces ability to act as a deterrent to China. What is your plan to
utilize U.S.-flag tankers to ensure supply chain integrity?
General Van Ovost. [No answer was available at the time of
printing.]
[all]