[Senate Hearing 117-889, Part 2]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 117-889, Pt. 2
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR
APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022 AND
THE FUTURE YEARS DEFENSE PROGRAM
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
S. 2792
TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022 FOR MILITARY
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CON-
STRUCTION, AND FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR
SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
__________
PART 2
SEAPOWER
__________
JUNE 8, 2021
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via: http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
56-722 PDF WASHINGTON : 2025
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
JACK REED, Rhode Island, Chairman JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut TOM COTTON, Arkansas
MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota
TIM KAINE, Virginia JONI ERNST, Iowa
ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine THOM TILLIS, North Carolina
ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia RICK SCOTT, Florida
TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
MARK KELLY, Arizona TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama
Elizabeth L. King, Staff Director
John D. Wason, Minority Staff Director
_________________________________________________________________
Subcommittee on Seapower
MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii, Chair KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut TOM COTTON, Arkansas
TIM KAINE, Virginia THOM TILLIS, North Carolina
ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine RICK SCOTT, Florida
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
_________________________________________________________________
June 8, 2021
Page
Navy and Marine Corps Investment Programs........................ 1
Members Statements
Statement of Senator Mazie K. Hirono............................. 1
Statement of Senator Kevin Cramer................................ 3
Witnesses Statements
Stefany, Mr. Frederick J., Acting Assistant Secretary of the Navy 4
for Research, Development, and Acquisition.
Questions for the Record......................................... 46
(iii)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION REQUEST FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022 AND
THE FUTURE YEARS DEFENSE PROGRAM
----------
TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 2021
United States Senate,
Subcommittee on Seapower,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC.
NAVY AND MARINE CORPS INVESTMENT PROGRAMS
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m. in
room SR-222, Russell Senate Office Building, Senator Mazie K.
Hirono (Chairwoman of the Subcommittee) presiding.
Subcommittee Members present: Senators Hirono, Shaheen,
Blumenthal, Kaine, King, Peters, Cramer, Wicker, Cotton,
Tillis, Scott, and Hawley.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MAZIE K. HIRONO
Senator Hirono. Sorry. See, we haven't done this in so
long, I forgot to turn on the mic. Thank you very much.
Thank you for your service to the Nation and for the truly
professional service of the men and women under your commands.
We are also grateful for our military families, for the vital
role they play in the success of the men and women of our armed
forces.
I also want to, once again, welcome now that we have
another Member here, welcome him and, once again, Senator
Cramer. I look forward, of course, to working with all of you
on this Subcommittee.
I have had the privilege of being the ranking on the
Subcommittee with Chairs Wicker and Purdue, and we worked very
well together on this, really, bipartisan committee. So, I
think we can find broad agreement with the Subcommittee as we
confront the issuing facing our sailors and marines and their
families.
The Navy and Marine Corps face difficult decisions as they
seek to modernize the fleet, maintaining a technical advantage
over our adversaries, supporting ongoing operations, and
sustaining today's readiness.
The threats we face around the world require us to consider
the best way to get the Navy and the Marine Corps the resources
they need; however, we must make sure that any increase in
resources do not come at the expense of important programs that
families, including our military families face every day.
At today's hearing, we will explore various aspects of the
Department of the Navy's investment programs. These programs
play a critical role in supporting and advancing our country's
strategic interests around the world, including the Indo-
Pacific Region, and at bases in my home state of Hawaii. With
that in mind, the subcommittee plays a crucial oversight role
as we work to improve our acquisition stewardship to ensure we
are getting good value for every shipbuilding dollar that we
spend.
Late last year, former Defense Secretary Esper published I
quote, ``The Battle Force 2045,'' an updated long-term
shipbuilding plan, in which he called for achieving a Navy
force even larger than the 355-ship Navy that has been adopted
as national policy in title 10, United States Code (U.S.C.).
I do not think that this administration has taken a
position on the Esper plan because we are still, I think
operating under 355-ship plan, are we not? Or it may be even
fewer than that. So, all though the Defense Department will not
produce a Future Year Defense Program, or FYDP, we have been
promised that the Navy will deliver a 30-year shipbuilding plan
that is required annually by title 10 of U.S.C.
This Subcommittee is well aware of the Department of the
Navy's ongoing challenges facing our air, land, surface,
subsurface, and maintenance programs. The Navy has been using
multi-year procurement authority to modernize the fleet more
efficiently, and Congress has approved the use of this
authority to procure Virginia-class attack submarines and DDG-
51 Aegis destroyers; two platforms that had been the largest
inventory shortfall, compared to the goals outlined in the 2016
force structure assessment.
It is especially troubling that the Navy budget would
violate the terms of a multi-year contract for the DDG 51, and
when Congress makes a multi-year commitment for such a program,
we expect the administration will live up to its commitment to
carry through on the program. It is not enough for the CNO
[Chief of Naval Operations] to make the DDG 51 destroyers, his
number one unfunded priority this year.
I wonder if the actions of the DDG 51 program reflect, in
part, the fact that the Battle Force 2045 plan will propose
cutting the goal for large surface combatants from 104 ships in
the CNO's previous plan to a level of 73 to 88 ships in the new
plan. We hope to explore these issues today.
We are also well aware of the significant changes the
Marine Corps is contemplating in reorganizing itself to deal
with operations against near-peer competitors. We should hear
today how the realignment, outlined by the Commandant in Marine
Corps Force Design 2030 is reflected in the plans and programs
in the fiscal year 2022 budget request.
I am also interesting in hearing from Secretary Stefany
about the vital role our public Navy shipyards play in
maintaining a ready and capable fleet. I am encouraged that the
Navy has finally gotten serious about investing in the critical
infrastructure that has been neglected for far too long.
I look forward to hearing from you this morning or this
afternoon about how the fiscal year 2022 budget supports this
plan. I also look forward to working with the Navy to ensure
that the shipyard modernization program stays on track. As you
all well know, shipyard modernization has been a very near and
dear issue for me and other members of this committee, so you
will have questions on that.
Senator Cramer, I turn to you for your remarks.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR KEVIN CRAMER
Senator Cramer. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and witnesses
for being here and for your service and your families.
Senator Hirono and I had a wonderful discussion a few weeks
ago and I look forward to working with you, as well, Senator,
to accomplishing important work of the Seapower Subcommittee,
and, obviously, I am a natural choice. My state is, literally,
the center of the North American continent. We have a monument
to prove it, and we are perfectly positioned.
I have this, as I like to say, unique vantage point to
observe our Navy and Marine Corps operating in all of our
adjacent seas: the Pacific, the Atlantic, the Arctic, and the
Caribbean. But, all joking aside, it is a critical time for our
national security and the stakes are very high as you know.
Appropriately funding the Department of Defense (DOD) in
order to keep this Nation safe and defend our interests is,
without question, in my mind, the most critical constitutional
duty of the United States Congress and it is one that I take
very seriously and I am sure all my colleagues, do as well.
To this end, I thank the Chairwoman for calling today's
hearing to examine Navy and Marine Corps programs in the
President's fiscal year 2022 budget request. But I must say, I
am concerned, very concerned that President Biden's Defense
budget request is wholly inadequate; nowhere near enough to
give our Navy and Marine Corps members the resources,
equipment, and training they need, quite simply, because this
budget doesn't keep up with inflation. It is a cut.
There is plenty of evidence of the insufficiency of this
budget within this Subcommittee's jurisdiction; for example,
this budget only procures eight battle force ships, of which
just four are combatant ships. It's a cut of 4 ships, as
compared to the 12 in the last shipbuilding plans projection
for fiscal year 2022, including one fewer destroyer, which
would result in a $33 million penalty for breach of contract,
which Senator Hirono addressed.
The budget also proposes to inactivate 15 ships, buy 6
fewer F-35C Joint Strike Fighters, divest all 12 Mark VI Patrol
Craft, cut the Navy and the Marine Corps munitions by roughly
10 percent, and I could go on.
A budget like this sends China and our other potential
adversaries exactly the wrong message: that we are not willing
to do what it takes to defend ourselves and our allies and
partners. We should be worried about China for a multitude of
reasons, but looking just at their Navy, their fleet surpassed
our fleet size target of 355 ships just last year and is
steadily climbing toward 460 ships in 2030.
That is an increase of 105 ships in 10 years, or an average
growth of 10 ships per year; meanwhile, this budget supports a
status quo U.S. Navy of around 300 ships. There is no growth,
in fact, the Navy is struggling to replace decommissioning
ships with new ships on a 1:1 basis to avoid shrinking. This
unacceptable situation is because the Navy is not being given
the resources needed to grow.
My understanding is all the clever tricks have been tried.
Unit manning is leaner than it should be. Maintaining an aging
fleet has taken a toll on our repair yards and the marine
environment is uniquely unforgiving, so new concepts, such as
unmanned vessels must be technically mature before we can scale
up.
A few specific areas I hope to cover today include Admiral
Kilby, I am interested in the extent to which the seven
cruisers slated for decommissioning could be maintained in a
reduced status to enable each of these ship's 122 vertical
launch system cells to remain available in a crisis.
Mr. Stefany, the last 30-year shipbuilding plan delivered
in December projected rather aggressive submarine-building
rates. In 4 different years, in the late 2020s and the late
2030s, for instance, the plan called for three Virginia-class
submarines and one Columbia-class to be built. I am interested
in your assessment of the submarine industrial base's current
performance.
General Smith, the Marine Corps appears to be aggressively
pursuing air defense, and missile systems in the Indo-Pacific.
I am interested in better knowing how these systems can both,
protect forward-postured marines, as well as help combatant
commanders deny maneuver space to an adversary. I look forward
to the testimony of our witnesses today.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Hirono. Thank you very much for your very thorough
opening statement. My goodness. I can see you are going to be a
really fantastic partner in this effort.
Who would like to--would you like to start?
Mr. Stefany. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Hirono.--Mr. Secretary?
Yes?
STATEMENT OF MR. FREDERICK J. STEFANY, ACTING ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF THE NAVY FOR RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND
ACQUISITION.
Mr. Stefany. Yes, ma'am.
We are very pleased to be here for your first in-person one
of these and it is a pleasure for the three of us to be here.
We will do one opening statement for the three of us combined,
ma'am.
Chairwoman Hirono, Ranking Member Cramer, distinguished
Members of the Subcommittee, on behalf of myself, Vice Admiral
Kilby, and Lieutenant General Smith, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today to address the
Department of Navy's fiscal year 2022 budget request for
seapower capabilities.
We would like to thank this Subcommittee for your
leadership and your support of shipbuilding, aviation, and
ground programs that support our forward-deployed naval forces.
As a maritime nation, our economic prosperity and security
are linked to the world's oceans. The Navy and the Marine Corps
team are the Nation's maritime force, forward-deployed each and
every day, protecting the vital interests of our Nation,
supporting our allies and partners, and providing a credible
and visible deterrent to our strategic competitors. Our goal is
to prevent conflict, but should deterrence fail, we are ready
to answer the call, to fight, and to win.
The Department of Navy's 2022 budget balances readiness,
capabilities, capacity, and people in order to advance key
Department priorities to defend the Nation, to innovate and
modernize our force, to increase resilience and readiness, and
to build the workforce to compete and win.
As Secretary Austin highlighted in his recent testimony to
the appropriation committees, the budget also reflects
difficult funding decisions, necessary to ensure we have the
right mix of capability that the nation needs most and supports
investments in a modern, future force that can deliver
integrated, all-domain naval power.
While difficult decisions are required, I would like to
highlight some of the areas we were able to increase our
investment in fiscal year 2022. The DOD prioritization is,
first of all, the recapitalization of the Navy's portion of the
nuclear triad. Then, meeting readiness needs today to field a
credible, non-nuclear deterrent ready to fight tonight.
Followed by investments in modernization needs for tomorrow's
fleet and, finally, building the capacity of a Navy congruent
with our budget controls. This ensures that we do not create a
hollow force while we sustainably grow the fleet.
To that end, we continue to fully fund our number one
procurement program: the Columbia SSBN program to the updated,
independent cost estimate to ensure that we deliver all the
ships in this class in time to meet STRATCOM's [U.S. Strategic
Command's] requirements.
We are also investing in land-based test facilities for the
frigate program and for the unmanned surface vessel programs,
and we are requesting advance procurement funding for frigate
to smooth out the planned ramp-up to construction of two ships
per year.
Although a different mix of ships from last year's
projection for fiscal year 2022, this budget request does
actually provide more funding and the same number of ships, as
were proposed by the Department last year. To ensure we have a
total force, a whole force, the fiscal year 2022 budget invests
additional funding in ship and aviation depot maintenance, and
it reflects additional authorities to expand the OPN [Other
Procurement, Navy] funding pilot, for ship modernization from
just the Pacific Fleet to now the entire Navy.
You will see an increase in our planned funding for SIOP
[Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Plan] shipyard
optimization modeling and area planning efforts that will lead
to major SIOP projects in the near future that will start with
the dry dock recapitalizations at Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard
and Puget Sound Naval Shipyard.
With a focus on developing a naval force capable of
distributed maritime operations, as outlined in the CNO's
navigation plan and the Commandant of the Marine Corps Force
Design. This budget provides investments to start the
development of new capabilities in collaboration with our
industry partners, such as a follow-on to the Virginia-class
attack submarine, a Next-Generation Air Dominance family of
aircraft, and a future, large surface combatant. It increases
our ongoing development efforts for hypersonic weapons.
The budget funds key enablers to support distributed
operations, such as our Project Overmatch, which is a seamless
network that will leverage demonstrated progress in command and
control in all domains, and facilitate the manned-unmanned
teaming of the future that would be required for future
warfare.
The budget continues investment in lethality and long-range
fires, with a request for Naval Strike Missiles that we will
use on our ships, as well as part of the Marines, Ground-Based
Anti-Ship Missile program, and it achieves real advances in
communication networks and control with the networking on the
move and the next generation of satellite communication
programs.
I would like to thank you for the opportunity to appear
before your subcommittee today and for the strong support that
this subcommittee has always provided to our sailors and
marines. We look forward to your questions. Thank you.
[The joint prepared statement of Mr. Frederick J. Stefany,
Vice Admiral James W. Kilby, and Lieutenant General Eric M.
Smith follows:]
joint prepared statement by mr. frederick j. stefany, vice admiral
james w. kilby, and lieutenant general eric m. smith
Chairwoman Hirono, Ranking Member Cramer and distinguished Members
of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you
today to address the Department of Navy's fiscal year 2022 budget
request for Seapower capabilities. First, we would like to thank
Congress and this Committee for your leadership and support of the
Department of the Navy (DON) acquisition, sustainment, research and
development programs. The fiscal year 2021 Authorization and
Appropriation Acts provided essential support for the DON's
shipbuilding, aviation and ground programs that are the foundation of
our maritime service and are essential to a full range of military
operations in support of our national security priorities.
In an increasingly interconnected and interdependent world, a
dominant naval force and a strong maritime strategy are critical to the
security of the Nation. The global security environment is increasingly
influenced by our competitors, requiring the Navy and Marine Corps team
to operate continually to provide credible combat power forward and a
ready response force to global crises and disasters. Amidst these
traditional challenges, our forces have adapted global operations in
response to the COVID-19 pandemic in ways that were unimaginable in
early 2020. As our national security posture evolves to confront new
challenges, the DON continues to invest in key capabilities that
maximize our naval power contribution to the Joint Force and ensure a
proper balance of readiness, capability, and capacity within the limits
of available resources.
To address the growing demands placed on our warfighters, the DON
is making necessary investments in lethal capabilities across a broad
spectrum of platforms and programs. Since the start of fiscal year 2020
we have delivered 13 relevant and capable war ships to the Fleet
including two Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, two Virginia-class
submarines, four Littoral Combat Ships, two Expeditionary Fast
Transport ships, one Amphibious Assault Ship, and one Expeditionary Sea
Base, and one Zumwalt-class destroyer following its combat systems
delivery. Today, the Navy has 74 ships under contract with 51 ships in
construction. We expect to take delivery of an additional ship in
fiscal year 2021, and plan to award contracts for three more ships this
year. On the aviation side, we will deliver 54 new manned aircraft and
four unmanned aircraft to Navy and Marine Corps units in fiscal year
2021, improving capability and enabling the divestiture of less
affordable and less capable legacy systems.
The Navy continues the maturation of critical warfighting
investments. CVN 78 successfully completed its post-delivery testing
and trials (PDT&T) period in April 2021 and will conduct Full Ship
Shock Trials from May-August 2021. During PDT&T the ship was at sea 50
percent of the time--certifying and testing systems and training the
crew, while also being used for pilot generation, a critical need for
carrier airwing readiness. In March 2021, VFA-147, the first
operational F-35C squadron, completed the longest at-sea period
(approximately 5 weeks) by F-35Cs onboard USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70).
VFA-147 completed missions in all warfare areas while reporting a 97.6
percent sortie completion and 80 percent Mission Capable rates. Fiscal
year 2021 funds completed the procurement of three MQ-25A System
Demonstration Test Article (SDTA) aircraft and supported the
development of six SDTAs for Next Generation Jammer Mid-Band (NGJ-MB)
Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD). These crucial
investments will continue to advance our warfighting edge against
adversaries.
Additionally, the Department achieved over 80 percent Mission
Capable rates for the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G fleets and achieved an 80
percent Mission Capable rate for E-2Ds in fiscal year 2020. These
positive trends are continuing in fiscal year 2021, on-going efforts
are focused on maintaining these advances by applying lessons learned
across all type model series aircraft to reduce long-term sustainment
costs.
Nearly 70 percent of today's fleet will be in service through 2030,
so accelerating the momentum of on-time delivery for ships, submarines
and aircraft coming out of maintenance availabilities remains a
priority for the Department. We continue to use available data to
provide better predictability, improve performance, share lessons
learned, and reduce costs. By taking a more forward-looking approach to
maintenance and modernization of our ship and aviation platforms, the
DON can grow the operational capacity of the Navy in a healthier way
over time. We will communicate future demand signals to our industrial
partners, stabilizing the industrial base and ensuring sufficient
capacity.
The Navy is seeing positive early results from the pilot program
established by Congress in fiscal year 2020 to fund Pacific Fleet CNO
Availabilities with multi-year Other Procurement, Navy (OPN) funding.
The OPN Pilot allows the Navy to implement commercial best practices
for ship maintenance and more efficiently use surface ship maintenance
funding through the entirety of the fiscal year without the pressure of
expiring funds. The fiscal year 2022 budget requests expansion of the
OPN pilot to include U.S. Fleet Forces CNO Availabilities. The Navy is
demonstrating significant improvement in ship maintenance execution,
and efforts such as OPN-funded availabilities are helping maintain the
positive momentum to ensure ships are delivered to the Fleet on time
with work completed in full.
Unmanned systems have and will continue to play a key part in
future Distributed Maritime Operations (DMO), and there is a clear need
to field affordable, lethal, scalable, and connected capabilities. The
Unmanned Campaign Plan serves as a comprehensive strategy for fielding
the DON's future unmanned capabilities into the fleet. The Department
will take advantage of near-term opportunities for rapid
experimentation, while investing in enabling technologies to include
autonomy, land-based testing sites, high-reliability engineering
systems, and networks in conjunction with Project Overmatch. The DON
developed the Unmanned Campaign Plan to direct an enterprise-wide
partnership along with industry and academia to coordinate efforts and
resources and take advantage of innovation opportunities such as
Commander Pacific Fleet's Integrated Battle Problem 21. We look forward
to working with the Congress on advancing our naval unmanned
contribution to the joint force.
The Fiscal Year 2022 President's Budget Request
The President's Fiscal Year 2022 Budget advances key DON priorities
to defend the Nation, innovate and modernize the Department, increase
resilience and readiness, and build a workforce to compete and win. It
balances the urgent readiness needs of our force today with investments
that maximize our naval contribution to the Joint Force, and reflects
hard decisions to divest of less capable platforms and systems, freeing
resources to invest in a future force that can deliver greater
efficiency and effectiveness.
The fiscal year 2022 request continues key investments in advanced
technologies and modernization of our current Seapower and Projection
forces, prioritizing the recapitalization of the strategic ballistic
missile submarine, the Columbia-class, which remains the Navy's highest
acquisition priority. The budget requests funding for eight Battle
Force Ships, 107 total aircraft, and completes procurement of V-22 and
P-8A, while maturing production and maintaining vital aviation
platforms to support a robust and technologically advanced fleet.
The fiscal year 2022 budget supports the sustainment of our
readiness recovery to deliver credible ready forces now by accelerating
the Navy's Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program (SIOP) and
fully funding two submarine overhauls in private shipyards. The request
is aggressive in its pursuit of increased lethality and modernization
with the greatest potential to deliver non-linear warfighting
advantages. It accomplishes this by beginning significant research and
development investments for future platforms, and supporting DMO that
will seamlessly network sensors, platforms (manned and unmanned) and
weapons for decision advantage. This includes prioritization of force
design and delivery of Naval Expeditionary forces capable of imposing
costs on global competitors with distributed, lethal power, and the
delivery of capable capacity.
The fiscal year 2022 budget prioritizes a capable and lethal force,
delivering platforms that are more capable, networks, combat systems
and weapons while divesting of less capable legacy platforms. The
budget balances resources and requirements to weigh the effects of
program decisions on the industrial base, maximizing efforts in support
of the President's Executive Order on Ensuring the Future is Made in
All of America by All of America's Workers, and the Build Back Better
initiatives. The budget shows a realistic and forward-thinking approach
to planning the future force, while providing future capability
requirements within projected budgets. The budget takes into
consideration the need to keep America's industrial base loaded at an
executable level that encourages industry investment in capital
improvements, capital expansion, and a properly sized world-class
workforce.
Summary
Thank you for the strong support this Subcommittee continues to
provide our sailors and marines. The Department of the Navy continues
to deliver platforms with the requisite capability to address the
maritime challenges of today with an eye to the evolving security
environment of tomorrow. To achieve the most capable Navy, we are
instilling affordability, stability, technical rigor, and capacity into
our programs to deliver these vital platforms to the warfighter faster
within the resources provided. With Congress' continued support, we
will provide the Nation with the Integrated All-Domain Naval Power for
the Joint Force that is required to win today and tomorrow.
Programmatic details regarding Navy and Marine Corps capabilities
are summarized in the following section.
U.S. Navy and Marine Corps Seapower Capabilities Ship Programs
Submarines
Ballistic Missile Submarines, coupled with the Trident II D-5
Strategic Weapons System (SWS), represent the most survivable leg of
the Nation's strategic arsenal and provide the Nation's most assured
nuclear response capability. The Columbia-class program remains the
Navy's number one acquisition priority. The lead ship started
construction in October 2020 and is on track to deliver to pace the
retirement of our current ballistic missile submarines, deploying for
its first patrol by 2030.
The fiscal year 2022 budget supports the continued incremental
funding of the lead ship, advance procurement and advance construction
of follow-on Columbia-class submarines, and continued class design
efforts. General Dynamics Electric Boat and Huntington Ingalls
Industries-Newport News continue to procure component and commodity
material to maintain and grow the submarine industrial base as the
program builds to annual procurement beginning in fiscal year 2026.
Supporting overall program risk reduction and required schedule
execution to minimize strategic deterrence coverage gaps, the fiscal
year 2022 budget request also funds Continuous Production of Missile
Tubes (and associated components) and Propulsors, and Multi-Program
Material Procurement/Production Back-up Units. Columbia's Missile Tube
production is tightly coordinated with procurement of Common Missile
Compartment material for the U.K. Dreadnought-class submarines being
executed under the Polaris Sales Agreement. Also included in the fiscal
year 2022 budget are development efforts to make submarines more
capable.
The Navy delivered two Virginia-class submarines in fiscal year
2020, including the first Block IV ship, the USS Vermont (SSN 792). The
Navy continues to build on past success with the Block V multi-year
procurement (MYP) contract for the construction of nine ships, and the
fiscal year 2021 award of an option to add a tenth ship to the Block.
This Subcommittee's leadership and guidance played an integral role in
ensuring funds were authorized and appropriated for the Navy to rapidly
award the option for the 10th boat of the Block V. The second ship of
Block V introduces the Virginia Payload Module, and all Block V ships
will incorporate Acoustic Superiority program improvements.
The Navy, shipbuilders and related suppliers recognize that
vigilance in execution and oversight of the Virginia and Columbia
programs is critical. In fiscal year 2021 the Navy is using the $130
million provided for industrial base support in the Columbia funding
line to continue to execute supplier development efforts to improve the
capability, capacity and stability of the industrial base.
Additionally, the Navy is implementing Continuous Production for
Columbia on selected shipyard-manufactured items to reduce cost and
schedule risk, and help strengthen the industrial base with a focus on
critical vendors. Advance Construction activities began June 2019 at
General Dynamics Electric Boat and Huntington Ingalls Industries-
Newport News to proactively manage schedule margin and reduce
controlling path risks for Columbia.
aircraft carriers
The Navy continues to focus on making USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78)
ready for operational use, and continues to see increased reliability
on the new critical technologies. The Advanced Weapons Elevators (AWEs)
have been cycled over 15,000 times, including 7,803 at sea, and are
performing as designed. CVN 78 successfully completed 8,157 aircraft
launches and recoveries. Readying Ford for deployment is a Navy
priority and the Department is working collectively with the Navy
shipbuilding industry to transition Ford into Fleet operations.
John F Kennedy (CVN 79) is 79 percent construction complete.
Kennedy transitioned to a single-phase delivery to achieve the most
efficient path forward and deliver a more capable and lethal ship to
the Fleet. CVN 79 is on schedule to deliver in 2024 with a complete
combat systems suite and fully outfitted with F-35C ship modifications.
Enterprise (CVN 80) construction is eight percent complete by
construction man-hours and Doris Miller (CVN 81) has commenced material
procurement. Additionally, CVN 80 is on schedule to meet its first
major construction milestone, keel laying, in the second quarter of
fiscal year 2022.
The Nimitz-class Refueling Complex Overhaul (RCOH) is key to both
the maintenance and modernization of each carrier in support of the
second half of its service life. The RCOH is refueling the ship's
reactors, modernizing its capabilities, and repairing ship systems and
infrastructure. USS George Washington's (CVN 73) RCOH is 89 percent
complete with re-delivery planned for August 2022. USS John C. Stennis
(CVN 74) commenced RCOH in May 2021 and USS Harry S Truman (CVN 75)
will begin RCOH in fiscal year 2025.
Large Surface Combatants
The Arleigh Burke-class (DDG-51) program remains one of the Navy's
most successful shipbuilding programs with 69 ships delivered to the
Fleet. Over the course of the fiscal year 2018 to 2022 MYP, the Navy
will procure a total of 11 Flight III DDGs, more than the planned 10
ship procurement. From a warfighting perspective, procuring one DDG-51
in fiscal year 2022 will still provide the near-term capacity required.
The shipbuilders have a total of 20 DDG-51s under contract, with 11
under construction. We assess that there is adequate near-term backlog
of work at each shipyard. Navy intends to evaluate the benefits of DDG-
51 FLT III follow-on MYP contracts in fiscal years 2023 to 2027 to
maintain the industrial base and continue to provide the latest
capability to the Fleet while the DDG(X) design and risk reduction
efforts are executed in parallel. These Flight III ships will provide
enhanced Integrated Air and Missile Defense with the AN/SPY 6(V)1 Air
and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) and AEGIS Baseline 10. AMDR meets the
growing ballistic missile threat by improving radar sensitivity and
enabling longer range detection of increasingly complex threats. The
program demonstrated design maturity through its successful completion
of all developmental testing. AMDR is in production for delivery to
support Flight III ships. AN/SPY 6(V)1 arrays for the first Flight III
ship have delivered and will support Flight III delivery and Initial
Operational Capability (IOC). The first DDG 51 Flight III ship (DDG
125) will deliver in fiscal year 2023. Flight III leverages the proven
Flight IIA platform with modifications for hull stability, cooling
(350-ton AC plants) and power (4 MW generators / 4160 VAC) to
accommodate AMDR. Aligned with Congressional intent, risk reduction
integration testing of critical Flight III systems (AN/SPY-6(V)1, Aegis
Baseline 10, and power systems) will occur at land based test sites, to
reduce risk prior to lead ship activation. The Land Based Engineering
Site began electrical plant testing in fiscal year 2021, and the Combat
Systems Engineering Development Site achieved standalone activation of
the SPY-6 array in April 2021.
Complementing the DDG 51, the DDG 1000 Zumwalt-class guided missile
destroyers provide multi-mission surface combatants designed to provide
long-range, offensive surface strike capabilities. The DDG 1000 program
continues to accomplish first-time integration of unique combat systems
elements, complete PDT&T, train the crew on ship functions, and
demonstrate operational performance. USS Zumwalt (DDG 1000) is
scheduled to reach IOC in December 2021. Michael Monsoor (DDG 1001)
final delivery is planned for March 2022. Completion of the planned
construction and HM&E test and activation of Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG
1002) at General Dynamics Bath Iron Works is 98 percent complete.
Delivery of the ship is now planned for a single delivery approach
following the completion of Combat Systems installation, test and
activation follow-on work.
DDG 51 Flight III is highly capable, but after over 40 years in
production and 30 years of upgrades, the hull form cannot accommodate
the future capabilities identified by the Future Surface Combatant
Force Analysis of Alternatives (FSCF AoA), including high power
Directed Energy, larger missiles, increased magazine depth, sensor
growth, and efficient integrated power. The future Large Surface
Combatant, DDG(X), will provide the flexibility and margins necessary
to succeed DDG 51-class as the Navy's next enduring large combatant. In
its initial form, DDG(X) will combine the DDG 51 Flight III combat
system elements with a new hull form, an efficient Integrated Power
System and greater endurance reducing the Fleet logistics burden.
DDG(X) will reduce combat system development risk by utilizing mature
technologies that leverage the DDG 51 Flight III Navy standard program
of record combat system elements and reduce engineering system
development risk by land based testing of the propulsion and electrical
system integration prior to detail design. Top Level Requirements were
approved by the CNO in December 2020 as the basis for the Draft
Capability Development Document. The Navy partnership with industry
will include shipbuilder participation driving to a stable requirements
baseline, concept design, and a ship designed for producibility as well
as flexibility.
Small Surface Combatants
Strategic competition and the on-going focus on the Indo-Pacific
requires a more capable Small Surface Combatant for operations in
contested environments. The FFG 62 Constellation-class is the evolution
of a ship design with increased lethality, survivability, and improved
capability to support the full range of military operations as part of
a more lethal Joint Force. FFG 62 Capability Requirements are mature
and have been refined through early engagement with industry in a
collaborative Conceptual Design process that completed in June 2019.
The FFG 62 program is managing development risk by combining proven
ship designs with mature, best-of-breed Government Furnished Equipment
designated combat system elements. The Navy will establish a FFG 62
Land Based Engineering Site to test power and propulsion systems prior
to ship activation. The lead ship is under contract and is expected to
start construction in fiscal year 2022, and the second ship of the
class, future USS Congress, was put on contract last month. The Navy is
confident in the capability FFG 62 will deliver to the Fleet.
The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) program has delivered 23 of the 35
total planned ships. By the end of calendar year 2021, 27 LCSs will
have been delivered and 20 will be available to the Fleet commanders.
The program plan for these ships is: 4 dedicated test ships; eight
Surface Warfare (SUW) ships; 8 Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) ships; and
15 Mine Countermeasure ships. The initial two test ships will
decommission in fiscal year 2021 and the third and fourth test ships
will complete testing and decommission, along with LCS 7 and 9, by the
end of fiscal year 2022 to re-prioritize funding for modernization,
capability upgrades, and sustainment.
The Navy has installed Naval Strike Missile (NSM) on four
Independence-variant LCS platforms and continues to install NSM on LCS
hulls this year and in the future, extending the offensive capability
of the ship. Additionally, procurement of material for Lethality and
Survivability upgrades is on track for the first installations in
fiscal year 2023. Eleven LCS will have conducted their inaugural
deployments to 7th or 4th Fleet by the end of fiscal year 2022,
providing a significant increase in contact layer assets for Fleet
Commanders which will continue to grow as the remaining ships are
delivered to the Fleet.
Following the theme of divesting legacy capacity and force
structure, the Navy's plan to divest two additional cruisers (CGs) in
fiscal year 2022, beyond the five previously planned for fiscal year
2022, enables continuation of funding for the five CGs in
modernization. CGs remain Navy's primary Air and Missile Defense
Commander platform until Flight III destroyers are delivered in the mid
2020's.
Amphibious Ships
Amphibious warfare ships remain a key component of the Nation's
global forward presence, playing a pivotal role in responding to world
crises and supporting a broad range of missions across the spectrum of
conflict. Today, these ships are persistently forward deployed,
competing below the level of armed conflict while living within the
range of enemy fires, building partner capacity, and deterring enemy
aggression. Partnered with industry, the DON is committed to delivering
the most capable multi-mission amphibious warfare ship.
America-class (LHA 6) will replace the decommissioned LHA 1 Tarawa
and aging LHD 1 Wasp-class ships. USS America (LHA 6) returned from
deployment as the centerpiece of the America Amphibious Readiness
Group/Marine Expeditionary Unit with the F-35B operating from the
flight deck. USS Tripoli (LHA 7) delivered in February 2020 and is
completing its post-delivery efforts to make the ship Joint Strike
Fighter-capable and ready for its planned deployment in fiscal year
2022. Bougainville (LHA 8) is 33 percent construction complete with 107
units erected to support a fiscal year 2025 delivery. LHA 8 will
include a well deck to increase operational flexibility and includes a
reduced island structure that increases flight deck space to enhance
aviation capability. LHA 9 has commenced long lead-time material
procurement. All LHAs will be F-35B capable.
San Antonio-class (LPD 17) provides the ability to embark,
transport, and land elements of a landing force by helicopters, tilt
rotor aircraft, landing craft, and amphibious vehicles. Fort Lauderdale
(LPD 28) is 91 percent complete and planned for delivery in January
2022, while Richard M. McCool Jr. (LPD 29) is 53 percent complete and
planned for delivery in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2023. LPD 28
and LPD 29 leveraged many design innovations and cost reduction
initiatives, including the first install of the Enterprise Air
Surveillance Radar (EASR) on LPD 29, as the class transitions to Flight
II, integrating more high-level capabilities. The Navy awarded the
first Flight II ship, Harrisburg (LPD 30), in March of 2019. It is
eight percent complete with a planned delivery in the second quarter of
fiscal year 2025. In addition, the Navy awarded the Pittsburgh (LPD 31)
Detail Design and Construction contract in April 2020 with delivery
planned in the second quarter of fiscal year 2027.
Light Amphibious Warship
In support of maritime competition and potential conflict, the Navy
is conducting an Analysis of Alternatives and will commence with
Concept Studies and Preliminary Design to evaluate a new medium intra-
theater amphibious platform. Studies will primarily focus on commercial
designs tailored for military application to enable maneuver and
mobility for our integrated naval forces conducting DMO. The Department
is driving towards a lead ship contract award as early as fiscal year
2023 that will support the Marine Corps' future Marine Littoral
Regiments in the Indo-Pacific region. The Light Amphibious Warship is
complementary to traditional large amphibious ships; both types of
ships are required to deliver Marine Corps forces to expeditionary
locations.
Connectors
The Ship to Shore Connector (SSC) program provides the capability
to rapidly project assault forces within the littoral operational
environment to ensure the Joint Force Commander's ability to conduct
amphibious operations maneuvering over-the-beach, over ice, mud,
rivers, swamps and marshes. The Landing Craft, Air Cushion (LCAC) 100-
class craft are the functional replacement for the legacy LCAC craft,
which began reaching end of their service life extensions in 2015. The
Department remains committed to maintaining this critical non-
displacement craft capability with the procurement of the new LCAC 100-
class and the LCAC extended service life extension program (E-SLEP)
initiative for the current LCAC-class. Technical issues have been
resolved and production has stabilized, with craft deliveries
proceeding in support of the program plan. The Navy is also replacing
its aging Landing Craft Utility (LCU) fleet with the LCU 1700 program
which will restore LCU's complementary heavy lift payload in a more
rugged, reliable, and affordable independent operations capable
platform.
Auxiliary Ships, Expeditionary, and Other Vessels
Expeditionary support vessels are highly flexible platforms used
across a broad range of military operations supporting multiple
operational phases. The Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) is part of the
critical access infrastructure that supports the deployment of forces
and supplies to provide prepositioned equipment and sustainment with
flexible distribution. The Navy commissioned USS Miguel Keith (ESB 5)
on May 8, 2021. The ESB 6 and ESB 7 have planned deliveries in fiscal
year 2022 and fiscal year 2024. Expeditionary Fast Transport (EPF) is a
shallow draft, all aluminum, commercial-based catamaran capable of
intra-theater personnel and cargo lift, providing combatant commanders
high-speed sealift mobility with inherent cargo handling capability and
agility to achieve positional advantage over operational distances.
USNS Newport (T-EPF 12) was delivered in September 2020. Apalachicola
(T-EPF 13) and Cody (T-EPF 14) are under construction with deliveries
planned in fiscal year 2022 and fiscal year 2023, respectively. T-EPF
13 will include installation of evolutionary autonomy functions;
serving as important point of learning as Navy advances its unmanned
vessel efforts. T-EPF 14 and T-EPF 15 will incorporate fact-of-life and
operational improvements that will enable an embarkable Role 2 Enhanced
medical capability that allows naval forces to effectively deploy,
survive, operate, maneuver, and regenerate in support of DMO.
The Combat Logistics Force (CLF) consists of T-AOE fast combat
support ships, T-AKE dry cargo and ammunition ships, and T-AO fleet
replenishment oilers. CLF ships fulfill the vital role of providing
underway replenishment of fuel, food, repair parts, ammunition and
equipment to forward-deployed ships and embarked aircraft, to enable
them to operate for extended periods at sea. The Kaiser-class (T-AO
187) fleet replenishment oilers will be replaced with the John Lewis-
class fleet replenishment oilers, designated T-AO 205 class. T-AO 205
is 91 percent complete and planned for delivery in March 2022. The two
follow-on ships of the class, are 73 and 18 percent complete,
respectively. Construction on the fourth ship, future USNS Robert F.
Kennedy (T-AO 208), began in May 2021. The fiscal year 2022 budget
requests funding for one T-AO.
Navajo, the first of a new class of combined towing, salvage, and
rescue (T-ATS) ship is scheduled to deliver in August 2022. T-ATS is
based on existing commercial towing offshore support vessel design, and
will provide ocean-going tug, salvage, and rescue capabilities to
support Fleet operations. The Navy expects to award two ships in fiscal
year 2021, and requests funding for two additional ships in fiscal year
2022. The fiscal year 2022 budget also requests funding for a T-
AGOS(X)) to begin recapitalizing the Navy's Auxiliary General Ocean
Surveillance ships.
The Navy's shipbuilding plan provides sustained demand for
commercial shipbuilding with the aforementioned Fleet Replenishment
Oiler Recapitalization (T-AO 205 Class) and Towing, Salvage, and Rescue
Ships (T-ATS 6 Class), as well as Cable Ships (T-ARC(X)), Submarine
Tenders (AS(X)) and Next Generation Logistics Ship (NGLS).
Strategic Sealift
The Navy continues execution of its sealift recapitalization plan,
and has worked closely with USTRANSCOM to develop an effective
acquisition plan to recapitalize the Department's aging strategic
sealift capability at a level of moderate risk. This three-phased
approach includes acquiring used commercial vessels for the surge
sealift force, constructing new ships for the Maritime Prepositioning
Force (MPF) to replace capacity that will begin to reach end of service
life in 2029, and extending the service life of viable platforms. The
fiscal year 2022 budget continues the readiness and recapitalization
commitments by providing additional used vessel procurements to replace
surge sealift capability, increased material readiness of existing
ships, retirement of the least ready vessels, and service life
extensions. The Navy projects the newly procured used sealift vessels
will require conversion and upgrade work to fully meet military
requirements. This work will be performed in U.S. shipyards. We
appreciate this Committee's support for the authority to procure
additional used ships to recapitalize the surge sealift fleet and
request that Congress remove remaining obstacles to used ship
procurement. Additionally, Navy and U.S Marine Corps are teaming to
produce MPF Next Generation requirements and transition plans. Sealift
new construction is most appropriate for the replacement of fully
operational status ships in the MPF which support Marine Corps.
Sustainment, Modernization and Service Life Extensions
Sustaining the Navy's force structure through the maintenance and
modernization of its naval vessels is key to ensuring they can meet
operational demands over their design service lives and provide
required capability to Fleet Commanders. The Navy has implemented
targeted initiatives aimed to reduce maintenance backlogs and improve
outcomes of maintenance availabilities covering the spectrum of work
planning, contracting, and execution. In our public yards, the Navy is
growing the capacity of the shipyards to meet the workload demand,
improving the training and productivity of the workforce, and making
the needed investments in our shipyards to ensure they are optimally
sized, configured and modernized to best execute their mission
requirements. In the private shipyards, the Navy has focused on
improving the completeness, accuracy, and timeliness of planning;
working to ensure material availability; adjusting Fleet maintenance
schedules to level load the ports; revising acquisition strategies to
continue to promote competition, learning, stability and
predictability; and streamlining Navy inspection points to improve
efficiencies.
The fiscal realities facing the Navy make it imperative to maintain
our in-service ships to achieve their expected service lives and
maintain their relevant combat systems through modernization efforts.
The fiscal year 2022 budget requests funding for the modernization of
three destroyers to sustain combat effectiveness, ensure mission
relevancy, and achieve the full expected service lives of the AEGIS
Fleet. Stand-alone and incremental modernization efforts and execution
will continue to be assessed and aligned to defeat our adversaries
throughout the life-cycle of the DDG 51 class. The Navy has evaluated
the most effective balance between costs and capability by extending
the service life of the most capable ships in the cruiser fleet while
removing the cruisers that have the least effective ballistic missile
defense capability to provide the Air and Missile Defense Commander
coverage. Planning is in progress for the inactivation of the first
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier. Upholding prior commitments by the Navy
to utilize the Nimitz-class to the maximum benefit of the Nation,
technical analysis of USS Nimitz (CVN 68), in conjunction with the
latest maintenance and operational schedules, supports a limited
service life extension of approximately one year past fifty years.
Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program (SIOP)
The Navy's four public shipyards are essential elements of our
national defense. Government owned and operated, the public shipyards
provide depot-level maintenance to ensure that the Navy's nuclear
powered aircraft carriers and submarines are available to meet the
Nation's defense priorities. The Navy is in year three of the SIOP
effort to transform the shipyards, positioning them to execute complex
maintenance availabilities required to support a growing Navy. The plan
focuses on three major areas for each of the Navy's public shipyards:
dry dock recapitalization to support both current and future classes of
ships; facility layout to optimize workflow within the shipyards; and
capital equipment modernization to increase productivity and safety.
The Navy is currently conducting a detailed analysis to support updated
cost estimates.
Phase II of the SIOP--focused on executing enhanced industrial
engineering analysis and the modeling and simulation of industrial
processes--is well underway. The Navy is building shipyard Digital
Twins and Area Development Plans (ADPs) that will guide infrastructure
modifications within the shipyard to enhance productivity. ADPs for the
four public shipyards are scheduled to complete by fiscal year 2025,
with the program moving into the execution of the SIOP upon completion.
Concurrent with the ADP effort, SIOP is moving forward with dry
dock recapitalization projects, facility restoration, and capital
equipment investments required to meeting the demands of the Navy's
Fleet Commanders. In addition, the Navy continues integrating SIOP
efforts with ongoing shipyard focused initiatives including Industrial
Process Innovation, Shipyard Performance to Plan and Naval Sustainment
System Shipyards to meet projected maintenance demands. These efforts
represent a substantial capital investment to deliver efficient and
modernized shipyards to support the Navy fleet.
Unmanned Surface and Undersea Vehicles
The DON is using a Family of Systems strategy to develop and employ
unmanned surface and undersea capabilities that augment the manned
force, and increase the cost imposed on our competitors. The Department
is developing modular and capable force-multiplying unmanned surface
systems that significantly increase the standoff, reach, and protection
of our manned platforms. These unmanned surface systems will be teamed
with manned platforms to achieve surface dominance as outlined in the
initial unmanned surface vehicle (USV) Concept of Operations (CONOPS)
document completed by the Surface Development Squadron in January 2021.
As directed in the fiscal year 2021 National Defense Authorization
Act, the Navy is conducting a Distributed Offensive Surface Fires AOA
to compare the currently planned large unmanned surface vessel (LUSV)
with an integrated missile launcher payload against a broad range of
alternative surface platforms and capabilities to determine the most
appropriate vessel to deliver additional missile capability and
capacity to the surface force. We expect to complete this analysis and
report our findings to Congress before the end of this calendar year.
The Navy's LUSV builds upon work funded by DOD's Strategic
Capabilities Office (SCO) and experimentation executed by the Navy USVs
in Project Overlord. LUSV will be a high-endurance vessel based on
commercial specifications, capable of weeks-long deployments and trans-
oceanic transits. With a large payload capacity, the LUSV will be
designed to conduct a variety of warfare operations initially in
conjunction with manned surface combatants while under the positive
control of a man-in-the-loop for employment of weapons systems. The
Navy is taking an iterative, systems engineering approach to obtaining
this technology and has designed an integration and experimentation
plan that will validate high reliability mechanical and electrical
systems, autonomous navigation and maneuvering, integration of combat
system, and platform command and control capabilities prior to
employment opportunities.
LUSV Design Studies contracts were awarded in September 2020 to six
Industry teams to provide robust collaboration with government and
industry to assist in maturation of platform specifications, and ensure
achievable technical requirements are in place for a follow on
development contract. Both Industry and the Navy are using these
collaborative interactions to significantly advance the knowledge base
that will feed into the LUSV program.
Medium unmanned surface vehicle (MUSV) is an unmanned sensor-ship,
built to carry modular payloads, and standardized for easy integration
with current Navy systems. Inexpensive compared to manned combatants,
MUSVs can be built in numbers, quickly adding capacity to the Fleet.
MUSV delivers a distributed sensor network that can navigate and
operate with man in/on the loop oversight, and will be capable of
weeks-long deployments and trans-oceanic transits. The Navy awarded a
design and fabrication contract to develop the first MUSV prototype
which is targeted for delivery in fiscal year 2023.
The Navy has benefited through its prototyping and experimenting
with Sea Hunter and Overlord unmanned surface vessel prototypes
accumulating over 3,100 hours of autonomous operations to include
teaming with other manned ships. The Navy will continue experimentation
and reliability demonstration efforts in fiscal year 2021 and fiscal
year 2022 on the two SCO-funded Overlord vessels as ownership shifts to
the Navy. The Navy is also building two additional Overlord prototypes
that will deliver in fiscal year 2022 to support continued
experimentation, and future mission CONOPS. The Navy is evaluating
other DMO applications to include logistics supply and refueling,
Marine Corps expeditionary options, and enhancements to other surface
platform missions. As part of this evaluation, the Navy is
collaborating with Military Sealift Command and the Marine Corps to
modify a T-EPF with autonomy to gain more autonomy knowledge and
reliability on a class of ship equipped with V-22 landing capability, a
large logistic and personnel size, weight and power capability, and the
ability to operate at high speeds.
The Mine Countermeasures (MCM) USV program is development and
production of MCM USV craft and Payload Delivery Systems to meet MCM
Mission Package requirements. It leverages the mature craft and sweep
payload developed for the Unmanned Influence Sweep System program that
achieved Milestone C and Low Rate Production in fiscal year 2020. Mine
hunting payload integration (with the AN/AQS-20 towed sonar) is in
progress and mine neutralizing payload integration is beginning
development with the Barracuda program. Additionally, the Navy awarded
a Multi Award Contract Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity in
fiscal year 2020 to provide the key enabling technologies for the
unmanned surface Family of Systems.
In the undersea domain, the Navy has begun fabrication of Orca
Extra Large Unmanned Undersea Vehicle (XLUUV). A competitive RFP was
issued in fiscal year 2020 for initial production of Snakehead, the
Large Displacement UUV, and for production of a Medium UUV that
supports both the submarine launched Razorback environmental sensing
mission, as well as the Maritime Expeditionary MCM UUVs mission. In
support of these new capabilities, the Navy is also investing in
enabling technologies, such as autonomy, command and control, energy,
and payloads, as well as establishing the interoperable standards and
open architectures for ease of technology transition. These
technologies and standards are the foundation necessary to ensure
integration and transition to the fleet using a disciplined approach.
The Navy recently made a significant advance in UUV autonomy by
integrating artificial intelligence, machine learning (AI/ML) automated
target recognition for naval mines aboard the current expeditionary UUV
program of record, the MK 18 Family of Systems. The deep learning
algorithm now fielded for the MK 18 detects mine-like objects in the
water for sailors operating the UUVs. By the end of the year, software
aboard the UUV will also adapt the UUV's mission pattern to identify
objects of interest, making the MK 18 the Navy's first intelligent UUV.
The Navy is assessing the utility of AI/ML for mine identification as
we develop the enabling technologies critical to affordable and
scalable unmanned systems.
The Navy has undertaken an aggressive approach through competitive
prototyping in collaboration with industry to accelerate these new
technologies utilizing the new authorities granted by Congress over the
past few years, such as middle-tier acquisitions and acquisition
agility legislation. This affords the Navy the ability to prudently
prototype, experiment, and demonstrate new capabilities prior to
commencing with Programs of Record. Unmanned vessels are key elements
in the future naval force and the Navy fully intends to leverage the
progress to inform new concepts of operation, new means of integrating
unmanned and manned vessels, and new capabilities afforded by these
advances.
Combat Systems
The Department continues to field the most capable and lethal
surface and submarine combat systems in the world. AEGIS Combat System
Baseline 9 delivers unprecedented offensive and defensive capabilities,
including offensive strike and ASW, and simultaneous air and ballistic
missile defense on destroyers and Air Defense Commander capability on
cruisers. AEGIS Baseline 10 will incorporate the AN/SPY 6(V)1 AMDR for
DDG 51 FLT III ships providing significant performance improvements
over the AN/SPY 1D(V) radar and expanding the sensor coverage and
enhancing the Navy's ability to perform the Integrated Air and Missile
Defense mission.
The DON uses open architecture that takes full advantage of
evolving technology to rapidly deliver real-time, reliable, and
actionable information to the warfighter and works towards breaking the
paradigm of hardware-software dependent deliveries. Using
virtualization technology, the AEGIS virtual twin system--a prototype
of the AEGIS Virtual Combat Management System--is able to support the
delivery of iterative updates to the AEGIS Weapon System. Navy is
investing in accelerating upgrades to Integrated Combat Systems in
order to ensure continuous combat superiority at sea. In addition, the
Navy just stood up its first weapons system software factory (The
Forge) which, in cooperation with industry, will enable rapid
innovation and delivery of combat system improvements to the fleet.
The Department continues to aggressively pursue affordable systems
that are employable from multiple platforms. By leveraging the
investment in AMDR, the Navy plans to replace the AN/SPY-1 D(V) radar
on select existing DDG 51 Flight IIA ships with scaled variants of the
AN/SPY-6(V). Additionally, AN/SPY-6(V) EASR variants will become the
primary Air Search Radar for aircraft carriers, amphibious ships, and
the guided missile frigate. The use of a common core technology and
support strategy enables significant life cycle efficiencies in
maintenance support, training, and overall cost for the Navy's primary
surface ship radars.
Traditional AEGIS development has been aligned to a major new
construction or modernization effort. To meet new challenges to our
maritime superiority the Navy is transforming the AEGIS development
model. Baselines 9 and 10 enable regular updates, without significant
modernization efforts and costs, maximizing return on investment.
Future growth capacity advantages of the modern computing
infrastructure in Baselines 9 and 10 will allow the Navy to
continuously field capability across the AEGIS fleet via stable and
continuous Capability Packages. The Capability Package model will allow
Navy to bring stability to AEGIS development and outpace the threat;
delivering capability at regular intervals with predictable cost, and
providing the framework for the Integrated Combat System.
The Navy continued to equip its submarines with the ever-evolving
undersea combat system utilizing bi-annual hardware Technology
Insertions on even years and software Advanced Processing Builds on odd
years. This process leverages commercial off-the-shelf (COTS)
technologies via the Acoustic Rapid COTS Insertion program mitigating
COTS obsolescence while providing more capability improvement at lower
costs.
tactical aviation
Carrier Air Wing (CVW)
The current CVW is transitioning to an optimal mix of 4th and 5th
Generation strike fighter aircraft necessary to compete with potential
adversaries in the 2020's. The Navy is managing 4th Generation F/A-18
inventory requirements through Service Life Modification (SLM) and 5th
Generation requirements through F-35C procurement. SLM extends the
existing 4th Generation capacity while adding advanced Block III
capability at one-third the cost of new procurement F/A-18 aircraft.
The active F-35C production line and the F/A-18E/F SLM effort are the
critical levers for the Navy to manage strike-fighter inventory into
the 2030s, ensuring the service maintains the capacity required to meet
Global Force Management (GFM) demand while investing in the new
technologies required to win in the great-power competition.
The Navy remains committed to the accelerated development of the
Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) Family of Systems (FOS) and other
key aviation wholeness investments. This decision ensures the CVW will
maintain capable strike fighter capacity to pace the most stressing
threat through the 2030s. NGAD FOS supports increased lethality and the
CNO Navigation Plan by providing advanced carrier-based power
projection within the CVW and maintaining CVN relevance in contested
threat environments. In fiscal year 2021, Navy's Next Generation
Fighter program (F/A-XX) begins the Concept Refinement Phase. During
this phase, iterative collaboration will occur between Government and
industry teams leading to the development of vendor concepts that
balance advanced air dominance capabilities and long-term
affordability.
With a primary focus of increasing the lethality of the CVW and
associated weapons capabilities, the Navy is investing in enhancements
for both F/A-18 and F-35. These enhancements include increasing F-35C
internal weapons bay capacity by 40 percent and the integration of
AARGM-ER. Additionally, Infrared Search & Track (IRST) improvement for
F/A-18E/F will bring critical out-of-band detection and weapon-quality-
track capability. Delivering 4th and 5th Generation transformational
capabilities to front-line forces as soon as possible remains a top
priority.
airborne electronic attack (aea)
The EA-18G Growler is a critical enabler for the Joint force,
bringing fully netted electronic warfare capabilities to the fight and
providing essential capabilities in the Electromagnetic Maneuver
Warfare environment. Next Generation Jammer (NGJ) pods will augment and
eventually replace the legacy ALQ-99 pods on the EA-18G and provide
full spectrum integrated non-kinetic effects. The delivery of Next
Generation Jammer (NGJ) increases EA-18G Growlers lethality and
provides a multi-generational leap in capability against radar and
communication targets utilizing advanced AEA techniques as well as
improved reliability and maintainability.
Next Generation Jammer-Mid-Band (NGJ-MB) Engineering &
Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase is focused on the development and
delivery of test pods for ground and flight test activities, as well as
the continued build of 6 System Demonstration Test Articles (SDTA).
Next Generation Jammer Low Band (NGJ-LB) had a successful Milestone B
event and awarded an EMD contract in December 2020, which includes
eight operational prototypes.
airborne command and control aircraft
The E-2D Advanced Hawkeye (AHE) is the Navy's carrier-based
Airborne Command and Control aircraft, equipped with advanced sensors
and networking equipment enabling airborne multi-domain command &
control, sensor awareness, combat identification, and network
connectivity required by Naval and joint force commanders to provide
air and sea superiority, and counter adversaries Anti-Access and Area
Denial strategies. The E-2D provides unique Theater Air and Missile
Defense capabilities, and is a cornerstone of the Naval Integrated Fire
Control system of systems linking Navy and Marine Corps fighter
aircraft, Navy surface combatants, and Marine Corps ground units.
This year the program will take delivery of 5 aircraft. In the 4th
year of a 5 year, 27 aircraft MYP contract, the fiscal year 2022 budget
requests $884.9 million in APN for 5 aircraft and Advance Procurement
for fiscal year 2023 aircraft. The fiscal year 2022 budget also
requests $386.9 million in RDT&E to continue development, integration,
and test efforts to outpace the evolving threat. Modernization
priorities include Hawkeye Cockpit Technical Refresh, Theater Combat ID
and National Technical Means integration, Naval Integrated Fire Control
development and test, ALQ-217 Electronic Support Measures updates,
Cyber Protection, Secret Internet Protocol Router chat, Counter
Electronic Attack, Multifunctional Information Distribution System/
Joint Tactical Radio with Tactical Targeting Network Technology, Sensor
Netting, Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) Signal Data Processor
(SDP) and Data Fusion.
assault support and logistics support aircraft
Tilt-Rotor Aircraft (USMC MV-22 Osprey and Navy CMV-22B)
Marine Corps MV-22 Ospreys currently have a continuous presence in
INDOPACOM, CENTCOM, and EUCOM. The Marine Corps has a requirement to
procure 20 additional aircraft through the MYP (fiscal year 2018 to
2022). The MV-22 Common Configuration-Readiness and Modernization (CC-
RAM) is executing, and while still early in the program, yielding
improved readiness rates. The fiscal year 2022 budget requests $90.0
million in RDT&E for continued MV-22B development and product
improvements, including a revolutionary capability (Helmet Mounted
Display/Degraded Visual Environment (HMD/DVE)) to improve pilot
situation awareness and safety in degraded visual environments; $458.7
million in APN for 5 MV-22s and long-lead materials; and $300.1 million
for modifications, of which $150.6 million is for CC-RAM.
The Navy is continuing development of Carrier On-board Delivery
mission aircraft, leveraging MV-22 investment to recapitalize the
legacy C-2 fleet with CMV-22B tilt-rotor aircraft. CMV-22B's first
flight occurred in December 2019 and the aircraft transitioned into
developmental test in January 2020. The program is currently in
operational test leading to IOC and its first deployment in the fourth
quarter of fiscal year 2021. The fiscal year 2022 budget requests $18.0
million in RDT&E for continued development, testing, and product
improvements; $293.0 million in APN for three CMV-22Bs and long-lead
materials; and $12.7 million for readiness and interoperability
improvements.
Fiscal year 2022 will be the last year of V-22 procurement and Bell
Boeing intends to initiate V-22 production line shutdown activities if
no additional V-22 orders are received. This will bring the Marine
Corps' MV-22 procurement to 355 aircraft and Navy's CMV-22 procurement
to 44 aircraft.
CH-53K
As the only fully marinized heavy lift helicopter in the DOD, the
CH-53K supports both current and future warfighting concepts by
providing agile maritime logistical connectors with greater payloads
and speed than any current or emerging rotorcraft. The CH-53K
contributes to a more lethal joint force by enabling forces to rapidly
transition from contact to blunt layer activities--and back again. In
the past year, the CH-53K program has demonstrated significant progress
in executing development and flight test activities, continued training
of aircrew and maintainers at the Marine Corps' operational test and
evaluation squadron, VMX-1, and continued Low Rate Initial Production.
To date, the CH-53K has flown nearly 2,300 developmental flight test
hours and is nearing completion of all test activities in support of
operational testing. Notably, the fire suppression system uses a more
ecologically friendly HFC-125 suppressant, a technical milestone only a
few other Department of the Navy platforms have achieved. The program
is well positioned to begin Initial Operational Test and Evaluation
(IOT&E) this summer. During fiscal year 2022, the program will complete
IOT&E and Live Fire Testing, continue to expand the CH-53K's envelope
through ground and flight testing and analysis, and procure the sixth
Low Rate Initial Production Lot.
The fiscal year 2022 President's Budget requests $256.9 million in
RDT&E to continue the CH-53K development and test, and $1.5 billion in
APN for procurement of nine low rate initial production aircraft,
including advanced procurement and initial spares.
executive support aircraft
The fiscal year 2022 President's Budget requests $45.9 million in
RDT&E and $40.3 million of APN for the H-92A Presidential Helicopter
Replacement Aircraft. RDT&E funding is required for Follow-On Test and
Evaluation activities and improvements. These efforts include Mission
Communications System upgrades (both software and hardware),
enhancements to required Wide Band Line Of Sight capabilities, cockpit
upgrades, shipboard interoperability, maintaining test aircraft and
facilities; as well as, initiates test and evaluation efforts for
distributed network communications, and vehicle performance
enhancements. APN in the amount of $40.3 million is required for
retrofit modifications for the incorporation of the of the Federal
Aviation Administration mandated Automatic Dependent Surveillance
Broadcast Out system capability, upgrades to the Mission Communication
System servers, and shipboard interoperability.
fixed-wing aircraft
KC-130J (USMC)
The KC-130J remains a force multiplier for deployed Marine Air-
Ground Task Force (MAGTF) success, bringing increased capability,
performance, and survivability with lower operating and sustainment
costs. The KC-130J is in high demand as it provides tactical air-to-air
refueling and organic lift capabilities to deployed Marine
Expeditionary Units and future Marine Littoral Regiments. The fiscal
year 2022 budget requests $588.9 million in APN to procure six KC-130Js
through an Air Force contract. This request supports a fourth Marine
Corps active-duty squadron that will be postured in the Indo-Pacific
region.
Take Charge and Move Out (TACAMO)
The Navy's TACAMO nuclear command, control and communications (NC3)
mission, flown today on the E-6B Mercury (Boeing 707) aircraft,
provides communications to the nuclear triad through all phases of a
nuclear conflict. In fiscal year 2022, the Navy will accelerate
recapitalization of this vital NC3 mission from the aging fleet of 16
E-6Bs onto the C-130J-30 (stretched Super Hercules) aircraft. Funding
in fiscal year 2022 includes $60.1 million of RDT&E for non-recurring
engineering and long-lead procurement for three C-130J-30 test aircraft
and $58.7 million of RDT&E for mission systems design and development.
Recapitalization of the TACAMO mission on the C-130J leverages a proven
platform for integration of mature TACAMO capabilities, supporting U.S.
nuclear deterrence and Columbia's assured second strike for decades to
come.
maritime patrol aircraft
The P-8A Poseidon combines the proven reliability of commercial 737
airframes with modern avionics, military communications, and advanced
sensors and weapons to provide a range of advanced warfighting
capabilities. P-8A capabilities include full-spectrum, wide area, cue-
to-kill Anti-Submarine Warfare; Anti-Surface Warfare; and networked
Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR). The P-8A program
will complete the replacement of the legacy P-3C Orions, and P-8A
squadrons now deploy continuously to all areas of the globe to maintain
United States maritime dominance, freedom of maneuver, and access to
sea-lanes supporting global commerce.
The warfighting requirement is 138 aircraft, including U.S. Naval
Reserve squadrons and quick reaction capable aircraft, with 128
aircraft funded. Boeing intends to initiate P-8A production line
shutdown activities in fiscal year 2022 if no additional P-8A orders
are received. As of April 30, 2021, 106 U.S. aircraft have been
delivered.
Since inception, the P-8A has consisted of three Increments.
Increments 1 and 2 have fielded and Increment 3 is scheduled to IOC in
fiscal year 2025. Increment 3, which consists of ECP 6 and ECP 7,
increases ASW capabilities including ASW Signal Intelligence (SIGINT),
Wideband SATCOM, Higher-Than-Secret (HTS) processing, enhanced track
management and sensor fusion (Minotaur), and Enhanced Multi-Static
Active Coherent (MAC-E). P-8A test aircraft began the ECP 6
modification in April 2021 to support developmental and operational
testing beginning in fiscal year 2022. ECP 7 encompasses advanced
algorithms to the acoustic processors, software improvements, and MAC-E
sonobuoy improvements. The fiscal year 2022 request includes $201.1
million in RDT&E for integration of ECP 6 and ECP 7 to complete
baseline capability fielding, and rapid development efforts for
evolving threats, and $175.9 million in APN for fleet modification
kits, deficiency corrections, safety upgrades, and production line
shutdown activities. P-8A incremental upgrades ensure the Navy paces
the undersea threat and supports distributed net-centric maritime
operations.
unmanned aircraft systems (uas)
Consistent with DMO, Naval Aviation fully supports the continued
integration of unmanned systems into the Fleet to enable a fundamental
shift in the way the DON conducts naval aviation operations. Advantages
for continuing and broadening unmanned aviation efforts include
decreased risk to personnel, greater persistence, longer ranges,
improved data speed and accuracy, and a faster decision cycle. These
capabilities offer the DON increased asymmetric operational
opportunities and tactical advantages that provide the warfighters an
edge to dominate and win in ongoing and future conflicts.
Naval Aviation has successfully deployed a variety of unmanned
aircraft systems (UAS) to the Combatant Commanders. For example, MQ-4C
and MQ-8B/C UASs are deployed and in operation with the Navy, and the
Marine Corps is increasing operational requirements with the MQ-9A
Reaper as the Marine Corps shifts focus to the INDOPACOM region. The
DON continues to mature the concept of employment of these systems as
we fly, integrate and increase quantities into the Navy/Marine Corps
Fleet. Of note, reliability, maintainability and availability of UASs
are comparable to manned platforms, and we continue to collaborate with
our industry partners to increase readiness and lower overall
sustainment costs.
Naval Aviation is continuing the development of new unmanned
aviation capabilities.
The MQ-25 UAS will provide a critical organic aerial refueling
capability to the Carrier Air Wing (CVW) and extend the CVW mission
effectiveness range, increase the number of F/A-18E/Fs available for
the strike fighter mission by relieving F/A-18E/Fs from the refueling
mission, and mitigate future strike fighter and organic CVW ISR
shortfalls.
The Marine Corps will sundown the RQ-21 Blackjack (Group 3 UAS),
and future operating concepts will focus on Group 2 and Group 5
operations. The Marine Corps has identified the MQ-9A UAS (Group 5) as
the materiel solution for the Marine Air-Ground Task Force Unmanned
Expeditionary - Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MUX MALE) capability.
The Marine Corps seeks to procure six MQ-9A Extended Range systems in
fiscal year 2022, and a total of 18 systems over the next several
years, to form three UAS squadrons. The Marine Corps will leverage
prior existing Air Force and Marine Corps efforts to reduce risk, while
providing advanced capabilities to the Marine Corps and overall joint
warfighting enterprise. These squadrons will provide persistent
airborne data relay in support of overall maritime domain awareness and
command and control capabilities. The MQ-9A Extended Range is a
critical enabler to the Naval force in building an alternate Precision,
Navigation, and Timing network.
The Naval Special Warfare (NSW) command will continue to operate
the RQ-21 Blackjack as their organic UAS with SOF peculiar payloads to
avoid a capability gap until the next generation small tactical UAS
(STUAS) is fielded in fiscal year 2026. The NSW is coordinating with
the Marine Corps to leverage the supply chain from the sundown of the
Marine's RQ-21 program.
Manned/unmanned teaming development efforts currently underway
include the development of CONOPS/Concepts of Employment for integrated
operations of and development of a common control architectures and
common standard interfaces and protocols. MQ-25 is currently leading
many of our current manned/unmanned teaming efforts via the development
and maturation of complex sea-based C4I UAS technologies and software
algorithms that pave the way for future multi-mission UASs to keep pace
with emerging threats. Towards that end, we also envision MQ-4C teaming
with P-8A and MQ-8C teaming with MH-60S rotary-wing platforms.
DON unmanned programs are proceeding on a steady course and speed.
The DON has successfully developed/employed a number of new unmanned
technologies and systems, observed the operational benefits of UASs in
not only combat but also drug interdiction, logistics, and day-to-day
operations. We see a future where further investment and maturation in
unmanned air system is not only practical - but essential to addressing
the Nation's current and future threats and needs.
weapons programs
Missile Programs
As the Navy carefully manages the approach to end of life of Ohio-
class SSBNs, addressing the viability of the SWS throughout the life of
the Columbia-class SSBNs remains a priority. The currently deployed
TRIDENT II Life Extended (D5LE) missiles will support initial load-outs
on Columbia, but production of additional D5LE missiles is not
practical due to technological obsolescence and lack of an industrial
base. The missiles cannot be extended due to the expiration of critical
safety components. A modernization of the D5LE SWS, TRIDENT II D5 Life
Extension 2 (D5LE2), is required to support later Columbia-class
missile inventory and seamlessly sustain USSTRATCOM requirements. D5LE2
will ensure the SWS will be flexible and adaptable in order to maintain
demonstrated performance and survivability despite facing a dynamic
threat environment until Columbia end of life. The fiscal year 2022
budget includes D5LE2 development efforts to modernize the Submarine
Launched Ballistic Missile design and industrial base whose production
lines were shut down over the last decade.
SM-6 missiles provide theater and high value target area defense
for the Fleet, and with Integrated Fire Control, has more than doubled
its range in the counter-air mission. The Navy awarded a 5-year MYP
contract for up to 625 SM-6 missiles in December 2019. The fiscal year
2022 President's budget continues funding for the upgraded SM-2 Block
IIIC as a rapid prototyping project exercising middle tier acquisition
authorities and prepares the program for a rapid fielding decision. SM-
2 Block IIIC leverages investments made in SM-6 Block I and Evolved Sea
Sparrow Missile (ESSM) Block II to enhance performance against numerous
threats and to increase depth of fire. The SM-6 Block IB program
completes design and continues integration and test efforts to field a
cost-effective extended range capability in response to Joint, Fleet
and Navy Urgent Operational Needs by integrating a new government
developed rocket motor onto an existing SM-6 Block 1A seeker.
ESSM provides another layer to the Navy's defensive battle-space.
ESSM Block 2 is in Low Rate Production on track and plans to achieve
IOC in early fiscal year 2022. The inner layer of the Fleet's layered
defense is the Rolling Airframe Missile designed to pace the evolving
anti-ship cruise missile threat and improve performance against complex
engagement scenarios.
Strike Weapons
The Department continues to support a wider, more systematic
approach towards delivering offensive weapons balance. By preserving
the readiness and capacity of our key strike weapons inventories,
pursuing strike weapon capability enhancements, and developing next-
generation strike missile capabilities, the DON will increase overall
force effectiveness to address emerging threats.
Tomahawk
In the fiscal year 2022 budget request, the Department sustains the
Tomahawk as the Nation's premier all-weather, long-range, survivable
deep strike offensive weapon to include new production and
recertification of current inventory. For Maritime Strike Tomahawk
(MST), the fiscal year 2022 budget request provides continuation of
initial shipboard and shore-side mission planning and funds software
builds to support first test of all MST system segments at NSWC in the
first quarter of fiscal year 2022. fiscal year 2022 MST Test and
Evaluation (T&E) plans include missile functional ground testing and
missile test flights from a ground launcher apparatus to assess seeker
performance, mature and refine seeker algorithms, and provide
verification and validation data for Modeling and Simulation. MST IOC
is planned for the fiscal year 2024.
Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare (OASuW) Increment 1/ Long Range Anti-
Ship Missile (LRASM)
OASuW Increment 1/LRASM provides Combatant Commander the ability to
conduct ASuW operations against near/mid-term high-value surface
combatants protected by Integrated Air Defense Systems with long-range
Surface-to-Air-Missiles and to deny adversaries sanctuary of maneuver.
The program achieved Early Operational Capability on the Air Force B-1B
in early fiscal year 2019 and on the Navy's F/A-18E/F aircraft in early
fiscal year 2020. The fiscal year 2022 President's Budget Continuation
of and completion of USN LRASM 1.1 development, which will deliver
incremental upgrades to keep pace with emerging threat capability and
increase in LRASM quantities through the FYDP.
Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM) & AARGM Extended-Range
AARGM procurement completed in fiscal year 2021 with deliveries
continuing through fiscal year 2024 in support of the transition to
AARGM-ER. AARGM-ER provides the Department of the Navy with a 5th
Generation compatible extended range asset to project power and provide
Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses, both at-sea and on land. There have
been 1218 AARGMs (All Up Rounds, Training Missiles, and Spares)
delivered to the Fleet (as of 26 May 2021). Program of record delivery
is 1803 missiles. The fiscal year 2022 President's Budget supports an
AARGM-ER ramp in production through FYDP and supports transition into
system-level developmental testing and operational testing of
production representative hardware.
Hypersonic Program
The Navy Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) Program Office is
developing a hypersonic weapon system that will enable precise and
timely strike capability against deep inland targets in contested
environments. CPS and the Army Hypersonics Project Office are jointly
leveraging a common missile design and test opportunities to field a
non-nuclear hypersonic weapon system. The Navy plans to make USS
Zumwalt the first Navy platform to field hypersonic capability,
currently planned for the mid-2020s. In March 2020 the Services
executed a highly successful flight test of the Common Hypersonic Glide
Body (C-HGB), and in late May successfully conducted a test of the
First Stage Solid Rocket Motor (SRM). All Up Round testing is scheduled
for fiscal year 2022. This rapid development and demonstration of
hypersonic strike weapons systems supports the U.S. ability to deter,
and if necessary, defeat potential adversaries.
Directed Energy
In fiscal year 2020, the Navy provided Congress its path forward
for shipboard integration of High Energy Laser systems and the risk
reduction plan to continue to improve technology while growing the
industrial base for these systems. Initial capabilities, such as Solid
State Laser-Technology Maturation (SSL-TM) on USS Portland (LPD 27),
continue to be valuable for shipboard experimentation and integration
to inform the Navy's long term consideration of other ship classes as
host platforms for laser weapons. In the fiscal year 2022 budget
request, the Department will further advance capabilities of laser
weapons to meet ship defense missions and will install and field the
first fully combat system integrated laser weapons system, HELIOS,
onboard a DDG 51 Flight IIA destroyer. The Department is also
collaborating and partnering with the DOD and other Services to
continue to mature these advanced laser technologies to defeat more
challenging threats to support and shape the future acquisition of
these systems.
Counter Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-UAS)
The Navy continues implementation of integrated C-UAS solutions
designed to protect high value and critical naval assets afloat and
ashore as well as provide basic defensive measures at priority shore
installations against the threats posed by unmanned aircraft systems.
Our efforts focus on maintaining commonality of current C-UAS solutions
while rapidly evaluating, improving and implementing an integrated
family of systems to defeat evolving threats afloat and ashore. We are
rapidly pursuing refinement of material solutions, threat-based mission
assessments, and development of advanced target discrimination and
defeat capabilities while continuing installation, integration,
improvement, and sustainment of C-UAS capabilities worldwide. We
continue engaging with the Army in their role as Executive Agent (EA)
for counter small unmanned aircraft systems (C-sUAS) to develop and
execute a deliberate, repeatable process to identify prioritized areas
for investment and focuses for development. Additionally, in
partnership with the C-sUAS EA, we are refining an open architecture
solution and interoperability standards as well as identifying or
developing additional detect and deter capabilities to integrate into
the C-UAS family of systems.
marine corps ground programs
The Marine Corps' ground programs are a vital contribution to the
integrated Naval and Joint force that can achieve success in both
maritime gray zone competition and traditional conflict. The Marine
Corps is developing ground-based, long-range precision fires as an
anti-ship capability to contribute to Distributed Maritime Operations.
Additionally, the Marine Corps will provide intelligence and
communication capabilities on a daily basis, enabled through a system
of sensors and communication networks, which will be employed by our
Marine Littoral Regiments.
Long-Range Precision Fires
As the Nation's Stand-In force, the Marine Corps is uniquely suited
to provide precision fires from land-to-sea in the prosecution of naval
campaigns. While this is a significant change from the past two decades
of land-based operations, we are implementing this change to maximize
the Marine Corps' deterrent and combat capabilities in support of
future naval campaigns. Simultaneously, we retain our national crisis
response force capability.
Ground-Based Anti-Ship Missile (GBASM)
GBASM is the Marine Corps' top modernization priority and is the
key lethality component for the Marine Corps to facilitate sea denial
in support of naval and joint operations. The current materiel solution
for GBASM is the Navy-Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System
(NMESIS) which consists of two Naval Strike Missiles mounted on a
remotely operated JLTV-based chassis. The capability creates cost
impositions for an adversary by introducing a new and highly credible
threat into their decision-making, while providing us with a relatively
low cost and highly effective capability.
By combining existing technologies in the missile and the platform,
the Marine Corps has reduced programmatic risks through the use of
proven capabilities, which enables us to move faster. The Marine Corps
successfully tested this system in November 2020, and in our fiscal
year 2022 budget request, we are seeking funding for 10 test systems
for further developmental and operational testing. With the ability to
strike enemy ships at ranges of 100 nautical miles and beyond, we
believe it will be a ``game changer'' for the Marine Corps, the Naval
Fleet Commander, and combatant commanders.
Organic Precision Fires (OPF)
OPF is a family of loitering munition systems that will provide
multiple echelons of the Fleet Marine Force with beyond-line-of-sight,
precise fires capabilities. As a ``hunter-killer'' capability, OPF will
provide continuous surveillance before, during, and after conducting
lethal strikes against targets, while reducing potential for collateral
damage. Furthermore, these systems will be capable of engaging targets
at extended range with sufficient lethality to defeat armored, water-
borne, and personnel threats.
Long-Range Unmanned Surface Vessel (LRUSV)
The Marine Corps envisions LRUSV as an uncrewed vessel,
approximately 45 feet in length, capable of conducting semi-autonomous
maneuver in the open ocean for extended periods of time. The vessel
will serve as a platform for the launching of Organic Precision Fires,
thus providing reconnaissance and surface-launched strike capabilities.
Through extensive wargaming, the LRUSV has demonstrated the potential
to generate significant operational impact, benefitting the Navy and
Marine Corps' anti-surface warfare campaigns. The Marine Corps is
taking a deliberate approach to capability development using
prototyping and experimentation to reduce technical and integration
risk, validate designs, and better inform achievable and affordable
requirements, with the ultimate goal of delivering capabilities to the
Marine Corps and Joint Force in the mid- to late-2020s. The Marine
Corps has already contracted for three prototypes, and with our fiscal
year 2022 budget request, we will seek to procure two additional
prototype vessels to begin experimentation.
Resilient Sensors and Communication Networks
To enable naval and joint force commanders across the competition
continuum, the Marine Corps must not only become lighter and more
lethal, but also must enhance its ability to enable joint command and
control, as well as reconnaissance and counter reconnaissance
operations. Thus, the Marine Corps is working on more resilient and
interoperable networks and data systems that will support Marines'
sensing and communication capabilities, enabling the Navy Tactical Grid
and Joint All-Domain Command and Control. This creates advantages for
Marines across key maritime locations and provides the required
information for uniformed and civilian leaders to make sound judgments.
Ground/Air Task Oriented Radar (G/ATOR)
G/ATOR is a state-of-the-art, ground-based, short-to-medium range,
expeditionary radar system designed as a single materiel solution to
satisfy air surveillance, air defense, ground counter-fire and counter-
battery, with the ability to perform air traffic control mission sets.
The radar is transportable by organic Marine Corps means. G/ATOR
enables Marines to control designated airspace by way of detecting,
tracking, classifying, and accurately determining the origin of enemy
projectiles and air threats. Notably, G/ATOR will support forward-
postured Marines by providing surveillance and detection of enemy air
threats, not easily identified by other radar assets in congested
littoral environments. The G/ATOR radar is already in service in the
Pacific region, and the Marine Corps will continue to procure and field
this highly capable radar system. In addition to G/ATOR, the Marine
Corps is developing the Multi-Domain Radar for a Contested Environment
(MuDRaCE). This advanced system is complementary to the G/ATOR and will
enhance the Marine Corps and Joint Forces' situational awareness.
Marine Electronic warfare Ground Family of Systems (MEGFOS)
MEGFoS is an electronic warfare system that serves to counter
improvised explosive devices and unmanned aerial surveillance threats
while also providing limited counter-communications capabilities. This
family of systems, which includes mounted and dismounted variants, is
in development. Through the use of the electro-magnetic spectrum,
MEGFoS will have the ability to locate and identify adversary forces
while simultaneously providing friendly forces feedback on their
signature management operations. MEGFoS will enable the Marine Corps to
maneuver, fight, and sustain itself through the exploitation of the
electro-magnetic spectrum.
Network On The Move (NOTM)
NOTM is comprised of a robust communication system mounted on a
ground combat vehicle or aviation platform. NOTM provides terrestrial
line-of-sight and beyond line-of-sight satellite communications for
Marines at-the-halt and while on-the-move. NOTM is purpose built to
support our naval and joint concepts that require our forces to fight
in a distributed manner by allowing dispersed commanders the ability to
effectively command and control forces in a contested all-domain
environment. The Marine Corps is currently fielding these systems that
will allow for seamless command and control for maneuvering units in
the future.
Next Generation Satellite Communications
Marine Corps Wideband Satellite Communications Family of Systems
(MC-WSATCOM FoS) is a comprehensive, integrated, and sustainable
solution designed to address current and future warfighting capability
needs using military and commercial SATCOM systems in both contested
and permissive electro-magnetic spectrum environments. The MC-WSATCOM
FOS will replace legacy very-small-aperture terminal communications
systems, enable command and control of forward postured marines, and be
fully interoperable with naval and joint wideband SATCOM systems.
Senator Hirono. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
In my opening statement, I referred to the fact that you
are responsible for acquisition and sustainment, including
maintenance matters. I would note that you have challenges
before you in this tasking and the Navy has been experiencing
delays and cost overruns in maintenance availabilities in both
the private and public shipyards.
What has been done, under your leadership since last year,
to improve the performance of ship maintenance programs and
keep individual overhauls from being late?
Mr. Stefany. So, yes, ma'am. Thanks for that question.
First of all, we have taken a systematic and data-driven
approach to looking at how our shipyards are doing, their
availabilities and the maintenance of the work we have right
now. We learned through the aviation model that we did a year
or two ago, that when you look at actual drivers of maintenance
delays, if you look at where the data is telling us those
delays are, that is not always where we thought they were.
So, by taking, what we call a plan to perform, an actual
looking at all of at data of the availabilities we have done in
the past at the shipyards, both private and public, and running
through the data, we have been able to determine where we have
bottlenecks or other choke points that we did not expect. So,
we are using that information to both rightsize our
availabilities, so on day one, we don't say optimistically say
the ship will get done early, right; we get an actual schedule
that we can stand behind, and then we are able to attack those
bottlenecks that have been holding us up.
As a result, we have reduced the days of delay
significantly from 2019 to 2020 and now into 2021, we are
seeing ships coming out closer to on time from our
availabilities.
Senator Hirono. Well, you mentioned that you found some
surprises when you analyzed what were some of the factors
causing the delays such as? What was an unexpected revelation?
Mr. Stefany. So, I don't know if Admiral Kilby had a couple
remarks?
Vice Admiral Kilby. I would just add one thing, ma'am, is,
as Secretary Stefany talked about, an unrealistic expectation.
So, planning to complete the avail [maintenance availability],
have the availability duration plan to be what it is, because
if you plan it optimistically and that ship doesn't come out on
time, other ships are backlogged waiting to come in.
So, that realistic assessment of planning is the main
thing, as well as locking down the package 120 days in advance.
Once you can do that, the shipyards can procure the material
they needed to conduct that availability and they are not
trying to chase that. There is a two-part main efforts on that.
Of course, every avail is different, but ensuring that we
load up those maintenance, projected maintenances
appropriately, I think is what Secretary Stefany is alluding
to.
Mr. Stefany. We would normally award like, for the private
yards, a contract about 30 days in advance and we saw that
doesn't give the time for the contractor to get his plan in
place, his workforce up to speed. We looked at the data and
found where we award contracts at 100 or 120 days in advance of
when the work starts, that gives the right amount of time. We
thought it was 30 days; it actually turns out to be 120 days to
get the workforce in place and all the plans in place to start
working on a continuous basis once the ship pulls in.
Senator Hirono. That is a very significant difference if
you are estimating 30 days and it is actually 120 days.
Vice Admiral Kilby. Not duration, ma'am. The start to----
Senator Hirono. I'm sorry?
Mr. Stefany. To award the contract, because we are doing
competitive contracts on the private side, to award that
contract and give them, the shipyard, enough time to get up to
speed before we bring the ship in to start working.
So, giving them more time up front to plan----
Senator Hirono. That certainly makes a lot of sense that
you would want to have realistic projections, as opposed to
optimistic ones.
Okay. Well, 5 minutes goes by fast, because I have about 20
more questions, but we shall proceed.
Senator Cramer?
Senator Cramer. Thank you.
Let's start with what I teed up, Admiral Kilby, in my
opening statement. It was as recently as 2017 that the then-
CNO, Admiral Richardson, mentioned that the Navy was looking at
bringing back the capabilities to reload vertical launch
systems (VLS) at sea, due to a need to increase capacity of
VLS.
A couple things. First of all, to what extent would VLS
requirements be met over the next 5 years if the proposed
budget request is enacted, including the retirement of seven
cruisers, which, obviously, is a factor, and to what extent
could the seven cruisers slated for decommissioning in the
budget request be maintained, in a reduced capability, as I
mentioned in the opening statement, and operating status to
enable getting the ships underway to leverage their 122 VLS
cells in a time of war.
Vice Admiral Kilby. Senator Cramer, thanks for that
question.
It is complex, as you would expect. The VLS cells that we
looked at are only going to be meaningful if that ship can get
underway and it has a meaningful combat system and a meaningful
radar to employ those missiles. So, it was our view, a tough
decision, to recommend early decommissioning of those ships
because of the challenges that we are having keeping them at
sea.
Today, the USS Vella Gulf failed to sail for her deployment
and she failed to sail for her last deployment. So, she was a
month delayed last deployment. She's 2\1/2\ months delayed this
deployment. She's one of those cruisers that is going to
decommission in 2022.
A way to keep them around, I think, in a cost-effective
manner, would be to try not to man them, but to keep them in a
condition where we could bring them back. In view of our
competitors, I don't think that timeline will allow us to bring
them back immediately, though you could, and we have in the
past, brought back ships that are in this reserve status.
Depending on the time requirement placed on us to bring it
back will drive how much it costs to keep them in that status.
So, if I need to keep a crew attached to that ship, that is
going to drive O&S [operation and sustainment] costs.
Senator Cramer. Sir, along the same lines, what is the
status of developing a system to help surface combatants reload
at sea?
Vice Admiral Kilby. That system is underway. It is being
developed by the N4 shop, our logistics shop. The challenge is
various sea states, so we are marching up from sea state zero
to a higher sea state, but we think now we are still at the
lower sea states.
Conducting it at sea, because of the weight and the length
of those missiles is going to be challenging, compared to some
of our older missiles when we had a strike-down crane attached
to those systems. So, we do want to vigorously pursue that. I
don't know that it will be underway; it will probably be in
some lighterage stage or moored alongside another ship where we
could transfer those munitions. But that is definitely
something we are interested in, especially in the Pacific.
Senator Cramer. Section 227 of the current fiscal year's
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) requires the
Secretary of the Navy to complete an analysis of alternatives,
an AOA [Analysis of Alternatives], regarding the most
appropriate surface vessels, and manned or unmanned, to meet
applicable offensive military requirements.
Can you provide an update on how that AOA is going?
Vice Admiral Kilby. Yes, sir. It is underway. I think we
are looking at a wide variety of things. On one end, we are
trying to validate in this AOA, the Navy's idea that we could
have an unmanned magazine augmenter to manned ships, and the
idea, we would rotate those ships in conflict, allowing the
manned ships to stay on station.
But we are also looking at other ships. That AOA is not
complete; it should be complete this fall. I am interested in
those results, too, but I think the hybrid force that we are
pursuing is a more cost-effective way to produce a greater
Navy, especially against a peer competitor. So, I am looking to
those results, too. I think it is on pace and I think we will
see those results in the fall, sir.
Senator Cramer. All right. Rather than asking my next
question with the time remaining, I will just wait until----
Senator Hirono. Why don't you go ahead?
Senator Cramer. We have the time?
Okay. I guess I didn't notice Senator Peters had left.
Mr. Stefany, getting back again to my opening statement
regarding the aggressive shipbuilding 30-year plan, what, well,
and I specifically mentioned the procurement of three Virginia-
class and one Columbia-class. What is your assessment of the
submarine industrial base's current performance and what would
it take for them to meet that aggressive plan?
Mr. Stefany. Yes, sir. I will answer the two parts: the
assessment of the industrial base and then what it would take
to get there.
Right now, I would say the submarine industrial base is in
a place to do two Virginias, plus a Columbia. Ramping up, we
would ramp that up from, in 2018, 2019, then COVID hit, right,
so we kind of took a step back in that.
In 2020, we weren't really producing at the two-per-year,
plus-one rate, but in the last 6 months, I have seen that
coming back and the industrial base is getting back to that
cadence where I believe they soon will be in a two plus one,
two Virginias, plus one Columbia capability.
In this budget, we have actually asked for $50 million for
some infrastructure capabilities. We call them APCO fixtures,
that we found are a bottleneck and would be helpful to get to
that ``two Virginias, plus one Columbia'' rate, and so, you
will see that in the budget, that we have done that. I think
that is the last infrastructure piece to get to the two-plus-
one.
Now, in the future, to get to three Virginias, plus one, I
don't believe the industrial base right now can handle that,
but we did a study, which we will be glad to share with your
staff, that we are looking at $1\1/2\ to $2 billion of further
investment by ourselves, plus industry, and an increase in the
workforce that would be necessary over a period of time to get
to that state. We have some details that we would be happy to
share with you, but right now, I think the industrial base is
set, both the suppliers and the shipyards to get to that two-
plus-one. Three-plus-one is going to be a major investment of
effort, capital, and workforce.
Senator Cramer. So, when can we expect the next 30-year
plan and realizing it was to be provided by law?
Mr. Stefany. Yes, sir. Absolutely. It was absolutely our
goal to have it to you, you know, within a few days of the
budget. It is in the final, final, final chop cycle within the
Department.
Any day now, sir. I, again, I apologize for all of us that
we were not able to provide it before this hearing.
Senator Cramer. Thank you.
Senator Hirono. Thank you.
Since you were asked about the industrial base capability
to build our submarines, are we going to be paying special
attention, knowing how important our submarine fleet is to our
national defense, especially with regard to near-peer
competitors?
Anybody? Mr. Secretary?
Mr. Stefany. [Inaudible.]
Senator Hirono. Because there are workforce issues. There
are all kinds of issues relating to the capability of building
more submarines, isn't there?
Vice Admiral Kilby. I will let Secretary Stefany cover the
industrial components of that, but from a confidence and an
imperative, I completely agree with you. Our submarine force is
the best in the world.
Senator Hirono. Uh-huh.
Vice Admiral Kilby. It is unparalleled, and that contains
other elements, not just submarines, but our maritime patrol
aircraft, our underwater arrays, our SURTASS [Surveillance
Towed Array Sensor System] ships, all that ecosystem creates
our capability in that domain, so we must preserve it. I think
increasing the number of submarines is definitely a part of
that and we have to get after that, as Secretary Stefany
alluded to.
Senator Hirono. Yes. So, that means that we need to pay
attention to the workforce needs, and all of the other
attendant areas to our submarine capability.
On Webex, I would like to call on Senator Wicker. Senator
Wicker, where are you?
I think you are muted.
Senator Wicker. No, I am supposed to be on mute.
Can you hear me okay?
Senator Hirono. Yes, please proceed.
Senator Wicker. Okay. Good. Thank you, Madam Chair.
This budget, Mr. Stefany, is not only disappointing, it is
dangerously inadequate and in my judgment, it is going to have
to be reversed. I know you have had to take your queues from
the budget office, which has different priorities that are more
significant, apparently, that are stressing domestic needs as
more significant than military needs, but this is a dangerously
inadequate cut in national defense.
The Navy's budget, based on this submission by the
President, is an increase of 1.8 percent from the fiscal year
2021 enacted budget. Given that an expected 2.2 percent
inflation rate, predicted for 2021, this represents a decline
in funding in real dollars.
With regard to shipbuilding, which is essential to keeping
us competitive in the Pacific with a very aggressive Communist
China, the shipbuilding cuts, there is virtually no funding for
amphibious ships, a reduction from two DDGs to one. Last year's
Congress authorized a multi-ship procurement bundle for three
LPDs and one LHA, but today contracts for LPD-32 and 33 have
not been awarded.
If this stays in place, and I don't think on a bipartisan
basis we can afford to keep it in place, purchasing one
destroyer, as opposed to two, will incur a thirty-three-
million-dollar penalty the Navy would have to pay for breaking
its obligation under the multiyear contract. Not to mention
what this would do up and down and across the United States to
our industrial base.
Mr. Stefany, can you explain why advanced procurement
funding contracts for LPDs 32 and 33 have been delayed.
Mr. Stefany. Yes, sir, Senator.
So, to update you on that authority that your committee
provided last year, the section 124 authority, we have finished
negotiating with Huntington Ingalls Industrie's (HII), to
document a contract structure that could be put in place to
implement the force-ship procurement that you are referring to.
We just finished that up about a week ago.
So, we have a handshake agreement on what that would look
like if we were to actually enact it into a contract. We
packaged that up and we are sending it to the Department
leadership for a decision, and to get that in place before the
authority expires at the end of this year that you provided us.
I will just let you know that the initial indications that
we are hearing from the Department is that they would like to
defer this decision so that they can make an overall, as they
do their overall 2023 budget review this summer and fall of the
overall force structure, I will work with Admiral Kilby and
General Smith on the right mix of ships of the future. The
commitment of four ships at once, they would like to defer that
commitment until they are able to make that force-structure
assessment.
So, right now, the indicators are that we are not going to
be able to execute that, but it is not a done deal; it is going
through the process within the Department for a final decision,
sir.
Senator Wicker. You know, our uniformed military is
constrained by our Constitution and the great principle that we
have in this country that the military is under the authority
of the civilian government, and I would imagine that they feel
constrained by what the elected leadership of our Executive
Branch has given them to work with.
I dare say they, if they told the truth, they would say
that this is just a disaster for our national defense.
General Smith, does the Marine Corps still need large
amphibious warships like the LPD and the LHAs?
Lieutenant General Smith. We do, sir, very much.
Senator Wicker. How are they helpful in the Pacific?
You know, we had a hearing of the full committee this
morning talking about our competition, with regard to a very
aggressive China, under the leadership of the Communist Party
of China.
How do the large amphibious warships, like the LPDs and the
LHAs, help us avoid conflict in areas like the Pacific?
Lieutenant General Smith. Sir, both the big-deck amphibs,
the LHAs, LHDs which carry F-35 aircraft and helicopters,
combined with those LPDs that carry the ground forces and the
long-range fires forces, are, in fact, a credible, conventional
deterrent. Those forces that are forward-deployed on a daily
basis in competition with our peer adversaries are an actual
force that is there; meaning, the saying is virtual presence is
actual absence. You have to be forward-deployed with allies and
partners. You have to be forward with a credible, lethal,
combat capability that can deter, because our goal is to deter
that conflict.
When those ships are not available, we are not there, and
when we are not there, adversaries will step in and fill that
void.
Senator Wicker. Admiral Kilby, we have had discussions
among the bipartisan members of the Armed Services Committee
about the new budget numbers on, basically, 8 ships versus 12
ships. The ship for Austal has been cut. One of two destroyers
has been cut. Only one oiler out at NASSCO, and this 1.8
increase overall, which amounts to a decline in real
purchasing.
If this Congress, if this Legislative Branch, the House and
Senate, exercising its power of the purse, could reverse this
and give you those ships back, which we had planned to do for
years now, would you be in a better position in the Pacific to
meet the challenge?
Vice Admiral Kilby. The simple answer is yes, sir. The
ships we have, we have to have a mix of ships for our force.
All the ships we are procuring in today's budget are
needed. The Flight III destroyer provides an added capability
as an air-and-missile-defense command ship. In the amphibious
ships, the LPDs are much more capable than our traditional
LSDs. So, all of those ships have a role, as General Smith laid
out.
I think the budget request you see before you is what we
tried to create, where we tried to create the best mix of
capabilities and platforms and follow the prioritization that
was laid out in our opening statement. Columbia was number one
and the increases in funding, necessitated hard choices for us.
Senator Wicker. Why do you think the Chinese are investing
so aggressively in their naval----
Senator Hirono. Senator Wicker?
Senator Wicker. Yes?
Senator Hirono. As much as we would love to continue, I am
going to move on to Senator Blumenthal.
Senator Wicker. That is about fine.
Senator Hirono. Thank you for your understanding.
Senator Wicker. I thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank
you.
Senator Hirono. You're welcome.
Senator Blumenthal?
Senator Blumenthal. Thanks, Madam Chair.
Vice Admiral Kilby, there is no question in your mind that
we need the Virginia-class submarine to maintain our undersea
dominance?
Vice Admiral Kilby. No question in my mind, sir.
Senator Blumenthal. Is there any question in your mind that
we need to build two Virginia-class submarines this year, as
part of the budget request?
Vice Admiral Kilby. No question in my mind, sir.
Senator Blumenthal. I agree wholeheartedly, and if you
haven't been, I suspect you have, to Groton, seen the kind of
production machine that they have there; it is truly,
extraordinarily impressive. I think it is due to the decision-
making in the Pentagon, as well as to their managerial
expertise. So, I thank you for all of your and others' service
in that regard. Thank you.
I want to commend, as well, the budget proposal, alongside
the Navy's decision earlier this year to exercise the option to
build a tenth Virginia-class submarine, which is a testament to
the importance of this technology to maintaining our undersea
dominance. Thank you.
Lieutenant General Smith, I am concerned about the Assault
Amphibious Vehicle (AAV) program and wonder if you could
explain to me the practical uses for this weapons platform in
the combat world that you foresee that is likely to be
encountered by the Marine Corps.
Lieutenant General Smith. I can, Senator.
The first thing when we are talking about this vehicle, the
Amphibious Assault Vehicle, is that we, the leadership in the
Marine Corps, starting with me, are responsible for the deaths
of eight marines and a sailor that shouldn't have happened, and
nothing I can say today will amend that. Inexcusable in every
regard.
That Amphibious Assault Vehicle will be replaced by the
Amphibious Combat Vehicle, which is our new vehicle, but those
vehicles, as soon as we can build all of the Amphibious Combat
Vehicles, the new one, to replace the old one, those vehicles
provide our mobility from ship to shore under any conditions.
They also provide our ability to operate ashore, once ashore.
The vehicle is optimized for shore. It is a ship-to-shore
connector, in and of itself, and it allows us to have
operational maneuverability throughout the first island chain
and, really, globally, when we are unable to bring the larger
connectors, such as the Landing Craft Air Cushion and Landing
Craft Utility from large amphibious ships to shore. So, that
ability to immediately come ashore and project combat power is
vital against a peer threat.
Senator Blumenthal. Wouldn't the program be limited by the
kind of access that is provided on the shore; in other words,
we may or may not be operating in a world where there are
beaches or accessible areas and most of our airlift these days
is by air. Most of our delivery of stuff is by air, correct?
Lieutenant General Smith. Sir, we try to mix it and we do
mix it with delivery via our air means, such as the CH-53s,
soon-to-be the kilo model and our KC-130s, but also our MV-22s.
But we do need that ability, sir, to go from ship to shore in
any condition, and what we do is we depend on our amphibious
Navy ship captains to place us in a position where the beach
grading, et cetera, allows us access.
It is fairly significant, sir, when you do the island
studies, where we actually can come aboard a land platform,
using that Amphibious Combat Vehicle, which is wheeled.
Senator Blumenthal. Just, finally, are there areas of
kinetic warfare right now, where you think the AAV would be
useful?
Lieutenant General Smith. So, the AAV is suboptimized for a
peer adversary because of the limited weapons systems that it
carries. So, again, to the sooner we get the Amphibious Combat
Vehicle, which is the newer version, which will have the
ability to control drones, the ability to control longer-range
weapon systems, when partnered with it, those are highly useful
against a peer competitor.
But the AAV, as it exists now, sir, is a vehicle by which
we move troops and provide them some protection landward.
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Hirono. Senator Scott, please proceed.
Senator Scott. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I thank each of you for testifying today.
General Smith, can you tell me how the re-envisioning of
the Marine Corps is going and, in particular, how you expect
this is going to help Marine Corps readiness to confront
Communist China.
Lieutenant General Smith. I can, Senator.
General Berger's vision of what the threat would look like
in 2030 required us to reshape the Marine Corps to be a force
that was able to, what we say is, sense and make sense of what
is happening, and, specifically, in the Indo-Pacific; meaning,
that today there are about 27,000 marines in the Pacific, about
20,000 are West of the International Date Line on any given
day. Those forces are the inside force.
We exist inside the weapons-engagement zone of our
adversaries and we are in close contact with our adversaries on
a daily basis; that is competition. When you can observe, gain
custody of targets, hold those targets at risk with things like
our Ground-Based Anti-Ship Missile, and when we can pass that
data to our allies, pass the data to our Navy partners, Air
Force partners, Army partners, that is a challenge for an
adversary who is out there who seeks to control terrain.
The re-envisioning of the Marine Corps requires us to be at
the size of force that we can maintain as ready. We can't
afford to keep excess. So, the Commandant made some incredibly
difficult internal decisions to divest of certain units in
order to make the units that we retain much more capable. We
have tried to pay for this out of our own total obligation
authority that you provide us.
Those actions have taken place and we are now in the
building phase of procuring things like our G/ATOR [Ground/Air
Task-Oriented Radar], our Naval Strike Missile (NSM) on a
robotic vehicle, our Amphibious Combat Vehicle that takes us
into the next generation of warfare against a peer competitor.
Senator Scott. So, if you got more funding, you wouldn't be
doing this, is that what you are saying, you would not be
downsizing the number of forces.
Lieutenant General Smith. What I would say, sir, is funding
is always, what I would say, sir, is with additional funding,
we would accelerate those other things that we are doing, such
as procuring the Naval Strike Missile (NSM) and the ROGUE
vehicle, which is a robotic Joint Light Tactical Vehicle we
would be accelerating the funding of the Ground/Air Task
Oriented Radar.
The force-sizing construct or the size of a unit or the
number of units is less important than their capability, and I
would, any additional money that we were to receive, I would
place it into those programs that are already successful and
accelerate that. The standard military term is you reinforce
success. When you get an opportunity, you run with that with
that additional funding.
Senator Scott. What threats in the Indo-Pacific are you
trying to address? What do you think are the threats that you
are going to have to address?
Lieutenant General Smith. Sir, the biggest threat is the
inside sense and make sense force is the Marine Corps is, in
fact, the forward-deployed force with our Navy partners; we are
there every day, sir. Before this command, I came from the III
Marine Expeditionary Force. I was the commander of Marine
forces in Japan, so, my backyard was the South China Sea.
Every day that we are out there, sir, we are, in fact,
gaining access, maintaining access, building allies and
partners, and it does matter, sir. Whether it be through the
Philippines, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore,
obviously, Australia, Japan, Korea, that is what we do on a
daily basis, sir, and if you are not there, adversaries will
step in and fill that role.
The pressure on our allies and partners, when you are not
shoulder to shoulder with them is significant. I wouldn't speak
for Admiral Aquilino, but we are a force that is of use to the
Nation every single day, as long as we are forward-deployed.
That is what your young marines sign up to do, my son being one
of them, they want to be out and about. They want to be
forward.
Vice Admiral Kilby. General, I would also add, this new
concept presents an opportunity where marines are going to
hazard ships. It has not been their traditional role. So, there
is an opportunity with this new force mix and this construct to
employ marines differently.
Lieutenant General Smith. That is very key, Senator. What
we do is Distributed Maritime Operations, we support that. So,
when we, from shore, using very highly mobile and lethal units,
can place an adversary ship at risk and cause them to maneuver
differently, that frees up the fleet commander. Admirals like
Admiral Kilby can maneuver much more freely when I can hazard
you from shore.
Thanks for pointing that out, Jim.
Senator Scott. Admiral Kilby, can you talk about how you
assess the size of the Navy right now and if we have the right
equipment and the right size force to combat our anticipated
threats.
Vice Admiral Kilby. Yes, sir, just being mindful of time,
we have done many studies over the last 5 years that say we
need a larger Navy. The Navy we can afford now is roughly 300
and 305 ships, as pointed out in the opening statements by
Senator Hirono and Senator Cramer.
So, if we are going to pace the adversary, we need to have
a bigger Navy. Our job is to create the best Navy we can for
the budget we are allowed and we try to do that.
Senator Scott. All right. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Hirono. Okay. We are in the middle of--come back--I
keep forgetting to turn on my mike.
We are in the midst of voting. If you need to go and vote
and would like to come back, please do so.
Senator King?
Senator King. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Admiral, I have the enviable position of being able to
advocate parochially, but also in the national interest. As you
know, one of the principal concerns I have with this budget is
the striking of a DDG from the multi-year procurement.
Number one, it strikes me as a terrible precedent and
signal to the American industrial base to breach a multi-year,
which has already been assumed, contracted for, and moving
forward. That would actually cost the Government something like
$30 million just to do that.
You were just testifying about the need for a larger Navy
and the shift toward China. The Pacific is a very big ocean and
naval power is our most-important way of projecting power. So,
talk to me about the decision to cut that DDG, breach the
multi-year, and I will talk with you in a moment about the
industrial base, but please, share your thoughts.
Vice Admiral Kilby. Yes, sir. We have spoken before about
this specific ship and what it brings. There are three
principal things that come with this new ship: a new combat
system, a new radar, and the ability to perform the roles of
the air and missile defense commander at a higher, more
meaningful level because of the capabilities of all of those
things.
Senator King. This is the Flight III?
Vice Admiral Kilby. The Flight III, yes, sir.
It is important. It was largely an affordability decision
and a regret from the Navy that we could not afford that second
ship.
Senator King. I take it, I think I understood that this is
the highest priority on your unfunded priorities list; is that
correct?
Vice Admiral Kilby. That is correct, sir.
Senator King. One of the problems we have, and I point this
out with regard to Bath Iron Works, but I suspect this chart
would work for Ingalls and other people. What you see here is
literally, this is a photograph of the industrial base and
these are the employees, and what happens is at the end of the
current multi-year, the industrial base disappears.
Now, this is DDG(x). The problem we have is this trough,
which is getting the industrial base from full construction of
DDG Flight IIIs to DDG(x), which isn't even designed yet. The
problem is, and I live 8 miles from this yard, you cannot turn
it on and off, this capability. When welders leave and go
somewhere else, they are gone, and so I urge the Navy to be
thinking about this and, in fact, I believe we should restore
that ship, but also talk about advanced procurement for three
ships in 2023 and beginning the process of a new multi-year,
because, otherwise, the industrial base wastes away and then,
as I say, you can't turn it off and on.
Share with me your thoughts about the importance of
maintaining the industrial base.
Vice Admiral Kilby. Yes, sir. I will defer to Secretary
Stefany, but from my position, it is vitally important.
We have done a lot of work over the last 4 years that I
have been in the Pentagon, looking at the number of shipyards
over time and the number has generally gone down, with the
exception of Austal, which has been a plus-up in the right
direction. I think you are spot-on here.
I do want to talk about a different----
Senator King. Let the record show the witness just said I
was spot-on. I want that to be----
[Laughter.]
Vice Admiral Kilby. I do want to talk about a different mix
of ships and go back to something Senator Hirono, I believe,
brought up, in that this force composition is important. So,
Distributed Maritime Operations means I distribute my force
widely, more widely than I can now in a concentrated strike
group-centric manner.
So, the idea that we are going to have less large surface
combatants is bolstered by the idea that I have more frigates,
which are roughly equivalent in combat capability from a sensor
perspective, and a combat-systems perspective, to a Flight II
DDG today. So, that composition of that force is what is going
to be required to have distributed maritime operations
complement it.
Senator King. But even as the frigates come online, you
still see a role for the DDGs, don't you?
Vice Admiral Kilby. Yes, sir, absolutely.
Senator King. I mean, that is the workhorse right now.
Vice Admiral Kilby. Well, I just want to double-down. The
DDG Flight III will have an unparalleled combat system and
sensor capability. The rationale behind DDG(x) is to create a
platform that can be modernized in the future, where we can add
things like directed energy and other things, because I am
going to be really challenged to do that on a Flight III DDG,
because I have really used all of that power to drive the radar
and the sensors attendant to it now.
It is really a view to the future that I am creating a
platform that can be modernized.
Senator King. Mr. Secretary, your thoughts on this issue?
Mr. Stefany. Yes, so, Senator King, two things. One in the
near term, both Bath and Ingalls, as you point out, have come
out of COVID and they really are performing well, and I worry
about breaking the momentum, right. There is a momentum thing
as the workforces get their act together, Bath can now
actually----
Senator King. Bath has hired a thousand people in the last
year.
Mr. Stefany. Right, and they have come out of that strike
and they are actually, you know, both, you know, our cost and
schedule performance are much improved over the last couple of
years, so I don't want to break that momentum.
Going forward, yes, we, the Navy, absolutely want to do
another multi-year procurement, very similar to the one we just
did for 2023 to 2027, but then beyond that, we are working to
feather in DDG-51 and DDG(x), so we don't get the stark, you
know, go from the light green to the dark green on your chart;
there is a feathering that has to happen as a transition there.
We will definitely show you our thoughts there and work
with your staff on laying out that feathering approach, if that
makes sense to you, sir.
Senator King. It does. But part of it is continuing the
momentum on the Flight IIIs.
Mr. Stefany. Absolutely, sir. Absolutely.
Senator King. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I yield back.
Senator Hirono. Senator Hawley?
Senator Hawley. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thanks to the witnesses for being here. Mr. Stefany, Vice
Admiral Kilby, let's start with the F/A-18s, if we could. I see
that the Navy has cut funding for 12 of the Block III F/A-18s
in the 2022 budget. My understanding of the justification of
this is saying that the F/A-18 Service Life Modification (SLM)
program will give additional service life back to the platforms
that are in service.
My question is, I understand the Navy is planning for its
first Block III SLM squadrons to become operational in 2024 and
2027, respectively, is that correct, and if so, is this still
on schedule?
Vice Admiral Kilby. We are experiencing challenges with
SLM, in that the aircraft we inducted, indicated a certain
level of work, which we are finding is really less than what is
required to bring those aircraft through the program. So, I
think we will definitely continue with SLM in the future
because of the capabilities it brings, but we need a mix of
aircraft to pace the threat. Nothing beats a Flight III Super
Hornet today, but our predictions is, into the future, those
things will degrade in their ability to command the battle
space.
So, we need to deliver on those 78 remaining aircraft in
Block III configuration. We need to continue with the SLM
program. We need to deliver F-35s, and then we need to work on
Next-Generation Air Dominance so we can stay ahead of the
adversary at a very macro level.
Senator Hawley. Mr. Stefany, do you want to add anything to
that?
Mr. Stefany. The only other part would be the F/A-18s we
have, getting the mission capability rate. Eighty percent was
our goal. Those actually were above 80 percent, and so we have
more of our current aircraft capable. That is also one more
factor in the F/A-18 equation overall.
Senator Hawley. I got it.
You did say, though, Admiral, the SLM program is currently
behind schedule; is that right?
Vice Admiral Kilby. I said the aircraft that are being
inducted as we--I was in Boeing about 2 months ago and when I
walked the line and looked at aircraft, the two aircraft that
we modeled the program after actually indicated were better
material condition than we are finding of the aircraft that we
are bringing in now, which requires the artisans at Boeing to
do more work and in Texas.
We want to make sure we get that additional service life.
We don't want to suboptimize that program, so we need to bring
them back up to specification.
Senator Hawley. Got it. Very good.
Mr. Stefany, let me ask you about the aircraft carriers.
Has the Navy done an analysis to show how aircraft carriers can
be used and their air wings can be used to help defeat a
potential Chinese offensive against Taiwan in the initial days
or weeks of any such contingency there.
Mr. Stefany. Yes, we have actually done a number of
analysis on that, and actually, Admiral Kilby was in the middle
of those analysis teams, so it is probably more effective for
him to provide the update on that.
Vice Admiral Kilby. I would just say this composition,
another aircraft that is super important to us, which we just
had a great example of its capability on Friday, which is the
hookup of MQ-25 T1 and passing of gas, a dry hookup and passing
of gas, so thank you for that. That will increase the
capability of the air wing, increase the range of the air wing,
allow fighters to do fighter business, and return tanking to
this new aircraft, that will be significant in importance.
But the problem isn't static. We have to continue to watch
the adversary and adjust our program to be capable against it.
So, the advances they make, we have to acknowledge and create
an air wing that is very capable. Fortunately, the aircraft
carrier isn't the weapon system; the air wing is.
So, we have a long history of updating air wings to produce
the kind of combat power we need, and we need to focus on that.
As you have read in some of the Navy's recent documents, it
is a shift from power projection, to power projection and sea
control. Sea control allows you to control sea space, to employ
strike groups, to have the effects to do what you intimated
sir.
Senator Hawley. Very good.
Would you be willing to share that analysis, some of this
analysis that you have done with my office in the appropriate
setting with the appropriate controls?
Vice Admiral Kilby. Yes, sir.
Senator Hawley. Yes, thank you. I look forward to that.
General Smith, let me come to you. The Naval Strike
Missiles and Tactical Tomahawks I see at the top of the Marine
Corps 2022 unfunded priorities list. Give me a sense of how
funding those, at the levels listed on the unfunded priorities
list would help the Corps stay on or ahead of schedule, when it
comes to fielding a credible sea denial capability.
Lieutenant General Smith. Thank you for that, Senator.
The unfunded priorities list, the reality is what we are
trying to do is additionally fund from our 2022 budget. We want
to accelerate that success.
We had a successful test of the Naval Strike Missile on a
remotely-operated Joint Light Tactical Vehicle last November.
The folks down at Raytheon in Tucson fought through COVID, they
are working hard to produce that missile. That is the exact
same missile that the Navy fires, so we fire the same missile.
There is about an 18-month lead time on that missile, which
is why we need to procure them now, because when we finish the
ROGUE vehicle testing, if we waited to procure until then, we
have to wait 2 more years, and time is the ultimate gift to the
adversary.
What those missiles do for us are both, Tomahawk, at long-
range, and the Naval Strike Missile--in this setting--at a
hundred miles-plus, is as far as we can go if the
classification levels, here, those enable, as Admiral Kilby
said earlier, enable our forces to deploy in small, very mobile
units ashore, and hold adversary targets at risk; meaning, deny
sea to them, which is what we do. We're the sea-denial force in
support of our fleet commanders.
When you are an adversary commander, a ship commander, and
you think you can sail within 200 or let's just say hundreds of
miles of a shore and then you, we would say get your bell rung
by multiple inbound missile, and you have to rethink how you
maneuver, that provides flexibility to the fleet commander and
it is vital. It is the thing that you have to respect, because
no one wants to lose a capital ship.
Senator Hawley. Yes, very good.
Thank you very much, General.
Thank you, Madam Chair, or Mister Chairman, now.
Senator Cramer. [Presiding.] Thank you, Senator Hawley.
Chairwoman Hirono has gone to vote. I have voted.
It is time to start a second round of questions. I have no
idea how many people are in the queue, other than me and
Senator Hirono, but Senator Hawley, if you had more questions,
this would be your best opportunity if you are willing to.
Senator Hawley. Well, since you mentioned it.
[Laughter.]
Senator Cramer. I will yield to Senator Hawley.
Senator Hawley. I will be brief, because I have to go vote,
but let me just ask another question or two. Let me ask about
this year's budget decommissioning seven cruisers. This goes
back to you, Admiral, and to you, Mr. Stefany.
The seven cruisers decommissioned, each of which I
understand has 122 VLS cells. I understand the Navy is also
planning to decommission four of the Ohio-class, guided middle
submarines over the next several years, each of which has over
150 VLS cells.
My question, is how does the Navy plan to account for this
decrease in vertical launch capacity across the force and to
what degree can things like containerized munitions on non-
surface combatants help to offset the loss of capacity?
Vice Admiral Kilby. Yes, sir. I will start.
This hybrid force, and we have produced an unmanned
campaign plan which lays out the case for unmanned vessels in
the air, on the sea, and the undersea, which is what we think
will help change the force posture, the ability for us to bring
power to bear.
So, lets just take the surface domain. In the case of the
Large Unmanned Surface vessel, the idea that it would be an
adjunct magazine, that I could stimulate that magazine from a
ship and set up kind of a chainsaw, where I can replace that
magazine with a lesser capability of that unmanned magazine,
and that will sustain the ability of that ship, rather than
take that ship and that combat system and that sensor offline
to reload, as Senator Cramer talked about. So, that is the idea
here, to augment the force, to do manned and unmanned teaming.
To, in the case of the air domain, allow air platforms to
go beyond the endurance of a single human being. That is the
place where you have to go, fully recognizing the challenges of
testing those capabilities out and having confidence in them to
supplement the force in the manner that I described. That is
the theory of the case behind the unmanned campaign plan.
So, challenging what those cruisers, I am a cruiser guy. On
my ships, I have only been on two destroyers, and the rest have
been cruisers, so I love them. I do acknowledge the challenges
to keep a ship that was designed for 30 years, extended to 35
years, at sea.
As a commander of a strike group, I want to have confidence
in my ship that it is going to be there when I need it, and on
my deployment in 2017, my cruiser was offline for one-third of
the deployment because it needed tank-top repairs. That is the
reality of it.
It is different than the past when we decommissioned ships
because their combat system wasn't capable. Now we are finding
that we can upgrade the combat system better, faster, but we
have a challenge with water under the keel, HM&E [Hull,
Mechanical and Engineering] modernization, tank tops, and all
the things that are plaguing us. So, we are at that point in
these ships who have served us well and ably for their entire
life.
Mr. Stefany. I was just going to add on the submarine side,
those guided-missile submarines, they are at the end of their
life. They can not be extended. The Virginia payload module or
the Block V Virginias--two of them are under construction, a
third one is about to start construction--are the replacement
for that undersea missile capability.
There is a few years of risk in gap in there, but that is
why it is vitally important we talked before about the
submarine, two Virginias per year, getting up to three,
eventually, to get that undersea missile capability in our
hands, as well.
Vice Admiral Kilby. Just one factoid, the Virginia goes
from a regular Virginia, which is 12 missiles to 40. So, that
is a huge increase with the Virginia payload module for
capability, and that submarine can do a lot of things for the
combatant commander.
Senator Cramer. Okay. Thank you Senator Hawley.
So, starting with this second round of questions, I am
going to come back to you, General Smith, with what I was
talking about in my opening statement, which we weren't able to
get to in the first round, regarding the Corps seemingly
aggressive pursuit of ground-based air-defense, and missile
systems to support its desire to operate as stand-in force in
the Indo-Pacific.
In addition to providing protection for forward-postured
marine forces, these systems can also help the combatant
commander deny, maneuver space to an adversary, where
transitory sea- and air-based systems may not reach.
Can you update us on these programs and then I will also
ask what is your estimate of the ability of these systems to
defeat missile salvos the enemy may launch against stand-in
forces, both in terms of capability and capacity.
Lieutenant General Smith. I can, Senator.
So, very quickly, just this fall coming up, Admiral Kilby
and I, along with the other forces, will go under the
leadership of the Army to a thing called Project Convergence
21, and in that experiment that will happen down at the Yuma
Proving Grounds and the China Lake Area, we will use one of our
G/ATOR radars, Ground/Air Task Oriented Radar, to pass data to,
I will be careful in the classification setting, to a larger
Navy system that has the ability to bring down things at very
long ranges.
So, our primary role is to sense, make sense, and pass
data, gain, maintain custody of targets.
Those forces that are distributed to launch anti-ship
missiles, to sense what is going on, to pass data, have to be
protected from air threats. We haven't had a real air threat
since World War II.
What our challenge is, Senator, and I will be extremely
candid with you, sir, is that we have to be highly mobile. If
we are not internally, organically transportable, via our C-
130s, our CH-53s, our Ospreys, and our L-class Navy ships, and
the future, Light Amphibious Warship, then we lose value to the
combatant commander.
So, the balance for us, sir, is, range, it is physics, the
range of a missile system that is an anti-air weapon and the
size. When you start getting into a missile system that is,
let's just say beyond 13 feet, that is a challenge, and so, we
are currently spending money on our MADIS, Marine Air Defense
Integrated System, and on what we would call GBAD, Ground Based
Air Defense, trying to find the sweet spot sir between range
and lethality, and mobility. That is a wicked problem for us to
solve and we have not yet solved it.
Senator Cramer. Is there anything you would want to add to
ensuring the integration of the Marine Air Defense System into
the theater. I mean, you touched on it, but I am wondering if
you wanted to elaborate at all.
Lieutenant General Smith. Sir, MADIS remains the only
system that has brought something down against a hostile
threat. You know, our shipboard MADIS system is now, we
acknowledged that it had good effect against Iranian drones.
That system is highly capable, but we need longer ranges in the
expanse of the Pacific and there comes a point when the
system's size limits what you can carry, and obviously, the
size of the missile system that you can carry limits the range.
I just met with, I won't use the name here, but I just met
with a couple of industry partners on how to extend that range
or put a different missile system onto that vehicle and it is a
challenge, sir, it is. At some point, that is kind of our F-150
pickup truck and it is rated for so much weight, and when you
start buying a 350 dually pickup truck, that doesn't fit in the
garage. So, we are struggling through that conundrum right now,
sir, with our Navy partners and with our industry partners.
But we are committed to protecting those forces and then
being able to do something in a more offensive manner for that
combatant commander to break up air formations, but that is
certainly a secondary mission for us, sir.
Senator Cramer. Excellent, and I might let you know that I
have left this room twice since this started and the first time
I bumped into the CNO and the second time into the Commandant.
I told them, you are both doing great.
But anyway, Admiral Kilby, this budget request includes
divestment of all 12 of the Mark VI, as I have mentioned,
patrol craft. As I understand it, they are less than a decade
old, and I know you have talked some about this, but they are
obviously highly capable compared to others of the small craft,
and they are the last remaining small combatant craft in the
Navy's inventory.
Related, in January 2016, two U.S. Navy river patrol boats
accidentally strayed into Iranian waters near Farsi Island in
the Arabian Gulf. Obviously, we all remember that well.
Iranian militia forces captured both command boats and the
10 American sailors onboard. After a day of intensive
diplomacy, Iran released the boats and their crews. Navy
officials said these Mark VI boats were part of the solution
and would provide a needed upgrade to our littoral forces. Can
you explain the decision to divest?
Vice Admiral Kilby. Yes, sir. I don't dispute anything you
said; it is all accurate. The decision to divest of the Mark
VIs was a fiscal decision to align the force to great power
competition. So, we wanted to keep the thing, that doesn't mean
that the Mark VIs aren't valuable. We viewed them as less
valuable than the capabilities and things we needed to invest
in. So, it is really a fiscal decision, right.
We want to field the most capable force we can against the
pacing adversary, which is China. So, in order to do that, we,
every year, through our cycle, look at our inventory and say,
are we positioned, are carrying these assets going to provide
that force, that aggregate force we need? In the decision of
the Mark VIs, we decided to divest of them so we could pursue
other things against China.
Senator Cramer. There is a lot of that going on throughout
the forces.
Mr. Secretary, anything you would want to add to that? I
suspect you probably have lived with this quite a bit.
Mr. Stefany. No, it is exactly that. That prioritization
that we do every year ourselves, with the Marine Corps, and the
Navy, and how valuable is this to the fight with China; that is
the ground rule that everything else falls under.
Senator Cramer. I have nothing further. Thank you.
Senator Hirono. [Presiding.] Thank you.
Senator King, would you like to start your second round?
Senator King. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Secretary, with regard to the DDG(x), which we were
talking about, the DDG(x), I hope that you will work in
consultation with the major yards to try to get as far into the
design process as possible. Where we have gotten in trouble, as
this committee has observed with the Ford, for example, is
doing R&D [research and development] while we are building, and
to the extent the requirements and design can be finalized,
then the yards can do a lot better job in terms of on-time
construction and on-budget construction.
It seems to me that that would start with consultations on
what the Navy is thinking about for capabilities and what the
yards can produce, and I am not talking about negotiations; I
am really talking about discussions on those issues.
Vice Admiral Kilby. Yes, sir. The CNO identified the top-
level, what we will call the top-level requirements, the very
high level requirements in December of this past year, and
after that we said, okay, now we need to bring industry in and
have those discussions before we get into the actual design of
the ship, and so, over the last couple of months, we have
brought both, Bath, and Ingalls shipyards in, as well as the
electrical control system kind of companies in to start having
those conversations this year before we start in 2022 to
actually start the preliminary design of the ships. So, while
we may have been a little slower than industry might have
wanted us, we wanted to get those, at least the top-level ideas
in place, now bring the industry in and start having those
discussions before we start to design the ships, sir.
Senator King. Getting the design close to final and the
requirements close to final before the contracting process
allows the bidders to give you a better bid because they don't
have to have so much uncertainty built into their bid.
Mr. Stefany. As we are going through the design process
over the next few years, we want them to be together as
teammates, right. Both shipyards will know all of the details
before we put out the request for proposal to actually build
the ship, right. So, they are teammates, and then, of course,
they will compete to actually build the ship, but our idea is,
we are altogether as one team for the next few years as we
design this new ship.
Senator King. Admiral?
Vice Admiral Kilby. Secretary, if I could add, sir, I
participated in a meeting also with HII and Ingalls about a
month ago where we brought them in a classified setting and
laid out the case: here is the adversary; here is where they
are going; here is the pace that they are going at it; here is
the things that Flight III bring us; here is the things we want
to transfer from Flight III to that new hull; here is the logic
behind the case I laid out to you on why we need to transition
to a ship that has more service-life allowance for the future.
It was a great interchange of discussion.
So, I think we are on the path to do that, but I think we
must continue that and we have seen great success with things
like the frigate program, where we had this ability to go back
and forth with industry at a much more rapid rate than we have
in the past, to inform that design.
I think DDG(x) will be a little bit different than the
frigate, because it will require a new hull form, and I think a
new power-generation system, an integrated power system to
provide that reserve in the future. That is where we will
really have to be lockstep as we work together.
Senator King. Well, if you are looking for an advanced ship
with an enormous power capability, I would commend to you the
Zumwalt. That has----
Mr. Stefany. That is a lot of ship, sir, yes.
Senator King. There is a huge potential there.
Okay. General and Admiral, in the past years, we have had a
problem with losing aviators and a shortage of fighter pilots,
particularly.
I just wanted to inquire, I will start with you, General,
how you are doing with retention of pilots, recruitment, did
COVID hurt, help, where do you stand with regard to pilots?
Lieutenant General Smith. Sir, candidly, not where we
should be.
Lieutenant General Mark Wise----
Senator King. Is your mike on?
Lieutenant General Smith. It is, sir. Let me get a little
closer. Sorry, sir.
Lieutenant General Mark Wise, he is our deputy commandant
for aviation, he and I speak about this often with the
Commandant. We are short on TAC AIR pilots, on jet pilots.
I wouldn't say COVID had a significant impact, sir, but
what has had an impact is, it takes a while to get through
flight school, obviously. We call it the pool. You go when
weather conditions or any kind of a fuel issue or if you have a
training aircraft that is down, there is an OBOGS, On-Board
Oxygen Generation System, if that is down, we work through
that. That can delay, and that will cause a pool or a backup in
the production of pilots.
We also, obviously, are competing with, as always, with the
airlines, who have a relatively inexhaustible, we would argue
an inexhaustible budget to pay bonuses. That is a challenge for
us, sir, and in all candor, we get a little bit of feast or
famine, sir.
You know, young marines sign up because they want to get
out and they want to fly. They want to get hours, and they
either don't get enough or if they are deployed, they are
quite----
Senator King. It is interesting you should say that,
because several years ago, Senator Cotton and I had a sort of
informal focus group with a group of military pilots about this
issue. We were trying to inquire, what are the problems, and we
expected money and bonuses and lifestyle.
The most significant thing they told us is, we want to fly.
We want hours in the air. That is why we went into this field.
We don't want to be behind a desk.
It was interesting, some of them said, look, I don't want
to be a general; I want to be a pilot, so don't put me in this
track where I have to have so many hours at the Pentagon or
wherever. I thought that was a very interesting observation.
Lieutenant General Smith. Sir, about being a general, I
wholly concur.
[Laughter.]
Lieutenant General Smith. You really don't.
But the point, what you will see, sir, is a shift over
time. The young pilots, they will head out and they just want
to rack up hours. They just want to fly.
I just hosted at the barracks for a parade. Lieutenant
Colonel Nicole Mann is one of our astronauts and she's got a
couple hundred carrier landings. She's now one of our
astronauts.
But that will change over time, and that if they really
want to do that at some point, but when you get a little older,
you have a family, to Senator Hirono's point, and you may not
wish to deploy quite as much, you will get the reverse; hence,
the feast or famine. Maybe I don't want to be deployed this
much because my kids are in school.
So, we are trying to deal with all of them simultaneously,
and I will defer to Jim. I know we are over. It is a challenge.
Vice Admiral Kilby. We have the same challenges General
Smith laid out. I just wanted to bring up one other aspect to
this.
The way the threat is advancing, we have got to increase
our investment in live, virtual, constructive environments, and
that allows us to replicate the threat at the numbers that we
would be challenged to fly adversary aircraft at. So, that
will, again, stimulate and train our pilots and our air crews
better to be more proficient. It doesn't replace time in the
cockpit in the air, but it supplements it in a way that they
are better prepared. We train and we generate those forces in a
realistic manner, so they are prepared to go to the fight.
Senator King. I am way over time, but just a final point. I
hope whatever platforms you are working on, Marines, Navy,
cyber is a major consideration. There is no question in my mind
that if there is a conflict, and we certainly hope there isn't
one, it will start with a massive cyberattack and trying to
blind us and disable our, particularly, command and control.
I assume, Mr. Secretary, that is a high priority in terms
of the requirements and the design requirements for anything
that we are buying.
Mr. Stefany. Yes, Senator King. Cyber and space are two,
frankly, warfare areas or domains where everything has to work
in as well as the normal, undersea, sea, and air.
Senator King. May I just have--one other point.
I hope when you are acquiring these new platforms, whether
it is an airplane or a ship, you are buying the intellectual
property, as well as the hardware so that in the future, we can
make our own parts. I foresee the day where every Navy ship has
a 3-D printer onboard so that it is, you know, for want of a
shoe, the horse was lost. For want of a horse . . . And if you
can print your own parts instead of waiting for a manufacturer
to [Inaudible.]
Mr. Stefany. Yes, sir. My legal team, that is the number
one thing that they are working on right now, and we will be
happy to work with your staff on it if any language or
something like that might help us out there, sir.
Senator Hirono. I know that Senator King has raised the
issue of ships being able to make their own parts, 3-D
printers, et cetera, and it makes a lot of sense from the
standpoint of, things can't come to a halt because the ship is
in the middle of an ocean and they need a part.
At the same time, one of the concerns I would have, and
that point is, what that would do to the supply chain and their
ability to stay afloat.
I understand all the complexities that you gentlemen have
been raising. One of the things that I and others of this
committee very much support is the need for modernizing the
public shipyards, and we are very glad that the Navy does have
a shipyard modernization plan, it is just that it is not
adequately funded, as in so many other aspects.
Mr. Secretary, does the Navy's fiscal year 2022 budget
fully fund this shipyard modernization plan?
Mr. Stefany. Yes, ma'am. In order to modernize the four
naval shipyards, we have a four-step approach, right. First, we
do a 3-D modeling of the shipyard. We actually build a 3-D
computer model like if it were a ship or an airplane, and that
first thing we do, lay it out, and then the engineers get in
and look at how to optimize that shipyard for the flow of
material and work through the shipyard through a 3-D modeling
process.
That first step is finished for Pearl Harbor and is in
process for the other three shipyards.
The second step, once we get the model done, is to do what
we call an area development plan that lays out all the work
that needs to happen at that shipyard to do what the model said
is needed.
Senator Hirono. Uh-huh.
Mr. Stefany. The third step would then, would be to create
individual military construction projects for each of the
things in that plan.
Then the fourth step would actually be to do those military
construction projects.
So, for fiscal year 2022, yes, I would say we are fully
funded to do all of that: the 3-D modeling of the three
remaining shipyards, and then for Pearl Harbor, to do the area
development plan and get that completed and get into, what is
called the DD-1391 documents and get those finished by the end
of 2022. So, for the 2022 budget, yes.
For the longer term, I think we sent a report to Congress a
couple of years ago that said it was going to be roughly a
billion dollars a year for the next 20 years to make it all
happen. That is one of the many topics that we are discussing
in the 2023 review that is going on right now.
But I am committed. I know Acting Secretary Harker is
committed to fully fund that as we go forward. This is a top
priority for us.
Vice Admiral Kilby. If I could add, Secretary Stefany.
Ma'am, we increased the funding for SIOP in the 2022
budget. I realize you are only seeing one year of the budget,
but the commitment to get after the dry docks, which are the
first order of business at all of those shipyards, we are still
coming through this. It has been, you know, if you are talking
about Columbia, as a once in a generation recapitalization
program, this SIOP is a once in a century capitalization plan
on top of it. So, we have got to do it and we have to do it
right. We understand that the class maintenance plans for,
particularly, our Virginia-class submarines, are the drivers
for that, which is the impetus to create the P209, which is the
dry dock in Hawaii.
Senator Hirono. In Hawaii, uh-huh.
Vice Admiral Kilby. I expect as we get through these
projects, we are going to see the dry docks are going to maybe
cost more than we anticipated in the original plan. We still
need to do it. It doesn't obviate the need to go do that.
I am hopeful that when we go through the modeling that
Secretary Stefany alluded to, there may be some efficiencies
gained there and if we can sustain that funding and roll it
over for the 20 years, we can complete the plan, but we have to
maintain discipline and focus on it.
But we did increase the funding in 2022 as an
acknowledgment of this and the importance of it.
Senator Hirono. So, I appreciate the process of doing the
modeling so you know what the big-ticket items, with regard to
modernizing our public shipyards, but this aspect of
infrastructure has been ignored for so long that I would think
that you already have a whole list of smaller projects that
should be funded and can move along.
I appreciate the commitment to the dry dock that we need to
have; otherwise, Hawaii, Pearl Harbor will not have the
capability to deal with Virginia-class submarines. I believe
Senator King has a dry dock situation in his state. So, we need
to have those proceeding, and as we had our discussion with
regard to Pearl Harbor, the production facility should pretty
much be in alignment with the building of the dry docks so the
efficiencies can be increased.
A number of us have already made comments about the fact
that the Aegis destroyer multi-year contract is being, is not
being followed. So, basically, we all know what the advantages
of a multi-year contract is and we know that we are now going
to have to pay a penalty, which, of course, is far less than
the 1.7 billion that we would have to find to replace or to put
this ship back into the budget.
But I do think that whatever you all have to do to comply
with the multi-year contract needs to happen because Mr.
Secretary, you did acknowledge that when we violate the terms
of a multi-year contract, it will make the job harder for those
of us who actually support these kinds of contracts when you
come before us the next time for a multi-year contract.
Mr. Stefany. Yes, ma'am. I view that a multi-year contract
is a commitment between the Navy, Congress, and our industry
partner, whatever company is involved, and we did not, at all,
take lightly the breaking of the contract that we are going to
have to do here. It was, as we talked about before, it was the,
you know, the last choice, the hardest choice that we had to
make in this budget, but the top line pushed us to a place we
just could not afford that second destroyer.
Senator Hirono. The only other time this happened was,
again, the Navy, and Congress came to the rescue by basically
replacing V-22 aircraft.
Mr. Stefany. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Hirono. But that is a far cry from $1.7 billion to
replace the destroyer.
So, if everyone is through?
Senator King. Madam Chair, I think you and I should
acknowledge that our states are largely surrounded by water----
Senator Hirono. Yes.
Senator King.----but the senator from North Dakota is here
out of pure virtue.
[Laughter.]
Senator Hirono. We had a little chat about that and the----
Senator Cramer. I can actually see all four----
[Laughter.]
Senator Hirono. Yes, our agreement is that he will just do
whatever I ask him to do. So, that is that. So, that is now on
the record.
[Laughter.]
Thank you very much, Gentlemen, for your testimony, and for
working with us.
This hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:58 p.m., the Subcommittee adjourned.]
[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Mazie K. Hirono
public shipyard modernization
1. Senator Hirono, Mr. Stefany, I applaud the Navy for establishing
a plan for modernizing the public shipyards. I consider this to be a
major improvement after years of neglect of this important
infrastructure. Certainly, there have been military construction
projects and various upgrades over the years, but the Navy has pursued
these without a comprehensive plan. Does the Navy's fiscal year 2022
budget fully fund this shipyard modernization plan?
Mr. Stefany. Navy shipyard modernization is a generational, phased
investment over many years which will include dry dock
recapitalization, facility layout and optimization, and capital
equipment modernization. The Navy is requesting $830 million for the
Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program in the fiscal year 2022
budget submission. The funding, which focuses on critical dry dock
improvement projects at Norfolk Naval Shipyard and Portsmouth Naval
Shipyard, also includes $65 million for planning and design efforts at
Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility. As
part of the unfunded priority list (UPL), the Navy requested an
additional $225 million to de-risk the schedule for the Portsmouth
Naval Shipyard Multi Mission Dry Dock. This budget request, together
with the UPL request, fully supports the fiscal year 2022 requirements
for the recapitalization of critical dry docks necessary to support the
class maintenance plan for the Navy's nuclear-powered aircraft carriers
and submarines.
2. Senator Hirono, Mr. Stefany, are you considering any changes to
the plan to accelerate specific capability expansion or specific
productivity enhancements in view of the ship maintenance problems you
are facing?
Mr. Stefany. The Navy is undertaking multiple efforts to expand
public shipyard capacity to sustain the Navy's current and future
fleet. These efforts include growing the size of the workforce,
instituting innovative training methods to accelerate proficiency
development, upgrading IT hardware and software systems, and
accelerating innovation investments. Additionally, the Navy is
implementing Naval Sustainment Systems--Shipyards (NSS-SY), a tool that
utilizes industry best practices to identify productivity
inefficiencies at the public shipyards to further accelerate capacity
improvements at the shipyards. The results will help determine the
changes the shipyards need to implement in order to better tackle
readiness recovery.
The Navy is also into its third year of the Shipyard Infrastructure
Optimization Program (SIOP). Fully executed, SIOP will deliver required
dry dock repairs and upgrades to support both current and future
classes of ships, optimize workflow within the shipyards through
changes to their physical layout and workflow, and recapitalize
obsolete capital equipment with modern machines that will increase
productivity and safety.
virginia-class submarines
3. Senator Hirono, Mr. Stefany, the contractors have started work
on some of the boats in the latest multiyear contract for attack
submarines, called the Block 5 multiyear contract. That is a contract
to build two boats per year. However, even before much work had begun
on the Block 5 program, serious problems were emerging with achieving
on-time deliveries of the boats from the previous contract, the Block 4
program. The shipyards are running 12 to 18 months behind contract
delivery dates on the Block 4 boats. It would appear that this has led
to increasing the cost estimates for Block 4 boats yet to be delivered,
cost and schedule increases for all of the Block 5 boats, and cost
increases for the boats in the Columbia strategic missile program. It
would appear that, among other problems, the yards are struggling to
find sufficient skilled workers. What is the Navy going to do to get
cost and schedule back under control for these programs?
Mr. Stefany. Submarine industrial base performance remains
challenged in achieving steady state delivery of two boats per year.
Improving this performance is essential for Virginia-class (VCS) Block
IV schedule recovery, VCS Block V foundational success, and concurrent
Columbia-class (CLB) construction.
In May 2021, the Navy completed a detailed assessment of the
integrated VCS and CLB schedules to ensure an achievable plan
supporting Columbia as the #1 Navy acquisition priority. The review
found that shipbuilder experience levels, inefficiencies, manning
shortfalls, absenteeism and the temporary shutdown of hiring and
training pipelines as a result of COVID-19 have resulted in these
additional delays to Block IV.
To address production cadence and span challenges and cost
performance, the Navy has taken steps to improve the governance
structure and align the Enterprise Business Strategy on key issues and
assumptions. Interim gating criteria, enhanced cost and schedule
reviews, and monthly executive leadership reviews will better align the
programs and enable the Navy to quickly address challenges to
production schedules.
The Navy is also working with the private shipyards to improve on-
time and quality material delivery. By shifting work between shipyards
to better manage labor and footprint constraints, and increasing the
quantity of strategically outsourced components and hours to the
supplier base to allow the shipbuilders to focus more on their core
work, the Navy is taking positive steps to address production cadence
and cost performance. The Department is also updating and enhancing
detailed VCS production schedules with an Enterprise perspective to
ensure integration yard-wide with construction and maintenance
activities, facility usage, and strategic outsourcing to avoid resource
conflicts. The Navy will also continue to explore investments that
further support achievement and sustainment of the two VCS per year
production rate in accordance with Congressional authorizations and
appropriations.
u.s. marine corps ground modernization
4. Senator Hirono, Lieutenant General Smith, while ground based
anti-ship missile launching systems do add a layered threat against a
maritime adversary, those that will be operated within the weapons
engagement zone (WEZ), as the Marine Corps is developing as a concept,
will be inherently vulnerable. How is the Marine Corps balancing
offensive and defensive capabilities development in its Littoral
Regiments in a manner that keeps the new organization truly
expeditionary and effective against a peer competitor?
Lieutenant General Smith. The Marine Corps is balancing offensive
and defensive capabilities in the unique design of the Marine Littoral
Regiment (MLR). The MLR is structured to maneuver and persist inside a
contested maritime environment where its primary mission will be to
conduct sea denial operations as part of a larger Naval Expeditionary
Force. As anti-ship systems are used to establish sea control and hold
adversary assets at risk as part of a maritime force, the MLR will
defend itself with an extended sensor network, anti-air assets,
signature management, and rapid maneuver to reduce the adversary's
ability to locate and target Marine assets. All systems, including
offensive anti-ship systems and air defense systems, are transportable
by organic Marine Corps assets to keep the MLR truly expeditionary and
effective.
The MLR will have three subordinate elements: a Littoral Combat
Team, a Littoral Anti-Air Battalion, and a Littoral Logistics
Battalion.
The Littoral Combat Team (LCT) is task organized around
an infantry battalion along with a long-range anti-ship missile
battery. The LCT is designed to provide the basis for employing
multiple platoon-reinforced-sized expeditionary advance bases (EAB)
that can host and enable a variety of missions such as long-range anti-
ship fires, forward arming and refueling of aircraft, intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance of key maritime terrain, and air-
defense and early warning. These EABs contribute to the security of the
MLR by being small and highly mobile, complicating adversary targeting
solutions.
The Littoral Anti-Air Battalion is designed to train and
employ air defense, air surveillance and early warning, air control,
and forward rearming and refueling capabilities.
The Littoral Logistics Battalion provides tactical
logistics support to the MLR by resupplying expeditionary advance base
sites, managing cache sites, and connecting to higher-level logistics
providers. It provides expanded purchasing authorities, limited Role II
medical forces, distribution of ammunition and fuel, and field level
maintenance. These MLR's organic expeditionary logistics capabilities
will allow for sustained high-tempo operations as part of overall unit
function.
Additionally, Littoral Regiments will be provided with increased
survivability via the expeditious and agile employment of various means
of organic lift. This includes aviation lift from aircraft such as MV-
22 and KC-130J and surface lift by a new class of Light Amphibious
Warships which will enable tactical and theater-wide mobility.
5. Senator Hirono, Lieutenant General Smith, in the Commandant's
Force Design 2030 annual update, General Berger states: ``We do not
need to `own' all of these capabilities ourselves, but rather, we must
prioritize what we will be responsible for and then seek best possible
support from the Naval and Joint Commanders for the remainder.'' As the
Marine Corps continues to transform into a more flexible amphibious
force, where do you see the most potential for joint systems to
facilitate your efforts?
Lieutenant General Smith. The Marine Corps will provide many
advanced capabilities to the Joint Force, especially in long-range
precision fires and sensing capabilities. Conversely, two of the most
significant areas where the Marine Corps will rely on Naval and Joint
Forces are surface mobility and Joint All Domain Command and Control
(JADC2).
First and foremost, the Navy will continue to provide key
warfighting capabilities to the Marine Corps especially through the
employment of amphibious ships. Traditional L-class ships will remain
vital to the forward presence of Marine units, and a new class of
amphibious warships, the Light Amphibious Warship, will provide
critical tactical and theater-wide mobility.
The Marine Corps will continue to participate in the development of
JADC2 to enable the passing of data across the joint force. As the
``Stand-in Force'' that senses and makes sense of adversary actions
within the adversary's weapons engagement zone, JADC2 enable small
teams of marines, distributed across vital areas of the Indo-Pacific,
to be the eyes and ears of the Joint Force in both steady state and
kinetic operations.
As part of JADC2, the Marine Corps is an active participate in the
development of the Army's Project Convergence and the Navy's Project
Overmatch that will enable critical networking across the joint force.
change for logistics fleet
6. Senator Hirono, Lieutenant General Smith, the Navy has indicated
that operations in a contested environment meant that the Navy's
logistics fleet will need to include smaller, faster, multi-mission
transports. Last year, Secretary Guerts indicated in his prepared
testimony that, ``the Navy will commence with Concept Studies to
evaluate the next generation medium lift intra-theater amphibious
platforms and logistics ships.'' How will this contested environment
affect the Marine Corps' ability to conduct amphibious assault
operations?
Lieutenant General Smith. In a contested environment, the adversary
will not grant us the time and freedom of maneuver to create conditions
necessary to ``set the theater,'' in the traditional sense. Because of
this, our new formations, the Marine Littoral Regiments, will be
postured forward in the Pacific. We will maneuver and deploy using Navy
and Marine Corps organic lift. The ability to rapidly deploy, without
the need of strategic lift or national assets, is key to the agility of
the MLR, and allows the MLR to serve in both contact and blunt layers
without needing to reorganize. These forward deployed naval
expeditionary forces will create positional and temporal advantage for
the fleet and the joint force.
Amphibious operations in a contested environment require a new mix
of amphibious ships that includes traditional L-Class ships and a new
class of Light Amphibious Warships (LAW), which enables MLR mobility
and sustainability. The overall number of amphibious warships grows to
support the more distributed expeditionary force design, with LAWs
complementing traditional amphibious warships.
In November 2020, the Department of the Navy concluded that a range
of approximately 31 amphibious warfare ships and 35 LAWs offer the
right balance, range of sufficiency, operational capabilities, and
embarkation capacity to enable competition, crisis and contingency
response. Traditional amphibious ships remain versatile, multi-mission
platforms for competition and crisis response, and the Navy and Marine
Corps continue to work together in meeting combatant commander
requirements.
The LAW is a program that will be critical to future Marine
Littoral Regiments and the Navy's overall Distributed Maritime
Operations strategy. It will be capable of delivering expeditionary
forces to austere locations, and addresses a need for low-signature
maneuverability, sustainment capacity, and beachable ships.
The LAW is a Navy program, and this year's fiscal year 2022 budget
request includes funding for important research and development
efforts, with the first ship requested in fiscal year 2023 with first
ship delivery in fiscal year 2026. Due to the LAW's affordable cost,
the Department will be able to budget for a higher quantity of these
lighter, more agile ships. The goal for the Navy and the Marine Corp is
to realize the best balance between capability and cost.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Gary C. Peters
climate change
7. Senator Peters. Mr. Stefany and Vice Admiral Kilby, in May 2009,
the Chief of Naval Operations formed the Navy's Task Force Climate
Change to take a hard look at what climate change means for naval
operations. The task force was shut down in early 2019 without a public
announcement at around the same time the GAO reported that DOD needed
to do more--not less--in planning for climate change. Was the task
force's work continued by another entity within the Department of the
Navy?
Mr. Stefany and Vice Admiral Kilby. The U.S. Navy Task Force
Climate Change was established in 2009 to develop a comprehensive
approach to address the challenges of the Arctic and climate change.
Over the course of a decade, the Task Force enabled the Navy to have
informed, focused, and deliberate discussions to influence future Navy
policy across the Department, and led to the release of a number of
strategic documents related to Arctic capabilities and climate change
considerations. In 2019, the Chief of Naval Operations determined that
the Navy had successfully integrated climate change issues into
institutional business processes, allowing for the realignment of Task
Force functions into existing responsibility areas.
The Navy views climate change as a critical readiness and national
security issue, both afloat and ashore, and continues to include
climate change and environmental resilience considerations in its
strategic approach to support national security priorities in the
maritime domain.
8. Senator Peters. Mr. Stefany, did the task force release a final
report?
Mr. Stefany. While there was no final report to document the stand
down of the Task Force Climate Change, over the course of a decade the
Task Force oversaw the release of a number of important policy
documents, including the Navy's Climate Change Roadmap in 2010, the
Arctic Roadmap in 2009 and 2014. The Task Force informed Department of
Defense Directive 4715.21, Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience, in
2016, and published a Navy Strategic Outlook for the Arctic in 2019.
The release of these strategic documents highlighted the successful
integration of climate change issues into the Department's
institutional business processes.
9. Senator Peters. Lieutenant General Smith, the Marine Corps
component of this effort--the Expeditionary Energy Office--was part of
Combat Development & Integration. Is it still in operation?
Lieutenant General Smith. Yes, the Expeditionary Energy Office is
still in operation as part of the Capabilities Development Directorate,
Combat Development and Integration.
Through this office, we are investing in advanced power sources and
new power generation to meet the energy needs of the force. Specific
areas of research and development include renewable solar energy,
electric power for mobility, new advanced battery chemistries, and
alternative energy sources, including hydrogen fuel cells or an
aluminum-based fuel. We are also seeking ways to reduce the form factor
of future power generation equipment. New sources must be Marine
portable while providing an operationally relevant level of power.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Roger F. Wicker
amphibious multi-ship procurement cost savings
10. Senator Wicker. Mr. Stefany, on June 8, 2021, you testified
that the Navy has finished negotiations with Huntington Ingalls
Industries for a contract to implement the amphibious warship multi-
ship procurement or ``amphibious ship bundle'' authorized by section
124 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021.
If finalized, how much money does the Navy stand to save by
executing the amphibious warship bundle this fiscal year?
Mr. Stefany. On May 20, 2021, The Navy completed negotiation of an
agreement on the fiscal year 2021 Multi-Ship Procurement for four
amphibious warships including an America Class LHA amphibious assault
ship and three San Antonio-class LPD Flight II vessels in accordance
with section 124 of the Fiscal Year 2021 National Defense Authorization
Act. The Navy's agreement with the shipbuilder (Huntington Ingalls
Industries--Ingalls Shipbuilding) demonstrates shipbuilder production
efficiencies related to level loading of shipyard workforce, a
reduction in overhead rates achieved through industrial base
stabilization and Economic Order Quantity. Savings of $722 million can
be achieved over procuring these four ships separately if awarded in
fiscal year 2021. This is in line with the Cost Estimate provided in
the Amphibious Ships (LPD & LHA) Multi-Ship Acquisition Strategy report
to Congress of December 9, 2020.
11. Senator Wicker. Mr. Stefany, if the amphibious ship contract is
delayed until fiscal year 2022, how much money would the Navy save via
the amphibious ship bundle?
Mr. Stefany. Assuming section 124 authority is extended to fiscal
year 2022, the Navy estimates it could save between $300 million and
$500 million versus procuring the ships separately. Negotiations with
the Shipbuilder will need to be conducted before a precise amount of
savings can be codified and implemented.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Thom Tillis
fleet readiness center--east (frc-east)
12. Senator Tillis. Vice Admiral Kilby and Lieutenant General
Smith, the Fleet Readiness Center--East is woefully behind on military
construction. The P990 contract was programmed in fiscal year 2018 with
a construction contract yet to be solidified to begin building.
Moreover, there are facilities that are required in fiscal year 2022
that have yet to be programmed, further delaying the ability of
facilities to provide depot-level repair capabilities for the F-35 and
numerous other military airframes across all services. As a result,
prime defense contractors are seeking alternate facilities for this
work. While I recognize this requirement sits fully under the realm of
Military Construction as executed by the Department of the Navy, it
directly impacts your ability to fulfill naval requirements and
capabilities, and foster development and integration within the Marine
Corps, respectively. Recognizing the indirect nature of this subject to
your military-specific professional roles, please comment on the
effects continued neglect of this facility will have on your aviation
capabilities?
Vice Admiral Kilby. and Lieutenant General Smith. Fleet Readiness
Center--East (FRC East) continues to play a vital role in Marine Corps
aviation readiness. The readiness of our aviation fleet is critical to
Marine Corps and joint force operations. The Command's customers
include more than 200 Navy and Marine Corps activities, 31 foreign
nations, 5 Air Force activities, 3 Army activities, and 2 federal
agencies. Its emerging workload includes the F-35 Lightning II, the UH-
1Y Venom, and the AH-1Z Viper. Especially regarding F-35 modification
requirements, FRC East is a critical enabler of our 5th generation
aircraft squadrons as the Marine Corps transitions all of its fixed-
wing attack squadrons to the F-35.
The Marine Corps has significantly invested in FRC-East over the
past several years. The specific P990 contract award was delayed
because the project bids exceeded programmed funding, which required
the Marine Corps to pursue a congressional reprogramming. However, the
P990 contract was awarded on 28 May 2021. In the future, the Marine
Corps will continue to invest in this important facility while
balancing the funding required to achieve the best overall aviation
capabilities.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Josh Hawley
precision strike missiles
13. Senator Hawley. Mr. Stefany and Vice Admiral Kilby, last year's
budget request included funding for 122 Tomahawks. This year only
requests funding for 60. Why has the Navy reduced the size of its
Tomahawk buy?
Mr. Stefany and Vice Admiral Kilby. Navy plans to sustain the
production line for its primary long range, precision strike cruise
missile. The 2021 Appropriations Conference directed the Navy to
maintain the production level of effort. Minimum Sustainment Rate (MSR)
for Tomahawk missiles is quantity 90 while executing production
concurrently with the Tomahawk Recertification Program. Navy's
procurement of 60 new production Tomahawks plus other customer
production requirements sustains the production line level of effort
outlined in the 2021 statute.
14. Senator Hawley. Mr. Stefany and Vice Admiral Kilby, how is the
Navy planning to offset this reduction, so it can continue to build out
its anti-ship missile capacity?
Mr. Stefany and Vice Admiral Kilby. The reduction in new production
Tomahawk will not impact Navy's anti-ship missile capacity, because new
production Tomahawks are land-strike missiles. Maritime Strike Tomahawk
(MST), as part of the anti-ship missile portfolio, relies on
Recertification and Modernization of legacy Block IV Tomahawks. In
fiscal year 2022, 39 legacy Tomahawks are planned for induction into
the Recertification and Modernization line for conversion to MST.
15. Senator Hawley. Lieutenant General Smith, how are we doing from
a concept development standpoint, when it comes to figuring out how
exactly we plan to use Naval Strike Missiles, TACTOMs, and their
enablers for Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations?
Lieutenant General Smith. The Marine Corps recently completed its
Tentative Manual for Expeditionary Advanced Base Operation, and this
concept manual is in full alignment with national strategy and the
Navy's Distributed Maritime Operations concept. The Marine Corps is
beginning a campaign of experimentation to validate or refine various
initiatives in the Commandant's Force Design 2030 plan. These
experiments will continue to inform the concept development for the
Navy/Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System (NMESIS) that fires
Naval Strike Missiles and the Long Range Fires program that fires
TACTOMs.
Development of these technologies is ongoing as well, and continued
funding of these top priorities is critical to ensuring their timely
development and deployment. The Marine Corps successfully tested the
NMESIS program against a ship target in November 2020 and the Long
Range Fires program in March 2021.
With congressional authorization and funding for the President's
Budget Request for Fiscal Year 2022, the Marine Corps will activate a
NMESIS capability in Hawaii in fiscal year 2023. The missiles have long
lead times for procurement, from 18 to 24 months, and therefore funding
now is critical to deployment in theater as soon as possible.
16. Senator Hawley. Lieutenant General Smith, how will the
capabilities provided by the TACTOM complement those provided by the
Army's Precision Strike Missile, which is also expected to have an
anti-ship capability?
Lieutenant General Smith. The Marine Corps' development of ground
based anti-ship and long range precision fires capabilities are
complementary to the Army's develop of the Precision Strike Missile
(PrSM) and other long range fires systems. As the Nation's naval
expeditionary force-in-readiness, the Marine Corps operates in forward
and austere locations and persists within the range of adversary fires
and operations.
The Navy Marine Corps Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System
(NMESIS) combines a JLTV chassis with a launcher and two Naval Strike
Missiles (NSM). This system is highly mobile and transportable by Navy
ships and connectors. Compared to PrSM, the NSM possesses a smaller
form factor, yet provides effective operational reach and lethal
capacity. In conjunction with larger but less expeditionary Army
formations, the joint force will be able to employ complementary ground
based anti-ship fires from a variety of ranges, locations, and attack
vectors. The first NMESIS equipped unit is on track to be operational
during fiscal year 2023 ahead of PrSM fielding. Additionally, the
NMESIS carrier is also intended to serve as the Marine Corps
replacement for the M142 HIMARS launcher and will be capable of
transporting and employing the MLRS Family of Munitions, to include
PrSM.
Finally, as part of a portfolio of precision fires capabilities,
the Marine Corps is developing a long range fires program that will
employ TACTOM missiles. The challenge to the threat is multiplied when
the NSM and TACTOM cruise missile attack profiles are combined with the
ballistic attack profile of weapons such as PrSM. The combination of
these ground based systems will markedly increase the Joint Force's
ship interdiction capability and capacity and enable effective sea
denial and sea control.
size of the u.s. naval fleet
17. Senator Hawley. Mr. Stefany, at the beginning of February, the
Acting Secretary of the Navy said that ``there's a strong interest in
allowing us to continue to grow the naval force to get up to 355-plus
ships'' and that the 355-ship objective is a ``non-partisan'' issue.
Can you confirm that this Administration has a ``strong interest'' in
growing the naval force to or past 355 ships?
Mr. Stefany. The Interim National Security Strategy addresses the
growing rivalry with China and Russia, as well as China's increased
investments and assertiveness. It also calls for us to ``promote a
favorable distribution of power to deter and prevent adversaries from
directly threatening the United States and our Allies.'' To compete and
win in an era of peer military competition, the United States needs a
balanced naval force capable of striking targets in all domains. The
force design must emphasize distributed awareness, lethality, and
survivability in high-intensity conflict. The force must be adaptable,
demonstrate presence, achieve sea control, and be capable of projecting
power by delivering precision effects at long ranges. The Navy, working
closely with the OSD Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation
(CAPE), continues to develop comparative assessments of naval force
structure options consistent with Interim National Security Strategic
Guidance and designed to maximize the maritime contribution to the
joint force. The results of these efforts and ongoing experimentation
and prototyping will be reflected in the fiscal year 2023 shipbuilding
plan.
18. Senator Hawley. Mr. Stefany, how does the shipbuilding request
included in this year's budget submission bring us any closer to that
force size?
Mr. Stefany. The fiscal year 2022 shipbuilding request supports a
balanced naval force capable of striking targets in all domains by
procuring eight new construction battle force ships, as well as eight
non-battle force connectors and craft, and continues the first phase of
the Sealift recapitalization effort with the purchase of five used
sealift ships. The 2022 budget also makes balanced investments in
readiness and advanced capabilities for the future force, such as
hypersonic weapons and unmanned systems and early design of future air,
surface and undersea platforms.
[all]