[Senate Hearing 117-967, Part 2]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 117-967, Pt. 2
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION
REQUEST FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2023 AND THE FUTURE YEARS DEFENSE
PROGRAM
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
S. 4543
TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023 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
__________
APRIL 26, 2022
__________
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
59-835 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
_________________________________________________________________
april 26, 2022
Page
Navy and Marine Corps Investment Programs........................ 1
Member Statements
Statement of Senator Mazie Hirono................................ 1
Statement of Senator Kevin Cramer................................ 3
Witness Statements
Stefany, Frederick, Performing the Duties of Assistant Secretary 5
of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition.
Questions for the Record......................................... 42
(iii)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION REQUEST FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2023 AND THE FUTURE YEARS DEFENSE PROGRAM
----------
TUESDAY, APRIL 26, 2022
United States Senate,
Subcommittee on Seapower,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC.
NAVY AND MARINE CORPS INVESTMENT PROGRAMS
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m. in room
SR-222, Russell Senate Office Building, Senator Mazie Hirono
(Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.
Committee Members present: Hirono, Kaine, King, Cramer,
Wicker, Rick Scott, and Hawley.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MAZIE HIRONO
Senator Hirono. This hearing will come to order. We are
waiting for my Ranking Member to come, and when he does come he
will simply have to agree with anything that I suggest. So that
is the deal. So we will start, and then when he comes he can
certainly make his statement.
I would like to welcome our witnesses to the hearing this
afternoon to explore various aspects of the Department of the
Navy's (DON's)investment programs: Mr. Frederick Stefany,
performing the duties of Assistant Secretary of the Navy for
Research, Development, and Acquisition; Vice Admiral Scott
Conn, Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Warfighting
Requirements and Capabilities; and Lieutenant General Karsten
Heckl, Deputy Commandant of the Marine Corps for Combat
Development and Integration. Welcome. Thank you for your
service to the Nation and for the professional service of the
men and women under your commands.
I also want to recognize our Ranking Member, Senator
Cramer, and when he comes he will submit his statement, or give
his statement.
We did have a very productive 2020 year Defense
Authorization Act, and I full expect to be working very
productively with my Ranking Member once again. We are also
grateful to our military families for the vital role they play
in the success of the men and women of our Armed Forces.
Sadly, last week we tragically lost three sailors on the
USS George Washington. On behalf of this Subcommittee I would
like to offer my deepest condolences to their family members
and to all members of the USS George Washington family.
The Navy and Marine Corps face difficult decisions as they
seek to balance competing priorities, including modernizing the
fleet, maintaining a technological advantage over our
adversaries, supporting ongoing operations, and to sustaining
today's readiness. The threats we face around the world require
us to consider the best ways to get the Navy and Marine Corps
the resources that they need. However, it is critical that any
shift in priorities for those resources does not come at the
expense of important programs that families, including our
military families, rely on 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 interest in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region, including
bases in Hawaii.
This Subcommittee plays a crucial role in the oversight of
those programs. We must continue to work to ensure we are
getting good value for every dollar that we spend, an ongoing
challenge.
This year the Navy is proposing to retire a number of ships
before the end of their useful service lives. This includes a
plan to retire nine littoral combat ships early, one of which
would only be 3 years old. The Navy's position is that these
vessels would not contribute much to a high-end conflict.
However, this plan would result in our fleet size shrinking at
a time when we are working to achieve a 355-ship fleet,
established as the goal several years ago.
Less than two years ago, former Defense Secretary Esper
published Battle Force 2045, an updated, long-term shipbuilding
plan. In this plan he called for achieving a Navy force even
larger than the 355-ship fleet that had been adopted as
national policy in Title 10 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
utilizing multiyear procurement authority to modernize the
fleet more efficiently. Congress has approved the use of this
authority to procure attack submarines and Aegis destroyers.
The two platform had been the largest inventory shortfall
compared to the goals outlined in the 2016 Force Structure
Assessment.
I look forward to hearing today about the Navy's multiyear
contract plan for building destroyers over the next 5 years and
how the plan will address our concerns for a potential
shortfall.
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. I expect to hear
today how the realignment of the force, to reflect the
Commandant's vision for the Marine Corps, is reflected in the
plans and programs in fiscal year 2023 budget proposal.
I am also interested in hearing from Secretary Stefany
about the vital role our public Navy shipyards play in
maintaining a ready and capable fleet. While shipyards are not
necessarily within what we call the kuleana of this Committee,
it is all tied together, because if you build ships you have to
repair and maintain them.
I am encouraged that the Navy has finally gotten serious
about investing in this critical shipyard infrastructure that
has been neglected for far too long. I look forward to hearing
from you this afternoon about how the fiscal year 2023 budget
supports this shipyard modernization plan.
I look forward to working with the Navy to ensure that the
shipyard plan, as I said, stays on track and that you are
requesting the appropriate resources for that plan to proceed.
Now--I just mentioned to them that since you are late you
have to do everything I want us to do. Okay? No problem, right.
Senator Cramer. From what I have heard it sounds like it is
not going to be that far away.
Senator Hirono. Yes. I do not think so.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR KEVIN CRAMER
Senator Cramer. Thank you, Chairwoman Hirono, and thank you
all for your service and for being here today as well.
I will agree with a fair bit of what I heard from the
chairman. It is obviously a critical time in our country and
the stakes are really high, and you are really an important
part of all that. So appropriate funding from the Department of
Defense in order to keep our Nation safe and, frankly, much of
the world, and defend our interests is the most critical and
highest priority, of course, we have as Members of Congress. We
take it seriously.
To this end I want to thank the chairwoman for calling
today's hearing to examine Navy and Marine Corps programs in
the President's fiscal year 2023 budget request. I have to say,
like last year, I am concerned. I am concerned that President
Biden's defense budget request is woefully inadequate, nowhere
near enough to give our Navy and Marine Corps the resources,
equipment, and training that they need. Quite simply, because
this budget does not keep up with inflation, it is a cut, and I
am hopeful that we can come together again to provide the
Department with the real budget growth that is necessary to
fund critical modernization, readiness, and personnel
shortfalls.
Regarding the President's budget, I do want to make three
technical points. First, we just received the detailed budget
justification material on Friday, despite the budget being
submitted a month ago. We need to get the NDAA done, and this
delay is not helpful.
Second, this year's shipbuilding plan's ``choose your own
adventure'' format lacks coherence, and three different
outcomes raise more questions than they answer.
Lastly, the procurement of the amphibious ship, LHA-9 is
double-counted in this budget in contravention of the law. This
is something that I have raised with a number of the officers
that have come into the office as well. We need an explanation
on that, please.
More broadly, I am concerned about the state of our Navy
and its downward trajectory. It seems to me that the Navy is
dealing with the confluence of four key issues. First,
President Reagan added a lot of ships to the fleet quickly,
nearly a 600-ship Navy. Thirteen of the 24 ships proposed for
decommissioning this year were procured in the 1980s. The
Reagan-era ships are reaching the end of service life in large
quantities, just like they were brought in in large quantities.
Former Navy officials' promises over the years to modernize and
extend the service life of many of these ships or replace them
with new ships, of course, have not panned out.
Second, as the chairwoman mentioned, the LCS program was
planned to be a major portion of our fleet, with 55 of these
ships in service by 2018. Instead, we have 24 today.
Unfortunately, this class has been plagued with problems from
the start, and a key reason for the program, the anti-submarine
warfare capability, which was supposed to be operational just
12 years ago, was cancelled altogether in this budget. Nine of
the 24 ships proposed for decommissioning are LCSs.
Third, we need Navy shipbuilding programs that can scale
up. There is a high opportunity cost in time and money for
failure in Navy shipbuilding, and again, this is an area where
the chairwoman and I agree. It is a key lesson of the LCS, the
CGX, the DDX, and DDG-1000 programs. Just think. If the LCS
plan delivered as promised, we would have a fleet now of
roughly 330 ships, with 55 LCS capable of hunting submarines,
neutralizing mines, and conducting surface warfare. Instead, we
have 31 fewer ships and no small surface combatants that can
hunt submarines.
To this end, the new Constellation-class frigate program
must succeed if we are to grow our Navy. Unfortunately, the
lead ship will not be finished until 2026, 11 years after the
last of our 51 Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates was
decommissioned, which has resulted in acute and continuing
frigate gap in the Navy's ability to escort convoys, hunt
submarines, and defend high-value assets.
Fourth, we need a consistent commitment from every
administration and Congress to provide steady and predictable
funding to the Department of the Navy. As bad as the
President's 2023 budget request is, the projected cuts to
shipbuilding in future years are worse, with the LPD amphibious
ship production line abruptly ending with no transition plan.
This is simply unacceptable, as it will both further shrink the
fleet and starve our Navy shipbuilding industrial base, which
is already barely hanging on.
I also have concerns related to the health and trends for
naval aviation and the extent to which this budget supports the
Commandant of the Marine Corps' force design, but in the
interest of time I will not belabor that now.
The bottom line is this budget sends China and other
potential adversaries the wrong message, that we are not
willing to do what it takes to defend ourselves and our allies
and our partners. We should be worried about China for a
multitude of reasons, but looking at just their navy for a
moment, their fleet surpassed our fleet size target of 355
ships 2 years ago, and continues to steadily climb. Meanwhile,
this budget proposes to shrink our Navy to 280 ships over the
next 5 years. It simply does not make sense, at least not to
me.
So a few specifics I hope to cover today include, Mr.
Stefany, I would like to discuss five shipbuilding issues to
better understand how this Subcommittee can be helpful, and we
will get to those five in my questioning.
General Heckl, the Marine Corps appears to be aggressively
pursuing air defense and missile systems in the Indo-Pacific. I
am interested in better understanding how these systems can
both protect forward-postured marines as well as help combatant
commanders deny maneuver space to an adversary.
I am also interested in the Commandant's requirement for
amphibious ships, and I look forward to your testimony. Thank
you.
Senator Hirono. Thank you.
Mr. Stefany, are you testifying on behalf of the other
panelists?
Mr. Stefany. Yes, ma'am. One opening statement for the
three of us.
Senator Hirono. Okay. Please proceed.
STATEMENT OF FREDERICK STEFANY, PERFORMING THE DUTIES OF
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE NAVY FOR RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND
ACQUISITION
Mr. Stefany. Thank you, ma'am. Chairwoman Hirono, Ranking
Member Cramer, distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, on
behalf of myself, Vice Admiral Conn, Lieutenant General Heckl
we thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to
address the Department of the Navy's fiscal year 2023 budget
request for our seapower capabilities. We would like to thank
your Subcommittee for your leadership and support of
shipbuilding, naval aviation, and ground programs that maintain
maritime superiority in defense of our Nation.
I would like to highlight that this past year we have had a
number of significant firsts as we provide new capabilities to
the fleet. This year we achieved the initial operational
capability, or IOC, of the USS Gerald Ford, and that ship is
now, the first of our class is preparing for first deployment
later this year.
We completed the operational testing of the CH-53K heavy-
lift helicopter, and just recently, just a couple of days ago,
we declared IOC of that capability.
We have been equipping our first platoons of marines with
the new amphibious combat vehicles this year, and we expect
later this year to do the first deployment of this vehicle
later this year.
We achieved IOC of the VH-92, the presidential helicopter,
and we are starting the commissioning process with the White
House to get that helicopter into the White House's fleet.
We have also accomplished the first refueling of an
operational aircraft with an unmanned air vehicle. In this case
it was the MQ-25 prototype aircraft, and we refueled both an F-
18, an E-2D, and a Joint Strike Fighter.
Of note on the Joint Strike Fighter, this year we had our
first deployment of F-35 Charlies. Both the Marine Corps and
the Navy deployed for the first time. Then a true measure of
interoperability with our partners in the Royal Navy this past
year saw the deployment of a squadron of marine F-35 Bravos on
the HMS Queen Elizabeth.
The Department of the Navy's fiscal year 2023 budget is
guided by SECNAV's priorities to strengthen our maritime
superiority in defense of our Nation, to empower our people,
and to strengthen strategic partnerships. It implements the
Chief of Naval Operations' navigation plan to expand our fleet
capabilities for distributed operations while building on the
Commandant of the Marine Corps' Force Design 2030, to rapidly
modernize the expeditionary posture of the Marine Corps.
Consistent with recent budgets, this budget prioritizes the
Navy's contribution to the National Strategic Deterrence while
balancing readiness for the fight tonight, new capabilities for
the future fight, and capacity across the near and future. The
fiscal year 2022 budget continues our investments in more
lethal network capabilities integrated into the Joint Force to
address our pacing and acute threats.
As reflected in the Department's 30-year shipbuilding plan,
this budget requests over $27 billion for shipbuilding
programs, more than $5 billion more than what was requested in
last year's President's budget, and includes 51 new
construction ships across the 2023 to 2027 FYDP.
This budget also invests in 96 fixed-wing aircraft, rotary-
wing aircraft, and unmanned aircraft in fiscal year 2023, with
420 aircraft across the FYDP.
The budget includes funding for Marine Corp force design
priorities for equipment modernization and precision fires,
resilient communications, and mobility platforms to optimize
the force for naval expeditionary warfare in a maritime
littoral.
To assure we can maintain the forces we have we expanded in
our budget the aviation and ship depot funding lines. We also
are continuing the OPN funding maintenance pilot, and we are
expanding it to the Atlantic fleet and the Pacific fleet.
The budget continues, Senator Hirono, to your point, once-
in-a-century recapitalization of our national ship
infrastructure as part of the Shipyard Infrastructure
Optimization Program, SIOP, with a significant increase in
funding in 2023, that is sustained--our commitment is sustained
across the FYDP.
On the aviation side, the budget funds repairs, overhauls,
inspections of our airframes, engines, and aircraft components,
and it continues our reform efforts to reduce out-of-reporting
aircraft and increase number of mission-capable aircraft we
have.
With a focus on developing our fully capable future naval
forces, this budget invests a record $24 billion in research
and development. It includes investments in our next-generation
submarine, our large surface combatant, our air dominance
aircraft, as well as investments in hypersonic weapons,
directed energy weapons, autonomy, artificial intelligence and
machine learning, and the initial instantiation of Project
Overmatch.
We thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
subcommittee today and for the strong support this Subcommittee
has always provided to our sailors and our marines. Now we look
forward to answering your questions. Thank you.
[The joint prepared statement of Mr. Stefany, Admiral Conn,
and General Heckl follows:]
Joint Prepared Statement by Frederick J. Stefany, Vice Admiral Scott
Conn, and Lieutenant General Karsten S. Heckl
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 2023 budget
request for Seapower capabilities. First, we would like to thank
Congress and this Committee for your leadership and support for the
Department of the Navy (DON) acquisition, sustainment, research and
development programs. The fiscal year 2022 Authorization and
Appropriation Acts strengthened the DON's shipbuilding, aviation and
ground programs that allow us to build and operate a potent,
integrated, forward-maneuverable Navy and Marine Corps.
As we look to our security and operational environment we face
increasing regional threats from coercive and malign actors. We are
looking broadly at the war in Ukraine and how it may embolden or deter
others. Aggressive actions by the Chinese and Russian militaries
threaten peace, stability, and rules-based order. The DON will continue
to strengthen our maritime dominance through integrated deterrence and
campaigning. Our advantage will endure by empowering our warfighters
and acquisition and sustainment workforce and by expanding our many
interagency and international partnerships. We will work to sustain and
grow that advantage by achieving seamless integration, communication,
and collaboration with allies and partners. We invest in the European
and Pacific Deterrence Initiatives while supporting our industrial base
partners here at home. Focused on mission readiness, we are increasing
the Department's resilience to climate change and reducing adverse
impacts on the environment. We promote active campaigning through our
operations, exercises, engagement, and interoperability with our allies
and partners across the world.
To address growing demands on our warfighters, the DON is investing
in lethal capabilities across a broad spectrum of platforms and
programs. Since the start of fiscal year 2021 we have delivered nine
highly capable warships to the Fleet including two Arleigh Burke-class
destroyers (DDG 51), two Virginia-class submarines (SSN), four Littoral
Combat Ships (LCS), and one San Antonio-class amphibious transport
dock. Today, the Navy has 76 ships under contract with 53 ships in
construction. We expect to take delivery of seven more ships and plan
to award contracts for eight more ships during fiscal year 2022. On the
aviation side, we have delivered 94 new aircraft for Navy and Marine
Corps, improving capability and enabling the divestiture of less
affordable legacy systems.
The Navy continues to mature critical warfighting investments. USS
Gerald R Ford (CVN 78) successfully completed its post-delivery testing
and trials period in April 2021 and Full Ship Shock Trials in August
2021. USS Gerald R Ford also completed its post-Shock Trial
availability, turned over all Advanced Weapons Elevators to the crew,
achieved Initial Operational Capability (IOC) on December 22, 2021, and
is preparing for its first deployment later this year. fiscal year 2021
saw the initial squadron standup of the EA-18G Growler Capability
Modification fielding a modern electronic attack capability while 25 E-
2D aircraft received critical radar and network upgrades. VFA-97 became
the third operational F-35C squadron and the second deployment of CMV-
22 is underway today. Unmanned advancements continued forward with the
MQ-25 prototype completing 36 sorties and 124.5 flight hours, achieving
the first ever unmanned-manned aerial refueling test flights with the
FA-18E/F, E-2D and F-35C. The MQ-25 also conducted at-sea on-deck ship
compatibility testing aboard USS George H W Bush (CVN 77), yielding
valuable early test data and increasing program confidence in the low
rate initial production (LRIP) design.
The Marine Corps has implemented significant modernization efforts
through the continued implementation of Force Design 2030 initiatives.
Through congressional support, the Marine Corps is fielding enhanced
sensor platforms, fires capabilities, and communications networks while
investing in the continued research and development of enabling
technologies. These capabilities are directly tied to the
implementation of new operational employment concepts, such as A
Concept for Stand-in Forces, and are making the Marine Corps lighter
and more lethal to win throughout the competition continuum.
Readiness remains a clear Department priority and fiscal year 2023
continues prior year gains on ship and aircraft maintenance efforts to
improve overall department readiness. 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. We
will communicate future demand signals to our industrial partners
through several government initiatives, including contract bundling,
improved maintenance planning through Availability Duration Scorecard
(ADS) 3.0, awarding contracts at availability start minus 120 days (A-
120), improved long-lead time material acquisition, and Other
Procurement, Navy (OPN) Pilot expansion. These initiatives will help
stabilize the industrial base and ensure sufficient capacity.
For example, the Navy is continuing to see positive results from
the pilot program to fund CNO Availabilities with multi-year OPN
funding. Established by Congress in fiscal year 2020 to fund Pacific
Fleet availabilities, the pilot was expanded to U.S. Fleet Forces
availabilities in fiscal year 2022.
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 Navy is continuing to demonstrate
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 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 Framework continues as our 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 Framework directs an
enterprise-wide partnership with industry and academia to coordinate
efforts and resources, while also taking advantage of innovation
opportunities such as U.S. Naval Forces Central Command's International
Maritime Exercise 2022.
The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget Request
The President's fiscal year 2023 budget advances key defense
priorities. It resources a Navy and Marine Corps Team that supports the
2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS) priorities of integrated
deterrence, campaigning, and building enduring advantages, with an
agile and ready joint force. Moreover, the Secretary of the Navy's
enduring priorities of strengthening maritime dominance in defense of
our Nation, empowering our people, and strengthening strategic
partnerships is nested under this guidance and resourced to achieve
these effects.
The fiscal year 2023 budget request is analytically driven to meet
our strategic goals, while balanced with reform targeted at maximizing
the value of every dollar. The budget reflects the Department's
commitment to building and sustaining a modernized naval force and
operating forward with sufficient capability, size, and mix to deter
and defend. Fiscal year 2023 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 Department's
top acquisition priority. The budget requests full funding for two
DDGs, two SSNs, one FFG, one LPD Flight II, one T-AO, and one T-ATS,
while providing the next increment of funding for construction of the
Columbia-class SSBN, CVN 80, CVN 81, and LHA 9. The budget request
procures a total of 96 fixed-wing, rotary-wing, and unmanned aircraft,
and completes procurement of E-2D Hawkeye, while maturing production
and maintaining vital aviation platforms to support a modernized and
tactically diverse fleet.
The fiscal year 2023 budget prioritizes readiness recovery,
continuing prior year gains on ship and aircraft maintenance efforts to
improve overall department readiness. The Department is investing in
the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program (SIOP) to provide
modernized public maintenance facilities needed to sustain the future
fleet. The request continues investment to develop improved war-
fighting capabilities across all domains and distributed maritime
operations, investing in long range fires and hypersonic weapons as
well as increases to unmanned platforms. This budget also prioritized
Force Design 2030 programs, such as the Navy/Marine Corps Expeditionary
Ship Interdiction System (NMESIS) and MQ-9A aircraft.
The fiscal year 2023 budget makes investments to expand the
industrial base partnerships that support our submarine and weapon
systems and that are critical to our strength and capacity. This
includes targeted investments to shipbuilder infrastructure, supply
chain capacity, strategic outsourcing, workforce training, and new
technologies.
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 capability to address today's maritime
challenges while investing in future capabilities to address tomorrow's
security environment. With the support of Congress, we will continue
efforts to develop and field platforms, systems, and technologies to
provide sailors and marines the capability overmatch required in this
era of strategic competition.
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. Modernizing this Sea Based Strategic
Deterrent with both the Columbia and TRIDENT D5 Life Extension 2
(D5LE2) programs will ensure the effectiveness and responsiveness of
Navy's leg of the strategic Triad through the 2080s.
Funding for the lead ship and future Columbia-class submarines
remains the Department's top 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 in 2030. The fiscal year 2023 budget supports the
final year of 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 procurements beginning
in fiscal year 2026. Supporting overall program risk reduction and
required schedule execution to minimize strategic deterrence coverage
gaps, the fiscal year 2023 budget request continues to fund Continuous
Production of missile tubes, propulsors, and various critical
components thanks to authorities provided by Congress. 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. The budget
request also funds multi-program material procurements to achieve best
value across nuclear shipbuilding programs and Production Back-up Units
to reduce schedule risks.
The Navy delivered two Virginia-class submarines so far this year,
including the second and third Block IV ships, the future USS Oregon
(SSN 793) and future USS Montana (SSN 794). Looking forward, the second
ship of Block V introduces the Virginia Payload Module, and all Block V
ships will incorporate Acoustic Superiority program improvements. While
construction is progressing on the remaining Block IV and early Block V
submarines, we are not meeting the sustained two per year delivery
objective. The Navy is working closely with industry to regain cadence
and implement strategic improvements, including continued shipbuilder
and supplier development initiatives. The fiscal year 2023 budget
includes funding to procure two Block V Virginia SSNs as well as
funding to address Virginia-class parts obsolescence, and continued
development of capabilities and technologies for future Blocks.
The Navy is taking proactive steps to improve the nuclear
shipbuilding industrial base capability, capacity, quality, and
workforce, which is essential for on-time delivery of one-per-year
Columbia and two-per-year Virginia production (1+2). In 2021, the Navy
partnered with the Office of the Secretary of Defense on a study to
assess the submarine industrial base's ability to design, construct,
and deliver submarines at rates consistent with current and future
shipbuilding plans. The fiscal year 2023 budget begins critical
investments identified in the study, to execute focused actions to
reach and sustain the annual 1+2 construction cadence. The investments
address shipbuilder infrastructure, supplier development for
capability/capacity, scaling of new technologies, workforce trade skill
gaps and constraints, expanding productive capacity via strategic
outsourcing, and government oversight of expanded industrial base
efforts. In fiscal year 2022 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, as well as
the $35 million provided in the Virginia funding line for submarine
industrial base / support facilities infrastructure at submarine
production shipyards.
The Future Attack Submarine (SSN(X)) design intent is to maintain
our asymmetric advantage in the undersea domain, ensuring assured
access for the Joint Force in future decades. The Navy envisions SSN(X)
to capitalize on Seawolf speed and payload capacity, Virginia acoustic
superiority and sensors, and Columbia operational availability. SSN(X)
is intended to retain multi-mission capability and sustained combat
presence in denied waters, with a renewed priority in anti-surface
(ASuW) and anti-submarine warfare (ASW) missions against increasing
numbers of sophisticated threats. Design flexibility and margins in
space, weight and power are intended to be included in the design to
facilitate efficient integration of future capability upgrades to
counter anticipated evolving threats. In fiscal year 2022, the Navy is
developing an Initial Capabilities Document and beginning trades
studies in support of the Analysis of Alternatives.
As the Columbia design workforce requirements diminish, SSN(X)
design efforts will ramp up, thereby maintaining the strength of our
submarine design workforce. The Navy is targeting SSN(X) construction
start in the mid-2030s, which should maintain a properly skilled
production work force as Columbia serial production ramps down.
Aircraft Carriers (CVNs)
The Navy continues to see increased reliability of the new critical
technologies on USS Gerald R Ford (CVN 78) as it prepares for
operational use. Having turned all 11 Advanced Weapons Elevators over
to the crew, with over 17,000 cycles operating in port and at sea,
Gerald R Ford achieved IOC on December 22, 2021. USS Gerald R Ford
successfully completed its first Planned Incremental Availability in
February 2022 and is preparing for its first employment.
USS John F Kennedy (CVN 79) is 85 percent construction complete.
John F 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, and is on schedule to deliver in 2024 with a complete
combat systems suite and fully outfitted with F-35C ship modifications.
USS Enterprise (CVN 80) construction is 15 percent complete and USS
Doris Miller (CVN 81) completed its first cut of steel in August 2021.
Additionally, the first CVN 80 keel unit was laid in April 2022, with a
commemorative ceremony to occur in late summer 2022.
The Nimitz-class Refueling Complex Overhaul (RCOH) is the full
recapitalization of the carriers in support of the second half of their
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 94 percent complete. USS John C
Stennis (CVN 74) is 21 percent complete. USS Harry S Truman (CVN 75)
will begin RCOH in fiscal year 2025.
Large Surface Combatants
Arleigh Burke-class (DDG 51) destroyers are the workhorse of the
Fleet, with 70 ships delivered as of February 2022. Over the course of
the fiscal year 2018 to 2022 MYP, the Navy will procure a total of 12
Flight III DDGs, more than the planned 10 ship procurement, thanks to
the strong support of Congress. The shipbuilders have a total of 19
DDG-51s under contract. The budget request funds procurement of a total
of 10 ships from fiscal year 2023 to fiscal year 2027 at two DDG 51s
per year, while the intended MYP contract will procure nine ships with
an option for the tenth DDG 51. Similar to the fiscal year 2018-2022
MYP, additional annual options will be requested. Including the tenth
ship as an option in the MYP as a ``nine plus one'' profile provides
the flexibility to adjust procurement quantities due to potential
changes driven by world events or production issues, while adjusting to
force structure requirements.
These Flight III ships will provide enhanced Integrated Air and
Missile Defense (IAMD) with the AN/SPY 6(V)1 Air and Missile Defense
Radar (AMDR) and AEGIS Baseline 10 (BL10). 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. Initial shipboard testing of the radar and combat
system has commenced on the first DDG 51 Flight III ship, USS Jack H
Lucas (DDG 125), which will deliver in fiscal year 2023. As part of a
two-phased testing approach, IOC in fiscal year 2024 will include Air
and Missile Defense Commander (AMDC) capability with core BMD
capability (Long-Range Search and Track and Sea Based Terminal). This
aligns with Fleet priorities for Flight III to replace Cruisers in the
AMDC role. Follow-on testing will support the IAMD key performance
parameters with completion of Initial Operational Test and Evaluation
(IOT&E), which culminates with Flight Test Mission (FTM)-42 in the
fourth quarter of fiscal year 2027. The 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 (AMDR, BL10, and power systems)
is ongoing. BL10 is being integrated with a LRIP SPY-6 array and power
conversion equipment at a land based development site to buy down risk
of first time integration at the waterfront aboard DDG 125. Land based
testing of the electric plant concluded in January 2022, initiating
integration and testing of the Machinery Control System software. Land
based integration activities continue to groom ``first-of'' issues in
advance of shipboard testing offering significant risk reduction for
DDG 125 ship production milestones. The first combat system software
incremental load was delivered to DDG 125 in February 2022.
The Zumwalt-class (DDG 1000) 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 Post Delivery Test and Trials (PDT&T), train the crew on ship
functions, and demonstrate operational performance. USS Zumwalt (DDG
1000) and USS Michael Monsoor (DDG 1001) are both homeported in San
Diego, California. The program is leveraging both ships to execute test
and evaluation requirements in accordance with the Test and Evaluation
Master
Plan with focus on Air Warfare, Surface Warfare, and Strike Warfare
on DDG 1000; and ASW and Aviation on DDG 1001. This allows for
simultaneous activation and testing of multiple warfare areas. IOC will
occur following completion of PDT&T requirements. The Navy is
evaluating the timeline to achieve IOC with the current estimate in the
first quarter of fiscal year 2023. Planned construction and Hull,
Mechanical, and Electrical (HM&E) test and activation of USS Lyndon B
Johnson (DDG 1002) at General Dynamics Bath Iron Works is complete and
the ship has transitioned to Huntington Ingalls Shipbuilding for
completion of Combat Systems installation as part of the planned single
delivery approach. Final delivery is expected after completion of the
combat systems installation in fiscal year 2024. The Zumwalt-class is
also planned for integration with Navy's Conventional Prompt Strike
hypersonic weapon system in fiscal year 2025.
DDG(X) will be the next enduring large surface combatant that
follows the highly successful DDG 51 Class. Similar to DDG 51's
evolution from CG 47, the initial flight of DDG(X) is a new hull form
built around the DDG 51 Flight III's AMDR with AEGIS BL10. DDG(X) Top
Level requirements were approved by the CNO in December 2020 and were
based on an informed requirements process executed by a cross
functional team of requirements, acquisition, naval architects, and
cost estimators to deliberately reduce execution risk. DDG(X) will
provide the flexibility and margins (space, weight, power, and cooling
reservations) to accommodate required future capacity and capability
upgrades to counter evolving threats. DDG(X) is currently focused on
Concept Refinement and transition into Preliminary Design with industry
partners. The Navy is committed to a smooth and successful transition
from DDG 51 to DDG(X) starting around fiscal year 2030. The transition
will preserve the critical shipbuilding and supplier industrial base by
executing a collaborative design process with current DDG 51 shipyards
and transitioning to a proven limited competition model between these
shipyards at the right point in ship construction.
The fiscal year 2023 request fully funds the required land-based
testing efforts over the FYDP to reduce critical risks with the
Integrated Power System and new hull form identified by the Senior
Technical Authority in accordance with prior congressional direction.
The Navy is incorporating lessons learned from prior platform
transitions to deliberately reduce execution risk and position industry
for a successful transition, by establishing informed requirements, use
of non-developmental technologies, proven combat system elements,
collaborative design process, and robust land based testing.
To date, Congress has provided a total of $335 million to support
the surface combatant supplier base and to improve surface ship
shipyard infrastructure. The Navy has awarded approximately $168
million of surface combatant supplier base funding across 51 suppliers
and is working with industry for targeted investments in shipyards and
the supplier base, supporting industry's capital expenditure strategies
to increase efficiency.
Small Surface Combatants
The Constellation-class Frigate (FFG 62) is the evolution of a
proven parent design built to Naval combatant design standards with
increased lethality, survivability, and improved capability to support
the full range of military operations as part of a more lethal Joint
Force. Frigate requirements have been validated and were 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 is establishing a FFG 62 Land Based Engineering Site
to reduce integration risks and test power and propulsion systems. The
first two ships, the future USS Constellation and USS Congress, are
under contract, with the lead ship to start construction in fiscal year
2022. The third ship, the future USS Chesapeake, will go on contract in
fiscal year 2022. The Navy is confident in the capability FFG 62 will
deliver to the Fleet, especially its ASW capabilities against modern
threat submarines.
The LCS program has delivered 26 of the 35 total funded ships. The
Navy has installed Naval Strike Missile (NSM) on six Independence
variant (IND) 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 (L&S) upgrades is on track for the first installations in
fiscal year 2024. Development of the L&S Common Combat System has begun
and will support transition from shipbuilder procured contractor
furnished equipment combat systems to program of record government
furnished equipment. Eighteen LCS will have conducted their inaugural
deployments to 5th/6th, 7th, or 4th Fleet by the end of fiscal year
2022, providing a significant increase in assets for Fleet Commanders
which will continue to grow as the remaining ships are delivered to the
Fleet.
Large Deck Amphibious Warfare Ships
Amphibious warfare ships remain a key component of the Nation's
global forward presence, supporting crisis and contingency response
missions in order to provide decision space for our Nation's leaders.
These ships and their embarked marines and sailors strengthen
relationships with our allies and partners on a daily basis to deter
strategic competitors. In order to ensure the future naval
expeditionary force is maximized for effective combat power, while
reflecting and supporting the force structure changes addressed in
USMC's Force Design, the Secretary of the Navy directed an amphibious
requirement study that will inform refinement of amphibious ship
procurement plans and shipbuilding profiles, as well as inform the
ongoing overall Naval Force Structure Assessment.
The America Class Landing Helicopter Assault (LHA 6) is the key
platform of the Expeditionary Strike Group/Amphibious Ready Group of
the present and future. The LHA 6 Class program provides agile and
versatile multi-mission platforms with increased lethality, command and
control, and survivability. Among other capabilities, these ships host
the fifth-generation F-35B Joint Strike Fighter aircraft that is
critical to the high-end fight.
USS Tripoli (LHA 7) delivered in February 2020 and is preparing for
its maiden deployment in 2022. Bougainville (LHA 8) is 46 percent
construction complete with 82 percent of 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 and preparing to start
ship fabrication in fiscal year 2023. The Department plans to procure a
future LHA, replacing the capability lost with the decommissioning of
the Bonhomme Richard (LHD 6).
Small Deck Amphibious Warfare Ships
San Antonio-class Landing Platform Docks (LPD 17) provides the
ability to embark, transport, and land elements of a landing force by
helicopters, tiltrotor aircraft, landing craft, and amphibious
vehicles. The San Antonio Class LPD will continue to support the
embarkation of Marine Expeditionary Units (MEUs) and facilitate
Amphibious Ready Groups well into the future, as these ships provide
strategic mobility, force projection, and the ability to campaign
across the globe.
USS Fort Lauderdale (LPD 28) delivered in March 2022, while USS
Richard M McCool Jr (LPD 29) is 79 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. The first
Flight II ship, the future USS Harrisburg (LPD 30), is 20 percent
complete with a planned delivery in fiscal year 2025. In addition, the
Navy awarded the future USS Pittsburgh (LPD 31) Detail Design and
Construction contract in April 2020 and start of ship fabrication is
planned for later this year. Following advanced procurement in fiscal
year 2022, this year's budget requests the remainder of the funding for
LPD 32.
Connectors
The Ship to Shore Connector (SSC) program provides the capability
to rapidly move assault forces from ship to shore within the littoral
operational environment to accomplish Unified Campaign Plan missions
and ensures the Joint Force Commander's ability to conduct amphibious
operations and operate over the high water mark, including movement
over ice, mud, rivers, swamps and marshes. SSC provides the functional
replacement for the Landing Craft, Air Cushion (LCAC) Class of craft,
which began reaching end of extended service life in 2015. The
Department remains committed to fielding SSC and has addressed program
developmental setbacks and commensurate reductions in procurement
quantities in fiscal year 2020 and fiscal year 2021. The 2022
Consolidated Appropriations Act added funding for three additional SSC
for five total. In fiscal year 2023 the Navy requests authority to
enter into one or more block buy contracts for up to 25 SSCs. The
initial block buy supported by the fiscal year 2023 President's Budget
would be for 10 SSCs from fiscal year 2023 through fiscal year 2027.
The Navy has contracted for 24 craft. The first two craft, LCAC 101
and 102, have been delivered to the Fleet in Little Creek, VA. 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. While no LCU 1700s are requested in fiscal
year 2023 as the shipbuilder works off their backlog, LCU 1700
procurement is planned to continue in fiscal year 2024.
Expeditionary, Auxiliary, and Other Vessels
Expeditionary support vessels are flexible platforms used across a
broad range of military operations in support of multiple operational
phases. The Light Amphibious Warship (LAW) will complement amphibious
warfare ships and will provide added surface maneuver, mobility,
sustainability, and survivability for Marine Corps Stand-in Forces in
strategic competition. Preliminary Design efforts began in January 2022
to help inform requirements through industry engagement. Upcoming
analysis will focus on requirements maturation and refinement of the
concept of operations for integration with the Marine Littoral Regiment
capabilities in support of the Stand-in Force. The Department is
driving towards a lead ship contract award no later than fiscal year
2025. These smaller ships are critical enablers of the USMC Force
Design, but in no way replace traditional amphibious warfare ships.
Both types of ships are required to posture the Naval Expeditionary
Force to serve as a Stand-in Force and respond to global crisis.
The Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) acts as a mobile sea base,
providing prepositioned equipment and sustainment with flexible
distribution to support deployed forces. fiscal year 2022
appropriations included the addition of one ESB ship. The Navy
commissioned USS Miguel Keith (ESB 5) on May 8, 2021. The ESB 6 and ESB
7 are planned for delivery 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. EPF provided combatant commanders high-speed sealift
mobility with inherent cargo handling capability and agility to achieve
positional advantage over operational distances. Apalachicola (T-EPF
13), Cody (T-EPF 14), and Point Loma (T-EPF 15) are under construction
with deliveries planned in fiscal year 2022, fiscal year 2023, and
fiscal year 2024, respectively. T-EPF 14 and T-EPF 15 are Flight 2
Variants with enhanced medical capabilities that will improve Navy's
ability to provide expeditionary medical support to forces conducting
DMO and Expeditionary Advance Base Operations (EABO) in contested
environments. Fiscal year 2022 appropriations included the addition of
one EPF Flight 2 and an Expeditionary Medical Ship (EMS). EMS is an EPF
variant that will provide expanded Role 2 Enhanced medical capabilities
(Flight 2A). Given the flexibility inherent in fast transports,
additional missions for the fast transport vessels are being evaluated.
The fiscal year 2023 budget request continues construction of the
John Lewis (T-AO 205) class fleet replenishment oiler to recapitalize
the T-AO 187 Class, which has been in-service since the mid-1980s. T-
AOs are the primary fuel pipeline that sustains Carrier Strike Groups
and Expeditionary Strike Groups, enabling them to project power for
extended periods at sea, reducing the reliance on foreign ports for
sustainment and increasing time on station to conduct operations. T-AOs
are closely integrated with commercial maritime industry due to the use
of U.S. commercial standards for construction and maintenance as well
as the use of merchant mariners to crew them. T-AO 205 class brings
additional capability and capacity to the Fleet through a 20-ship
program of record. USNS John Lewis, the lead ship of the class, is
planned for delivery in May 2022. T-AO hulls 206 to 208 are currently
under construction. Construction on the fifth ship, the future USNS
Lucy Stone (T-AO 209), will begin in first quarter of fiscal year 2023.
The 2022 Consolidated Appropriations Act added funding for one
additional T-AO and Affordability Initiatives.
Navajo, the first of a new class of combined towing, salvage, and
rescue (T-ATS) ship is scheduled to deliver in late 2023. 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 received funding for two ships in
fiscal year 2022 and requests funding for the final ship in the class
in fiscal year 2023.
The Detail Design & Construction contract of the fiscal year 2022
funded lead ship of a new class of Auxiliary General Ocean Surveillance
ships (T-AGOS 25 class) is scheduled to award in fiscal year 2023, with
serial production planned to begin in fiscal year 2025. The T-AGOS 25
ships will replace the T-AGOS 19 and T-AGOS 23 class ships. These
vessels are critical to ASW and other tactical and strategic missions.
Strategic Sealift
The Navy continues to act on Congressional authorities to address
strategic sealift readiness, executing the sealift recapitalization
plan developed in cooperation with USTRANSCOM. This three-part approach
includes acquiring used commercial vessels for the surge sealift force,
constructing new ships for the Maritime Prepositioning Force (MPF), and
extending the service life of the most viable platforms. On March 21,
2022, MARAD completed the purchase of the first used vessel, the CAPE
Arundel, and will complete the purchase of the second used vessel in
April 2022. Throughout 2022, the buy-used program will conduct the
conversion of the first two vessels for service with the Ready Reserve
Force and will purchase an additional five used vessels; two of which
are planned for conversion in 2022.
The fiscal year 2023 budget supports readiness and recapitalization
commitments by requesting two additional used vessel procurements per
year over the FYDP, improving the material readiness of existing ships,
retiring the least-ready vessels, and continuing to extend the service
life of appropriate vessels. The newly procured used sealift vessels
will continue their conversion and upgrade work to meet baseline
readiness requirements of the Ready Reserve Force ships maintained in
Reduced Operating Status. This work will be performed by U.S.
shipyards.
The Navy and U.S Marine Corps are coordinating revision of MPF Next
Generation requirements and transition plans. Navy will introduce an
initial capabilities document into the JCIDS process in fiscal year
2022 to validate MPF Next Generation requirements that will begin the
process for new construction ships. Sealift new construction is most
appropriate for the replacement of fully operational status ships in
the MPF which support Marine Corps.
Sustainment, Modernization, Service Life Extensions and Divestments
Maintenance and modernization of the Navy's fleet ensures Fleet
Commanders have the necessary assets with the required capabilities to
respond to operational demands. As a collective maintenance and
modernization community, the Navy is continually working to reduce
deferred maintenance backlogs and deliver ships back to the Fleet on
time and with all required work completed. Key efforts are underway
that span the entire process of work package planning, contracting, and
waterfront execution, including taking a Performance to Plan approach
to improving work package quality, level-loading ports to establish
predictability and stability for our industry partners, providing
government equipment and material earlier, streamlining Navy inspection
points, and reviewing waterfront roles and responsibilities to minimize
unnecessary churn and delays in decision making. By providing
predictable and stable workload to private shipyards, the Navy is
enabling the efficient use of repair capacity available across the
ports and allowing industry to understand future workload forecasts and
identify opportunities for targeted infrastructure investments.
Additionally, the Navy has completed an exhaustive thorough review into
the USS Bonhomme Richard fire and is taking appropriate actions to
avoid similar events on Navy ships completing repair, maintenance, and
modernization availabilities.
Modernization efforts ensure the Navy's in-service Fleet has relevant
combat capability
for our Fleet Commands. The fiscal year 2023 budget requests
funding for the modernization of four destroyers that will ensure
sustained combat effectiveness, mission relevancy, and enable the AEGIS
Fleet to achieve their full expected service lives. The budget funds
the first procurement of a SPY-6 variant for back-fit on in-service
DDGs, commencing in fiscal year 2026. The Navy is incorporating lessons
learned from Cruiser Modernization in the availability planning for DDG
Modernization availabilities in the areas of contract type, system lay-
up and reactivation, crew manning, and training. Additionally, stand-
alone and incremental modernization will continually be reviewed and
aligned to provide the necessary capability and mission effectiveness
to defeat our adversaries throughout the life cycle of DDGs.
In this era of strategic competition, the Navy's submarine force
provides an asymmetric warfighting advantage. Ensuring our submarines
are maintained and modernized to dominate the undersea battlespace is
an enduring Navy priority. The Navy is committed to seeking balance of
the maintenance workload within the public and private shipyards, as
well as maintaining a healthy industrial base for both submarine
maintenance and new construction. To that end, the Navy launched a
study to improve fast attack submarine (SSN) material availability that
will include a 15-Year SSN Maintenance Plan outlining approaches to
optimize submarine repair at all shipyards, including private-sector
maintenance execution. The Navy will continue to work with our industry
partners to improve cost and schedule performance for submarine
maintenance, providing valuable maintenance surge capacity.
To free up additional resources for priorities more closely aligned
to the NDS, the fiscal year 2023 budget proposes to decommission 24
ships in fiscal year 2023. Of these 24 ships, eight ships are at or
beyond expected service life (ESL) and 16 ships are prior to ESL (1 CG,
4 LSD, 9 LCS, 2 ESD). For the former eight ships, inactivation in
fiscal year 2023 is a normal part of the end of their lifecycle. For
the latter 16 ships, the Navy closely reviewed operational needs and
fleet requirements, and ultimately made the difficult decision that
this force structure is too costly to operate and sustain and no longer
provides the capabilities needed to best address the current and future
national security challenges. Decommissioning less capable ships before
the end of their expected service life provides critical resources to
invest in procurement and development of higher capability platforms.
The Navy is trading near-term capacity for long term capability, and
the fiscal year 2023 budget does not resource capacity beyond what can
be reasonably sustained - manning, training, maintenance, ordnance,
operations, and future modernization.
The CG and LSDs are in poor material condition and require
significant resources to continue to maintain, modernize, and operate
them. The substantial cost to retain these ships outweighs the
potential warfighting contributions of these platforms over their
limited remaining service life. For the LCS, the fiscal year 2023
budget focuses the LCS class on mine countermeasures (MCM) and surface
warfare (SUW) mission areas, eliminating the ASW mission for the class.
The ASW Mission Package is no longer being pursued due to technical
challenges and the forthcoming introduction of FFG 62 as a highly
capable ASW platform. Consequently, eight Freedom-class ships are
planned for decommission in correlation with the eight ASW mission
packages. In addition, LCS 3 is also proposed for decommissioning
because it remains a non-deploying test ship that is no longer needed.
Continued retention of this ship imposes significant cost to upgrade it
to common configuration and capability with the rest of the Fleet. The
T-ESD ship class is less relevant for peer military competition, as
they were designed for non-contested environments to support ship-to-
shore craft movements. These T-ESDs support the maritime prepositioning
force. In the fiscal year 2023 budget, Maritime Preposition Squadron
Two will be placed into reduced operating status (ROS).
Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program (SIOP)
The Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program is essential to
supporting the future needs of the Navy's nuclear submarine and
aircraft carrier force. With the tremendous support received from
Congress, to include $1.6 billion appropriated in fiscal year 2022, the
program is advancing several key initiatives. The Navy appreciates the
Congressional support provided in the fiscal year 2022 appropriation to
derisk the construction schedule for the new Multi-Mission Dry Dock at
Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, critical for the east-coast maintenance
capability for the Virginia-class submarines. In fiscal year 2022, the
second increment of digital modeling will commence which will inform
project design and construction. Area Development Plans will be
completed at each public shipyard across the FYDP utilizing the digital
modeling output. Additionally, funds will be utilized to begin project
design for a Ford-capable dry dock at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
(PSNS), award the construction contract for DD8 Salt Water Upgrades at
Norfolk Naval Shipyard (NNSY), award several restoration and
modernization projects, and purchase capital equipment to replace aged
elements to revitalize maintenance shop capabilities. Funding requested
in fiscal year 2023 budget requests for SIOP includes $8.3 billion
across the FYDP, which includes construction start of a new Multi-
Mission Dry Dock at Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard, critical for the west-
coast maintenance capability of the Virginia-class submarines.
To ensure disciplined execution of construction efforts managed
within the program while maintaining uninterrupted support to the
Fleet, the DON has established a Program Executive Office for
Industrial Infrastructure (PEO II) affiliated with the Naval Facilities
Engineering Systems Command, and reporting directly to the Assistant
Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition. PEO
II and the Program Management Office (PMO 555) are implementing agile
acquisition methodologies to coordinate the programmatic execution of
this complex effort. PEO II also remains integrated with the Naval Sea
Systems Command and the Naval Sustainment System - Shipyards (NSS-SY)
efforts to ensure that required ship maintenance at the shipyards is
not impacted by SIOP efforts.
The program remains committed to applying lessons learned and, when
applicable, applying industry best practices to an iterative process
that utilizes industrial modeling and simulation data to inform program
decisions that can improve Fleet operational availabilities. This
process and ongoing coordination, across the major stakeholders, will
ensure that thoughtful and informed actions toward optimization are
made at the Nation's public shipyards. SIOP is creating momentum as a
cross-organizational initiative committed to creating predictable
delivery of critical infrastructure for the four public shipyards of
the future.
Unmanned Surface and Undersea Vehicles
The DON continues to experiment, develop and deliver unmanned
surface and undersea capabilities to augment the manned force. These
capabilities will increase capacity, standoff, reach, and protection of
our manned platforms.
The Navy's Medium and Large Unmanned Surface Vessels (MUSV/LUSV)
are a key element of the Future Surface Combatant Force that support
the NAVPLAN ``Capacity'' priority to deliver a larger, hybrid fleet of
manned and unmanned vessels. These USVs will expand Intelligence,
Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) advantage and add missile
magazine depth. Our fiscal year 2023 efforts will execute a deliberate
development plan to include reliable Hull, Mechanical and Electrical;
advanced networks and radios; common core USV Combat System; vessel
control software; sensory perception and autonomy; and platform and
payload prototyping.
In February 2022, the Navy assumed ownership of the two Strategic
Capabilities Office Overlord vessels for continued experimentation and
learning. Of significant note, the Navy accumulated over 4000 hours and
47,000 nautical miles of autonomous mode operations to include teaming
with other manned ships during fiscal year 2021 through March 2022.
Experimentation with the Overlord vessels will continue to inform
development of MUSV/LUSV.
By the end of fiscal year 2023, Navy will have an operational MUSV
Land Based Test Site, will have initiated LUSV land based testing, and
will operate six USV prototypes: three of the four Overlord USVs
(OUSV), one MUSV prototype, Sea Hunter and Sea Hawk. Additionally, the
first autonomy enabled EPF-13 will commence sea trials in July 2022 and
be delivered at the end of fiscal year 2022 to support EABO
experimentation and CONOPs development.
The MCM USV program includes the development and production of MCM
USV craft and Payload Delivery Systems to deliver multiple capabilities
to meet MCM Mission Package requirements. Mine sweeping is accomplished
leveraging the mature craft and sweep payload developed for the
Unmanned Influence Sweep System program that completed IOT&E in June
2021 and Underwater Explosive testing in the first quarter of fiscal
year 2022. Payload integration between the same mature craft and the
AN/AQS-20 towed sonar has completed and technical evaluation is
currently in progress, which will provide the mine hunting capability.
The Barracuda program is the future mine neutralizing capability in
early development, with plans to integrate onto the MCM USV.
The Navy continues to invest in a family of Unmanned Undersea
Vehicles (UUVs) to aid in maintaining undersea domain superiority.
These investments will expand Navy reach and persistence by augmenting
manned platform capacity with unmanned autonomous systems. The Navy has
begun fabrication of Orca, Extra Large Unmanned Undersea Vehicle
(XLUUV), a pier-launched UUV capable of carrying large payloads, and
anticipates delivery of the Test and Evaluation asset in Q3 of fiscal
year 2022. The Large Displacement Unmanned Undersea Vehicle which will
support Subsea and Seabed Warfare and Intelligence Preparation of the
Operating Environment capabilities delivered the first in class Phase 1
UUV in Q2 of fiscal year 2022, and has commenced in-water testing. The
Navy is taking a deliberate pause on LDUUV Phase 2 to realign Subsea
and Seabed Warfare and hostability requirements.
The Navy delivered the last three, of nine, Dry Deck Shelter
variant Razorbacks to UUVRON-1 in October 2021. These are the first
Program of Record submarine launched and recovered UUVs. A competitive
RFP was issued in fiscal year 2020 for production of a Medium UUV that
supports both the submarine torpedo tube launched and recovered
Razorback Intelligence Preparation of the Operating Environment
mission, as well as the Maritime Expeditionary MCM UUVs mission. The
Navy anticipates awarding an Engineering Development Model contract in
the third quarter of fiscal year 2022.
Lionfish is a small lightweight highly portable vehicle that can be
mission configured to support Explosive Ordnance Disposal and Naval
Special Warfare. This effort was a partnership with the Defense
Innovation Unit and used accelerated acquisition authorities such as
commercial solutions opening and other transactions. Lionfish will
include advancements to the artificial intelligence, machine learning
(AI/ML), Automated Target Recognition, and autonomy processes currently
fielded with the MK18 MOD2 UUV, expanding the capabilities of the
Navy's intelligent family of UUVs. The Navy anticipates awarding a
contract in the third quarter of fiscal year 2023 to procure 10
vehicles.
The Marine Corps' Long-Range Unmanned Surface Vessel (LRUSV),
approximately 45 feet in length, is intended to be capable of
conducting semi-autonomous maneuver in the open ocean for extended
periods of time. LRUSVs will be capable of launching the Organic
Precision Fires loitering munitions to engage targets on land and at
sea, and thus increase the effective range and lethality of formations,
such as the Marine Littoral Regiment. The Marine Corps' LRUSV and
Organic Precision Fires are specifically purposed to enhance Naval and
Joint Force Commanders' sea denial campaigns. Through prototyping,
experimentation, and working closely with program vendors, the Marine
Corps will ensure delivered capabilities are in line with funded
requirements. The Marine Corps has accepted the first of five LRUSV
prototypes for experimentation and analysis, and the Marine Corps
anticipates receiving additional prototypes in the 3rd quarter of
fiscal year 2022 for continued testing and refinement.
The DON is continuing to invest in foundational enabling
technologies in fiscal year 2023. These include autonomy, command and
control, energy, and payloads, as well as establishing the
interoperable standards and open architectures for ease of technology
transition.
Combat Systems
The Department continues to field the most capable and lethal
surface and submarine combat systems in the world. AEGIS Baseline 9
delivers unprecedented offensive and defensive capabilities, including
simultaneous air and ballistic missile defense on destroyers and AMDC
capability on cruisers. AEGIS Baseline 10 (BL10) with AN/SPY-6 will
provide significant performance improvements over Baseline 9 with its
AN/SPY-1D(V) radar, expanding the sensor coverage and enhancing the
Navy's ability to perform the IAMD mission to defeat more advanced and
more numerous threats with the integration of the AN/SPY-6(V)1 AMD
system. Integration includes using a BL10 Virtualized AEGIS Weapon
System at the AMDR test site in Hawaii, as well as BL10 integrated
development and testing with the low-rate initial production AMDR
system installed in the New Jersey development site.
Traditional AEGIS development has been aligned to new construction
platforms or major modernization efforts. Navy's shift to open
architectures seeks to take full advantage of evolving technology to
rapidly deliver real-time and reliable capability to the warfighter and
to break the paradigm of hardware-software dependent deliveries. The
current method of combat system delivery, takes 4 to 8 years to deliver
and is tied to specific hardware set limiting proliferation to a low
percentage of the fleet. By employing proven industry standards of
Infrastructure as a Service, Platform as a Service, and Software as a
Service, Navy will be able to support the delivery of iterative updates
to the AEGIS Weapon System at speed and scale. The Navy will also
continue investment into its first combat system software factory, The
Forge, which will enable rapid innovation and delivery of combat system
improvements to the fleet. Work in this area is foundational to
developing the future Integrated Combat System. As Navy continues these
developmental efforts, new construction and in-service Aegis Baseline 9
and 10 ships will receive predictable upgrades in the form of
Capability Packages.
The Navy continues to equip its submarines with ever-evolving
undersea combat systems, utilizing the Submarine Warfare Federated
Tactical Systems (SWFTS) modernization process for hardware Technology
Insertions and Advanced Processing Build software upgrades. This
process leverages commercial off-the-shelf technologies to provide
advanced capability improvements at lower cost. SWFTS has successfully
delivered a progression in warfighting capabilities for decades to our
Fleet SSNs, SSGNs and SSBNs including advancements in the combat,
sonar, electronic warfare, and imaging systems. SWFTS delivers the
first TI-20 installs to the Fleet in fiscal year 2022, which brings
added capability and improved system architecture, strengthens
cybersecurity and integrates new payload capabilities to provide
increased lethality. The fiscal year 2023 budget supports continued
implementation of Agile and DevSecOps software development best
practices at SWFTS vendors to increase quality, expedite capability
delivery, and improve cybersecurity by engraining cyber resiliency into
the system architecture. These efforts improve the Fleet's ability to
protect against known threats, detect unknown threats when they occur,
and respond and recover quickly to an operational state.
tactical aviation
Carrier Air Wing (CVW)
The striking power of the CVW remains the cornerstone of power
projection capability from 11 of the world's most survivable airfields,
our aircraft carriers. The current CVW is transitioning to an optimal
mix of 4th and 5th Generation strike fighter aircraft that incorporate
advanced capabilities to support the objectives of the NDS. 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 Department has appropriate levers in
place to manage the strike fighter inventory through ongoing F-35C
production and F/A-18E/F SLM. Currently while the gap is not eliminated
there are sufficiently funded resources and levers to support Global
Force Management and operational capability through the FYDP.
The Navy continues to accelerate development of the Next Generation
Air Dominance (NGAD) Family of Systems (FoS) to provide advanced,
carrier-based power projection capabilities that extend the range of
our carriers. The NGAD FoS will replace the F/A-18E/F Block II aircraft
as they begin to reach end of service life in the 2030s and leverage
Manned-Unmanned Teaming (MUM-T) in order to provide increased lethality
and survivability. F/A-XX is the strike fighter component of the NGAD
FoS that will be the ``Quarterback'' of the MUM-T concept, directing
multiple tactical platforms at the leading edge of the battlespace. In
fiscal year 2021, F/A-XX began the Concept Refinement Phase and it
remains on schedule. The Navy will continue collaboration between
Government and industry teams to develop vendor concepts that balance
advanced air dominance capabilities and long-term affordability.
Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) Aviation Combat Element (ACE)
The MEU Aviation Combat Element (ACE) remains a uniquely critical
and capable component of our national strategic demand for forward
presence, crisis response, power projection, and theater security
cooperation. The ACE is a capable and lethal forward-deployed, sea-
based, expeditionary force that can operate across the range of
military operations with a tailorable and uniquely suited complement of
aircraft. The current MEU ACE is built around a squadron of MV-22B
tiltrotor aircraft that deliver unmatched combat range and airspeed
unlike any current vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aircraft. The
capabilities offered by the new CH-53K heavy-lift platform allows the
MEU ACE to organically support a wide variety of assault support
missions and contingency operations to meet Combatant Commander needs.
The future ACE will also feature a Group 3 UAS capability that provide
both an organic land- and maritime-based intelligence, surveillance,
and reconnaissance capability. The fixed wing component of the MEU ACE
is continuing to transition to the F-35B that incorporates advanced
capabilities to support the objectives of the NDS. The Navy and Marine
Corps team is actively validating innovative concepts of employment of
the F-35B on our amphibious fleet.
The future Marine ACE, much like the CVW, will leverage MUM-T to
provide increased lethality and survivability through the Autonomous
Collaborative Platform (ACP). The Marine Corps is actively working
collaboration between Government and industry to develop and refine
concepts through analytical simulation to balance advanced air
dominance capabilities and long-term affordability within the ACP
program.
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
ultimately replace the legacy ALQ-99 Tactical Jamming System in the
middle frequency range on the EA-18G and provide full spectrum
integrated non-kinetic effects. The delivery of NGJ increases EA-18G
Growler's 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.
The NGJ-Mid-Band (NGJ-MB) program is in the completion phase of
Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD), and completed Milestone
C in May 2021. NGJ-Low-Band (NGJ-LB) successfully completed Milestone B
and awarded an EMD contract in December 2020, which includes the
delivery of eight operational prototypes. This contracting effort
remains on hold as the protest process works through the courts.
airborne command and control aircraft
The E-2D Advanced Hawkeye (AHE) is the Navy's carrier-based
Airborne Command and Control aircraft, equipped with an advanced
airborne radar, aerial refueling capability, 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.
The fifth Full Rate Production Lot 6 aircraft was delivered in
December 2021, completing the MYP contract. Modernization priorities
focus on Fleet capabilities to pace the threat, including
Interoperability, Crypto Modernization, Communication and Navigation
Hardware; essential Command and Control; networking and sensor
performance capabilities that are critical enablers to Naval Integrated
Fire Control (NIFC); vital upgrades and improvements to enable Joint
All-Domain Command & Control (JADC2) and Naval Operational Architecture
(NOA) [Theater Combat ID (TCID) and Hawkeye Cockpit Technical Refresh
(HECTR)]. These modernization efforts are interdependent and required
to keep pace with the rapidly advancing JADC2 environment and equally
rapidly advancing adversary capability.
assault support and logistics support aircraft
Tiltrotor 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 fiscal year 2022 budget added
substantial Congressional funding to the U.S. Air Force (USAF) for
Nacelle Improvement implementation, successfully accelerating the
timeline for this readiness- and reliability-enhancing effort within
our sister service. The Marine Corps is working to coordinate and fund
an acceleration commensurate with new USAF timelines to ensure a smooth
transition between service tiltrotor aircraft, and preservation of an
uninterrupted production line.
The Navy is leveraging MV-22 investments to recapitalize the legacy
C-2 fleet with CMV-22B aircraft in support of strike group logistics.
The program declared IOC in December 2021, completed its inaugural
deployment in support of the USS Carl Vinson carrier strike group (CSG)
in February 2022, and is already underway on its second deployment in
support of the USS Abraham Lincoln CSG.
The fiscal year 2023 budget requests $125.2 million in RDT&E for
continued V-22 development and product improvements, including a Helmet
Mounted Display/Degraded Visual Environment to improve pilot situation
awareness and safety in degraded visual environments. Fiscal year 2023
also includes $207.6 million in APN for long-lead materials,
modifications, common configuration, and nacelle improvements. The
program is funded for 359 MV-22 aircraft for the Marine Corps and 44
CMV-22 aircraft for the Navy. Fiscal year 2022 was the last year of V-
22 procurement under MYP III and Bell Boeing intends to initiate V-22
production line shutdown activities if no additional V-22 orders are
received.
CH-53K
Having completed IOT&E, and with declaration of IOC soon to follow,
the CH-53K will support Marine Corps operational concepts as the only
fully marinized heavy lift helicopter in the DOD. Work to date has
expanded the CH-53K's envelope through ground and flight testing and
analysis, and has incorporated impressive real-world use of the
aircraft to recover a downed Navy H-60, weighing 15,500 pounds, from an
altitude of 12,000 feet in the mountains of California in September
2021. CH-53Ks continue to fly with Marine Operational Test & Evaluation
Squadron 1 and are assigned to Marine Heavy Helicopter Squadron 461,
the first fleet squadron to transition, preparing to support MEU
deployments. A contract to procure the sixth Low Rate Initial
Production Lot of nine aircraft was signed in January 2022.
The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget requests $220.2 million in
RDT&E to continue the CH-53K development and test, and $2.1 billion in
APN for procurement of 10 Full Rate Production aircraft, initial
spares, and modifications.
executive support aircraft
The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget requests $45.6 million in
RDT&E for VH-92A Helicopter Improvements and $55.3 million APN for
Executive Helicopter Series (VH-3D, VH-60N and VH-92A). RDT&E funding
is required for continued VH-92A improvements and follow-on test and
evaluation activities. These efforts include VH-92A Mission
Communications System upgrades to both software and hardware,
enhancements to required Wide Band Line Of Sight capabilities, test
aircraft and facilities; and test and evaluation efforts for
distributed network communications, high-hot aircraft performance
enhancements and cockpit upgrades. APN in the amount of $55.3 million
is required for retrofit modifications to the VH-92A Mission
Communications System and continued modifications to the VH-3D and VH-
60N to ensure communications interoperability through the remainder of
the lifecycle.
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 has the highest deploy-to-dwell ratio in the Marine
Corps, as it provides critical tactical air-to-air refueling and
organic lift capabilities to deployed MEUs and future Marine Littoral
Regiments. The fiscal year 2023 budget requests $468.6 million in APN
to procure five KC-130Js through a USAF contract. These aircraft will
be fielded to a new Marine Corps active-duty squadron in Hawaii and
support mobility in the Indo-Pacific region.
take charge and move out (tacamo)
The Navy's TACAMO nuclear command, control and communications (NC3)
mission provides assured communications to the nuclear triad through
all phases of conflict and is a vital link to the Navy's SSBN fleet,
the most survivable leg of the triad. Currently flown on the aging E-6B
Mercury (Boeing 707 airframe), TACAMO recapitalization will be
developed for the C-130J-30 (stretched Super Hercules) aircraft. TACAMO
mission systems will be developed and integrated by a third-party
contractor. In fiscal year 2023, the Navy will invest $554.2 million of
RDT&E toward platform development and complete Milestone B. Funding
in fiscal year 2023 includes $395.2 million to fully fund the
procurement of three C-130J-30 test aircraft, $74.5 million for non-
recurring engineering contracts on the C-130J airframe, and $26.3
million for very low frequency transmit system modernization.
Investments in fiscal year 2023 set the stage for a successful
Milestone B and subsequent mission integration. Integration of the
TACAMO mission on the C-130J-30 leverages a proven platform and the
mature TACAMO capabilities to support U.S. nuclear deterrence and
Columbia's assured second strike for decades to come.
maritime patrol aircraft
The P-8A Poseidon is the U.S. Navy's multi-mission maritime patrol
and reconnaissance aircraft. The P-8A incorporates the commercial 737
airframes with modern avionics, military communications, and advanced
sensors and weapons to provide a range of advanced warfighting
capabilities. The P-8A consists of three Increments, ensuring the Navy
paces the undersea threat and supports distributed net-centric maritime
operations. Increments 1 and 2 have fielded and Increment 3 is
scheduled to IOC in fiscal year 2026. Increment 3, which consists of
ECP 6 and ECP 7, increases ASW capabilities including ASW Signal
Intelligence, Wideband SATCOM, Higher-Than-Secret processing, enhanced
track management and sensor fusion (Minotaur), and Enhanced Multi-
Static Active Coherent (MAC-E). The first P-8A test aircraft completed
the ECP 6 modification in March 2022 to support developmental and
operational testing beginning in fiscal year 2022. ECP 7 (MAC-E)
integration will occur prior to developmental testing.
The fiscal year 2023 budget request includes $161.7 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 $249.3 million in APN for fleet modification kits,
deficiency corrections, safety upgrades, and production line shutdown
activities. Boeing intends to initiate P-8A production line shutdown
activities in fiscal year 2022 if no additional FMS P-8A orders are
received. As of April 2022, 110 U.S. aircraft have been delivered.
unmanned aircraft systems (uas)
Naval Aviation continues to integrate unmanned systems into the
Fleet to enable a fundamental shift in the way the DON conducts naval
aviation operations. Broadening unmanned aviation efforts will decrease
risk to personnel, allow 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.
MQ-25A Unmanned Carrier Aviation
MQ-25A will increase the strike range, capability, and lethality of
the CVW through organic mission and recovery tanking, and provide an
ISR capability to the CSG. As the primary CVW mission and recovery
tanker, MQ-25A will increase available CVW Strike Fighter assets,
preserve F/A-18E/F Fatigue Life Expenditure. MQ-25 is integral to the
Air Wing of the Future and establishes the foundation for MUM-T and
autonomous operations from the CVN. The fiscal year 2023 budget
continues investment in MQ-25 and the Unmanned Carrier Aviation Mission
Control System (UMCS) development and begins testing of Navy MQ-25A
while beginning LRIP of four MQ-25A air vehicles to increase fleet
inventory. MQ-25A will IOC in late 2025. The fiscal year 2023 budget
request supports the start of procurement for the MQ-25 Stingray with
$799.7 million in APN and continues RDTE funding with $266 million.
MQ-4C Triton
The MQ-4C Triton is a persistent force multiplier that delivers
unprecedented situational awareness of the battle space to shorten the
sensor-to-shooter decision loop in the maritime and littoral
battlespace. In 2020 two MQ-4C Triton IFC-3 variants deployed to
INDOPACOM providing theater Maritime ISR coverage, executing 140 ISR
missions and 3500 flight hours. One MQ-4C Triton IFC-3 remains flying
in SEVENTH Fleet executing tasking of eight ISR flights per month.
Multi-INT Operational Test and Evaluation and IOC are planned for
fiscal year 2023. The fiscal year 2023 budget requests $663.1 million
in APN to continue procurement of three MQ-4 Tritons, and $13.9 million
in RDTE, with an additional $163.3 million for RQ-4 modernization RDTE.
MQ-9A
The Marine Corps is adjusting to meet future operating environments
that require leveraging uncrewed aerial systems at the tactical to
strategic level. As a critical enabler within the MAGTF and Naval
Expeditionary Force, MQ-9A squadrons will provide persistent
communications extension, airborne early warning, maritime domain
awareness, and electronic warfare support. As the Marine Corps builds
the Unmanned Aerial Squadron of the future, the Marine Corps seeks
funding for the required aircraft, ground control stations, spares, and
support equipment across the next several years. Existing U.S. Air
Force efforts are being leveraged actively throughout this process to
reduce cost and risk, while providing advanced capabilities to the
Marine Corps and the overall joint warfighting enterprise. Future
potential mission sets for Marine Corps uncrewed systems include
offensive air support and tactical transportation capabilities.
weapons programs
Missile Programs
As the Navy carefully manages the approach to end of life of Ohio-
class SSBNs, addressing the viability of the Strategic Weapons System
(SWS) throughout the life of the Columbia-class SSBNs remains a
priority. The currently deployed TRIDENT II D5LE missiles will support
initial load-outs of early Columbia hulls, but production of additional
D5LE missiles is not practical due to technological obsolescence and an
atrophied industrial base. Modernization of the SWS, D5LE2, is required
to maintain the Sea Based Strategic Deterrent starting with the ninth
Columbia-class submarine by ensuring sufficient missile inventory and
seamlessly supporting USSTRATCOM requirements. D5LE2 incorporates the
necessary flexibility and adaptability needed to maintain demonstrated
performance and survivability in the dynamic threat environment until
Columbia-class end of life. The Administrations' recently released
Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) states that D5LE2 needs to begin deploying
on Columbia-class in the late 2030s in order to sustain sufficient
missile inventories to support the U.S. sea-based strategic deterrent
as well as the United Kingdom's independent nuclear deterrent. The Navy
will prioritize near-term investments in accordance with the NPR to
ensure that D5LE2 is effective in the expected threat environment and
delivers on time.
Standard Missile-6 (SM-6) is the Navy's primary air defense weapon
for surface combatants providing increased battlespace against threats
over-the-horizon. SM-6 leverages the proven SM-2 propulsion and
ordnance sections, and adds a modified Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air
Missile active seeker and booster for extended ranges. Each new Block
brings additional capabilities and mission sets. The Navy awarded a
five-year MYP contract for up to 625 SM-6 missiles in December 2019.
The fiscal year 2023 President's budget continues funding for the
upgraded SM-2 Block IIIC. The program is anticipated to achieve an
Initial Capability in fiscal year 2022 and plans to transition from a
rapid prototyping project exercising middle tier authorities into a
Major Capability Acquisition in the second quarter of fiscal year 2023.
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, which integrates a new government developed rocket motor with
an existing SM-6 Block IA seeker, transitioned from a rapid prototyping
effort to Major Capability acquisition and has been designated as major
subprogram to the existing SM-6 ACAT IC program. The program intends to
complete development, integration, and test efforts to field a cost-
effective extended range capability in fiscal year 2027.
ESSM provides another layer to the Navy's defensive battle-space.
ESSM Block 2 is in Low Rate Production and declared IOC in December
2021. The inner layer of the Fleet's layered defense is the Rolling
Airframe Missile. The RAM Block 2B includes hardware and software
updates to counter complex raid scenarios, upgraded IR seeker to
enhance multi-object and closely-spaced object discrimination, a
missile-to-missile link, and an improvement in firepower. RAM Block 2B
is on track to declare IOC in fiscal year 2024.
Strike Weapons
The DON continues to focus on delivering a strong balance of
offensive strike weapons by maintaining the readiness of our strike
weapons inventories, enhancing capacity and performance of existing
strike weapons, and developing next-generation strike missile
capabilities. Through these efforts, the DON will increase overall
force effectiveness and continue to address emerging threats from
adversarial forces.
Tomahawk
In the fiscal year 2023 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 of and
recertification of current inventory into modernized BLK V Tomahawk
missiles. BLK V(a) Maritime Strike Tomahawk (MST) provides a long range
moving maritime strike capability to meet current and future threats,
supporting the Surface Warfare Mission area through the inclusion of a
seeker suite in the Tomahawk BLK V missile. The fiscal year 2023 budget
request for MST provides continuation of Test and Evaluation (T&E)
plans that 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
fiscal year 2025. The fiscal year 2023 budget request continues
engineering, manufacturing, and development of the Joint Multiple-
Effects Warhead System (JMEWS), which will deliver a hardened target
penetration capability with the Tomahawk BLK V(b) missile in fiscal
year 2027. The fiscal year 2023 budget request continues engineering,
manufacturing, and development of the Military Code Global Positioning
System (GPS) receiver, which will deliver significant increased
resiliency in spoofing and jamming threat environments capability to
the Tomahawk BLK V missile in fiscal year 2026.
Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare (OASuW) Increment 1/ Long Range Anti-
Ship Missile (LRASM), OASuW Increment 2
The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget requests $226.0 million to
fund Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) efforts associated with
filling congressionally directed Operational Testing, which includes
telemetry kit installations and test support. Fiscal year 2023 also
funds procurement and installations of updated Weapon Data Link to
satisfy compliance of NSA crypto modification mandate, and procures 60
DON LRASM weapon systems. The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget also
requests $12.8 million for completion of the LRASM 1.1 capability
improvements.
The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget requests New Start
authority to begin Technology Development in support of OASuW Increment
2, now referred as Hypersonic Air Launched OASuW (HALO). HALO supports
the national imperative to mature hypersonic capabilities. The program
represents a longer-term capability that encompasses increased
performance and will provide the Navy a necessary air launched, carrier
based weapon to address evolving long range high speed threats from
near peer competitors. In order to deliver this capability to the
warfighter when needed, the Navy will collaborate heavily with the
USAF.
Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM) & AARGM Extended-Range
AARGM procurement completed in fiscal year 2021 with the award of
the last DON Full Rate Production (FRP) contract. There have been 1366
AARGMs (All Up Rounds, Training Missiles, and Spares) delivered to the
Fleet (as of March 2022). Program of record delivery is 1803 missiles.
Deliveries continue through fiscal year 2024 in support of the
transition to AARGM-ER. AARGM-ER provides the DON with a 5th generation
compatible extended range asset to project power and provide
Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses, both at-sea and on land. The fiscal
year 2023 President's Budget requests $90.8 million in RDT&E to support
operational and Integration testing of production representative
hardware. The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget requests $131.3
million in WPN to procure 69 AARGM-ER All Up Rounds and six Captive Air
Training Missiles.
Hypersonic Program
U.S. near-peer competitors have weaponized and fielded hypersonic
missile systems, creating warfighting asymmetry that must be addressed.
The 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
All Up Rounds missile design and test opportunities to field a non-
nuclear hypersonic weapon system. Zumwalt-class DDGs will be the first
Navy platform to field this hypersonic capability in the mid-2020's,
followed by Block V Virginia-class SSNs in the late-2020's. In March
2020, the Services executed a highly successful flight test of the
Common Hypersonic Glide Body (CHGB), and in 2021 successfully conducted
three static fire tests of the newly developed Two Stage Solid Rocket
Motor, tests to validate the Navy's launch approach, and tests of
advanced capability for future insertion into the CHGB. The first
flight testing of the common All Up Rounds is scheduled to occur in
fiscal year 2022. This rapid development and demonstration of
hypersonic strike weapon systems supports the U.S. ability to deter,
and if necessary, defeat potential adversaries. The Department's fiscal
year 2023 budget begins procurement of the first three All Up Rounds to
be delivered to the first Zumwalt-class DDG in fiscal year 2025 as well
as two test rounds to support the Joint Flight Campaign. The request
totals $1.2 billion in CPS RDTE. $18.6 million in funding is also
dedicated to building supply chain resilience for hypersonic weapons
components.
Navy Laser Weapons
The Navy is continuing its path forward for shipboard integration
of High Energy Laser (HEL) systems, pursuing multiple projects to
accelerate fleet integration with initial capabilities, assess
operational concepts and platform options through experimentation,
mature advanced technologies, perform lethality assessments against
anti-ship missiles, and inform development of requirements for future
acquisition. 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. Future Navy surface combatants, FFG-62 and DDG (X), have
included space, weight and power reservations to accommodate high power
lasers systems. DDG(X) design includes reservations to accommodate HEL
systems with power levels capable of countering ASCMs in a self-defense
role when those systems are mature and proven.
In the fiscal year 2023 budget request, the Department will further
advance capabilities of laser weapons to meet ship defense missions,
installing an eighth Optical Dazzling Interdictor, Navy (ODIN) system
on DDG 51 Flight IIA ships. Additionally, the first fully combat system
integrated laser weapons system, HELIOS, onboard a DDG 51 Flight IIA
destroyer will be fielded. The DON will continue collaboration and
partnering with the DOD and other Services to mature these advanced
laser technologies and increase power scaling to defeat more
challenging threats to support and shape the future acquisition of
these systems.
Torpedoes
The Department is investing heavily in increasing the capacity and
capability of both the Heavyweight and Lightweight Torpedo inventories
to maintain our advantage in the undersea domain against our strategic
competitors. The MK48 Heavyweight Torpedo is the Navy's primary
submarine-launched ASW and ASuW weapon. The Department is increasing
both production of the MK48 MOD 7 and development of new capabilities
with the MK 48 MOD 8 and MK48 MOD 9 to maintain our advantage over the
threat today and in the future. The MK54 Lightweight Torpedo, which is
employed by both surface ships and aviation ASW assets, continues to be
produced and upgraded to keep pace with the ASW threat. Production of
the upgraded MK54 MOD 1 continues, and development of the MK54 MOD 2 is
underway to rapidly meet the high-end threat. The Department is also
investing in developing a Very Light
Weight Torpedo capability to further our advantage in the undersea
domain. The Compact Rapid Attack Weapon will deliver multi-mission
capability as both a hard-kill torpedo countermeasure and a short range
ASW weapon. These investments are critical to the Navy's efforts to
prepare for both today's fight and the future fight, where ASW and
submarine ASuW are vital to our warfighting readiness.
marine corps ground programs
Fiscal year 2023 USMC investments enable the Marine Corps to close
kill webs and deter strategic competitors. Some of the programs are
emerging, while others are more mature in the acquisitions process.
Maintaining momentum for the Marine Corps' modernization efforts
expedites the USMC's ability to meet the requirements for critical
warfighting concepts, such as A Concept for Stand-in Forces. Proactive
modernization, balanced with the readiness needed to ``fight tonight,''
will ensure the Marine Corps remains a naval expeditionary force-in-
readiness. This budget provides a relevant and modern force that can
sense, make sense, and act today and in the future in support of Naval
and Joint campaigns.
Navy/Marine Corps Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System (NMESIS)
In this budget request, the Navy/Marine Corps Expeditionary Ship
Interdiction System (NMESIS) continues to be the Marine Corps' top
modernization priority and is the critical lethality component to our
anti-ship missile capability. In conflict, NMESIS will allow the Stand-
in Force to deny or protect key maritime terrain from the enemy.
Additionally, this system can be employed to herd the enemy into areas
where Joint and Coalition forces can exploit their relative advantages.
NMESIS will create cost impositions for adversaries by introducing a
credible threat into their decision-making at a relatively low cost to
U.S. Forces.
The NMESIS consists of two NSMs mounted on a remotely operated
Joint Light Tactical Vehicle-based chassis. Due to the mature
technology in NMESIS, the Marine Corps has reduced programmatic risks.
Indicative of this, the Marine Corps has successfully tested NMESIS
twice, once in November 2020 and more recently in August 2021. Given
the performance metrics over the last two years of testing, we believe
NMESIS will have immediate effects in the operational environment. This
year's budget request builds the NMESIS launcher and missile capacity.
Organic Precision Fires (OPF)
Organic Precision Fires (OPF) will provide multiple echelons of the
Fleet Marine Force with an organic, loitering, beyond line-of-sight
precision strike capability. The system is comprised of a surveillance
capability, separate loitering munitions, and a command and control
station. OPF will provide continuous surveillance before, during, and
after conducting lethal strikes. OPF offers Marines less exposure to
enemy fires by offering range outside of adversary direct fire weapons.
The associated loitering munitions will have sufficient lethality to
defeat armored, water-borne, and personnel threats. Funding requests
will continue to support testing, experimentation, and user evaluations
with Organic Precision Fires prototypes.
Ground/Air Task-Oriented Radar (G/ATOR)
The Ground/Air Task-Oriented Radar (G/ATOR) is a proven platform
that continues to exceed expectations. G/ATOR is a multi-role, ground-
based, 3D radar system that is designed to detect air threats, rockets,
missiles, and mortars, while aiding in the performance of air traffic
control mission sets. The radar is transportable by organic Marine
Corps means and provides a significant ``engage on remote'' capability
in support of Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations. The Marine Corps
has fielded these radars throughout the force, with several located in
the Indo-Pacific region.
The Marine Corps, as the forward element of the Joint force,
continues to invest in and improve the sensor capabilities of G/ATOR.
In 2021, at the Army's Project Convergence exercise, G/ATOR
successfully integrated with and supported a Navy-Marine Corps live-
fire kill-chain event. This is yet another meaningful step towards
greater Naval integration and adding existing Marine Corps platforms to
the Joint and Naval IAMD mission. The Office of Naval Research (ONR)
also developed an advanced, complementary system to the G/ATOR, the
Multi-Domain Radar for a Contested Environment (MuDRaCE). ONR is
maturing the technology and will transition this capability to the
Marine Corps for incorporation as a program of record.
Marine Air-Ground Task Force (MAGTF) Electronic Warfare Ground Family
of Systems (MEGFoS)
The MAGTF Electronic Warfare Ground Family of Systems (MEGFoS) is
an electromagnetic warfare (EW) system designed to advance our
capabilities in the electromagnetic domain. MEGFoS protects friendly
spectrum access, senses spectrum usage, and provides a means for
disrupting an adversary's decision-making cycle. MEGFoS is comprised of
three variants--mounted, dismounted, and team portable. All three
variants are networked and able to share data and coordinate EW
missions with one another. In the 1st quarter of fiscal year 2022, the
Marine Corps began experimentation with a prototype of the MEGFoS team-
portable variant. In this year's budget request, the Marine Corps is
seeking to procure a mixture of mounted, dismounted, and team-portable
systems.
Networking On The Move (NOTM)
Network on the Move (NOTM) is a satellite communications (SATCOM)-
based command and control system mounted on a ground combat vehicle or
aviation platform. NOTM provides terrestrial line-of-sight and beyond
line-of-sight communications for Marines at-the-halt and while on-the-
move. The system is purpose built for Marines fighting in a distributed
manner, in alignment with naval and joint concepts, to effectively
command and control forces in a contested all-domain environment. The
Marine Corps continues to procure and field these systems to
distributed Fleet Marine Force units, enabling command and control, now
and in the future.
Senator Hirono. Thank you.
So, Mr. Secretary, in my opening statement I referred to
the fact that you are responsible for acquisition and
sustainment matters, to include maintenance and the importance
of our maintenance availability, in both the private and public
shipyards. What have you done since the last year to improve
the performance of ship maintenance programs and to keep
individual overhauls from being late?
Mr. Stefany. Yes, ma'am. So we have taken a multiple-
pronged approach. We started with the planning phase and we are
putting more resources into planning up front for an
availability, getting the work packages defined, getting the
long-lead material bought sooner in the process than we have in
the past.
In the contracting phase, we have moved to what we call an
A-minus-120, where we try to award the contracts--I am talking
about private shipyards now--120 days before the availability,
to give the contractor a chance to get up to speed and
understand the work before we get into the actual project. Then
we have really done a focused effort, what we call ``plan to
perform'' of what are the key criteria for the success of an
availability, and then make sure we understand the levers that
we would pull in order to be able to succeed, what are the key
things, and make sure we are focusing on the most important
data to be able to effect the availability once it has started.
Except for the contracting part, ma'am, we are doing the
same type of items on the public shipyards as well. Looking at
the availability of equipment up front at the public shipyards
and then doing that ``plan to perform'' process, where we are
really pulling the thread hard on processes within those
shipyards.
Senator Hirono. So, Mr. Secretary, as with the shipbuilding
side, on the maintenance and repair side, you are probably
seeing issues of workers, not enough trained workers, and
supply chain issues. So what specifically are you doing to
address those particular problems?
Mr. Stefany. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Hirono. On the shipyard, the repair side.
Mr. Stefany. Yes. On the repair side, yes, we are seeing
both supply chain delays due to COVID impacts as well as
workforce, where we are not having the workforce that we need
appear, and it is happening in new construction as well, so
your point is very valid.
We are working with the shipyards, regional shipyard
associations, on pipelines for future workforce, to try to get
skilled workers from out of the colleges and trade schools into
the trade. That is a longer-term thing. It is not happening
immediately. But we are seeing younger folks coming into the
business through the trade schools we have set up. For the
actual work, we actually are, I will say, illuminating. We have
tools to illuminate where our supply chain is really having
trouble and trying to attack that in advance, ma'am.
Senator Hirono. So I think that the lack of trained workers
has been an issue long before COVID, and it has been
exacerbated by COVID. So I hope that you are doing something to
turbocharge the focus on recruiting and retention, shipyard
works, both on the shipbuilding side as well as on the repair
side. I do not have the answers to the lack of workers, but it
is a major concern ongoing. So you are going to get asked those
questions every time you come before either SASC or this
Subcommittee.
There is going to be a gap in the number of America-class
LHAs, the amphibious ships. So my information is after the
force total of the 11 originally planned is finished in 2023,
then you are not going to get any more of these LHAs for
another 8 years or so. Was that a budget decision, and if so,
what happens when you need to resume production or construction
of these LHAs and then the shipyard is going to have to ramp
up? What happens regarding the construction of these ships at
that point, what that kind of a long gap?
Mr. Stefany. Yes, ma'am. Quickly, on the last one, for
workforce we do have funding in the 2023 budget to actually go
and try to accelerate those workforce development programs. I
just wanted to finish that last question.
With this question, ma'am, yes, the LHA-type ships, about 5
years apart. We call it 5-year centers. So the previous ship
was in 2023, and the next ship, most efficiently, would be
built in 2028. It is affordability reason of why it is not in
as a 2028 ship. It is just in the overall budget, why it is
sitting out there in 2031. But we will relook at that in the
coming budget cycle, ma'am.
Senator Hirono. I would ask that you do that.
I have a lot of other questions and I will probably do a
second round, but I will turn to Senator Cramer.
Senator Cramer. Thanks, Chairwoman, and since you have
primed the pump so nicely on shipbuilding strategies let's hang
out there for a little bit and maybe drill down a little more,
because I appreciated many of the questions.
Let's see. Mr. Stefany, I said there are five shipbuilding
issues, so I will try to tackle them one at a time here in the
first round.
First of all--and by the way, thank you for the DDG(X)
acquisition report that you delivered last week. Can you
elaborate a little bit on the benefits, potential benefits of,
and the Navy's interest in maximizing collaboration and design
and early construction between Ingalls shipbuilding, Bath Iron
Works, and the Navy for DDG(X) program? Explain why that makes
sense.
Mr. Stefany. Yes, sir, and it is what we have learned on
the submarine program, frankly, where the shipyards working
together with the Navy we get the best breed. We get the best
engineers and the best planners at both shipyards, working with
the Navy to lay out those original specs and to lay out the
plan for building it. Which shipyard maybe can do this better,
what can do that better, and we take the strengths of each.
The other part is we do not have downtime, where we have
competitive pressures, where the companies have to go apart, in
their separate corners, and do a bidding process. We can
continue the design spirals until we can get to the
construction of those first two ships. Again, we have committed
that each shipyard will be involved in the construction, and so
knowing we are going to have them involved, having both
companies working together on the best product, using a single
design tool, a single computer-based model, is what we have
seen in the Virginia program as the best way to design and
build, at least build the initial ships of a new, from-scratch
program, sir.
Senator Cramer. Sure. So let's then talk about multi-ship
acquisition and procurement as well. So there are eight Lewis-
class oilers to be procured in fiscal year 2022 through 2027.
It seems like a good opportunity to provide stability to the
industry, including workforce, and save some money through the
multi-ship procurement, including economic order quantity
authorities.
Can you support an approach like this, and can you provide
a rough estimate of what maybe could be saved with an approach
like that?
Mr. Stefany. Yes, sir. I would say from an acquisition
point of view, absolutely. Buying eight ship sets worth of
equipment at the same time, from an economic quantity and items
like that would be the most efficient way to buy it. I think
when we looked at the amphibious ship multi-ship it was about a
7 percent savings, and that was with two different kinds of
ships. So I would expect in this case we would see more than 7
percent, because they are all the same type of ship, right. But
I can take for the record, sir, an actual estimate for you.
Senator Cramer. No, that sounds great. Thank you.
So the chairwoman brought up the issue of workforce. I want
to spend a little bit of time on that as well. Is workforce one
of the reasons that this budget shows a Virginia-class
submarine? Construction durations are extended by 2 years. Is
that fair?
Mr. Stefany. That is one of a number of reasons, but
probably the primary reason, sir, yes.
Senator Cramer. So when you talked about workforce
development programs, tell me about opportunities that might
exist for--by the way, I am a former state economic development
director. I know you think you knew everything about me. I knew
you wanted to know that. So unfortunately, in North Dakota, we
just do not have any shipbuilders, so I was thinking that if I
was the head of economic development somewhere, what kind of
incentives can we do together--local state, you know, along
with whatever incentives. When I say ``we,'' the Federal
Government could provide. I am sure you have thought through
this a couple of times.
Mr. Stefany. Yes we have, sir, and even before COVID and
our recent issues, local companies with local governments,
Senator Kaine and the Virginia waterfront, very, very active,
even before we had the COVID-type issues.
What we are looking at going forward, though, is to take
that across other parts of the country. I think we have--I will
not say ``tapped out'' but we have kind of maxed out the
Virginia and up in Connecticut, that area of the country, from
the skilled workers, so we want to expand out to other parts of
the country. We have started programs in Danville, Virginia, in
Pennsylvania, in the Philadelphia area, that would take local
city, state, as well as the Navy working together to come up
with pipelines of non-traditional pipelines.
Now, sir, we are just now starting to look at, with the
influx from Afghanistan and Ukraine coming into the United
States, potentially there are skilled workers there as well,
that we could take advantage of, sir.
Senator Cramer. I appreciate that. Well, I am near the end
of my time so I will reserve my next question about the double
accounting issue that I brought earlier for you in Round 2.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Hirono. Senator Kaine.
Senator Kaine. Thank you, Chair Hirono, and to all of our
witnesses thank you for your service.
So this is just us. I am sure it is on C-SPAN, but I want
to dig into an issue that I am confused about. So I want to ask
about two things. I want to ask about amphibs and I want to ask
about the marine force posture discussion and budgetary
ramifications of that.
So on amphibs, the Marine Corps continues to state that its
minimum amphib requirement is 31, but we are hearing different
estimates from OSD and the Navy about that. So if the Marine
Corps is the principal end user and they are saying the minimum
acceptable is 31, how do we explain confusing messages that I
am getting? I am hoping we can clear up the confusion. It seems
to me like there is either probably one of three options.
Either the Marines want 31 and Navy and OSD agrees it should be
31, and we will fund 31. Or the Marines want 31 and Navy and
OSD agree with the 31, but say that there is a budgetary
challenge that means we are going to have a temporary gap to
get to 31. Or the Marines want 31 and Navy and OSD different
and do not think 31 are necessary.
So maybe there are other forks in the decision tree but it
seems like it is one of those three answers. Can I start with
you, Mr. Stefany? What is going on?
Mr. Stefany. Yes. I would say that Secretary Del Toro, when
he came in, kind of had the same question, right?
Senator Kaine. Yeah.
Mr. Stefany. So he got the NAVY, the CNO staff, and the
Commandant's staff together and chartered an amphibious ship
study, without OSD, with Navy, Marine Corps.
Senator Kaine. Yep.
Mr. Stefany. That study is just completing, and the
briefing process, I do not know if the SECDEF has been briefed
it is very, very near term. That will feed into a force
structure assessment that we are doing that will go with the
National Defense Strategy, the classified version I think you
have just seen, right?
Senator Kaine. Right.
Mr. Stefany. So we do that, and that will ultimately get us
to what is the final number of amphibious ships--traditional
amphibious ships we are talking about--and if it is, whatever
it is. We will then resource, given a constrained budget, to at
some point get to that number, sir.
Senator Kaine. What is the likely timing of this, because
obviously our hope on the committee would be to get done with
the NDAA probably between Memorial Day and July 4, so we have
the capacity to try to shape what we do in the authorizing bill
to meet what the recommendation is, and I hope it is a
consensus recommendation and not a thug war.
But what do you think the timing is?
Mr. Stefany. I can tell you I believe that the Commandant
and the CNO are on the same page, and they are coming to the
committee, I think, in a week and a half, and their plan is to
give you the results, or at least to talk about it, all three
of them together.
Senator Kaine. Okay.
Mr. Stefany. That obviously would have to go to OSD and we
would update you through the other steps.
Senator Kaine. Right. Okay. Good. We will save those
questions for then.
The other one I want to talk about is the Commandant's
force structure ideas, and I am a supporter of them. I like
what I see. I know that they are generating some controversy,
and that is fine. People have different ideas about the way to
do something, and sometimes folks are reluctant to make a
change. I get that. I have seen it in organizations I have been
part of.
But the piece of it I want to ask you about is in the
planning guidance that the Commandant put out about 3 years ago
he said, quote, ``If provided the opportunity to secure
additional modernization dollars in exchange for force
structure, I am prepared to do so. So I will let go of some
force structure if I can modernize to the mission of tomorrow,
as we see it.''
Some do not want to let go of force structure, but there is
another question that I am really interested in, which is, if
you do let go of force structure to get modernization, I do not
want the force structure dollars taken away and then not put to
modernization, and I have been hearing that is a concern, that
if the Marines make a pivot in this way to try to prepare for
tomorrow's battle, I do not want their money taken away on the
force structure side. I want the money plowed back into
modernization.
So if I could ask you, Mr. Stefany, and General Heckl, at
this point, you know, April 26th, sitting here, are you
comfortable with the direction things are going, that as the
Marines pivot and set aside some force structure for
modernization they are going to be able to hold onto those
resources to actually do what the Corps needs to do?
Mr. Stefany. I will start and turn it over quickly. I would
say, you know, that has always been a discussion in the
building, but I think so far, if you trace the dollars, you
would see it has been pretty much money moving from here to
there. It has been relatively even. But I will turn it over to
the general.
General Heckl. Senator, thank you very much for the
question, and the bottom line, up front, is yes, we are
comfortable. I actually just met with the money guy for the
Marine Corps, Lieutenant General Mahoney, this afternoon.
But again, sir, I think--and really, great thanks to this
Committee and to others, to include the Navy. We knew there was
risk, sir, that that force structure could be harvested, if you
will. We have not seen that. But I will simply say that some of
the funding that is being reinvested, it is being specified, or
as the money people talk, it has been ZIP-coded. So it has been
limited in our ability but overall, sir, no, we are not
concerned.
Senator Kaine. All right. Well, both of these are helpful,
and I will obviously get into these questions further when we
have the posture hearing in a week and a half, but thank you
for shedding light on it. I appreciate it. I yield back.
Senator Hirono. Senator Hawley.
Senator Hawley. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks to all of
you for being here.
Admiral, if I could just start with you. Can we talk a
little bit about the shipbuilding, the three different profiles
that are included in the plan released, I think, on April 20th.
My question, I guess, is this. Is the Navy confident that each
of those profiles would allow it to meet the operational
requirements for deterring a Chinese fait accompli, vis-`-vis
Taiwan?
Admiral Conn. The first two profiles, Alternatives 1 and 2,
were fiscally constrained in terms of no real budget growth in
the types of forces you could have, at the same funding line
with differences in manned and unmanned between the two.
Alternative 3 was industrial-base limited, as we understand it
today, and for an additional $75 billion--it equates to about 2
percent a year--what type of options in force structure could
that develop?
I will say in the shipbuilding plan itself it says that
Alternative 3 most closely approaches the previous analytical
work that was used to generate the ship-owning plan.
Senator Hawley. But my question--I appreciate that, but can
I just drill down on that a little bit? I want to be clear. Do
each of these profiles--1, 2, and 3--will they allow the Navy--
is the Navy confident that they will allow you to meet the
operational requirements necessary to respond to what is the
pacing challenge in the pacing theater, the pacing scenario in
the pacing theater?
Admiral Conn. I would say we have the most confidence in
Alternative 3.
Senator Hawley. Okay. So not in 1 and 2. You have less
confidence in 1 and 2.
Admiral Conn. That is correct.
Senator Hawley. Okay. Thanks. That is very helpful.
General Heckl, can I turn to you? I want to ask you about
anti-ship missiles. The Marine Corps has put anti-ship missiles
at the top of the unfunded requirements list for the last 2
years, I think, if I have got that right. It did not do so this
year. Can you just explain why that is?
General Heckl. Sir, the NMESIS, the Navy Marine
Expeditionary Strike Interdiction System, which is the naval
strike missile you are referring to--very successful, by the
way--is still our number one priority, sir. Are you referring
to the UPL, where the Commandant put the LPD-33 for advanced
procurement?
Senator Hawley. I am sorry. I am having--can you repeat
that, General?
General Heckl. Yes, sir. So right now the NMESIS remains
our number one priority.
Senator Hawley. Yeah.
General Heckl. Yes, sir. No question. Are you talking about
the unfunded priorities list----
Senator Hawley. Yes.
General Heckl.--LPD-33, sir. Obviously, force design, we,
the Marine Corps, are very confident, and I think the Navy,
they are on a good trajectory. Our concern right now is
primarily amphibious ships.
Senator Hawley. Okay. I guess what I am driving at here is,
are you satisfied that you are getting everything that you need
to accelerate fielding the capabilities that you are going to
need for the expeditionary advanced base operations?
General Heckl. Absolutely, sir. Absolutely.
Senator Hawley. Good, and while I have got you here,
General, I just want to register my thanks. I think the work on
the Force Design 2030 has been outstanding, and I know that, as
Senator Kaine alluded to a minute ago, that there is some
controversy about that. I know some people are upset that, for
instance, Marine Corps is cutting tanks. But, you know, the
Indo-Pacific is primarily a maritime theater, and I think you
are doing a great job on that, and I really think this kind of
a bold rethinking is a model for everybody else.
General Heckl. Senator, thank you, and, you know, Liddell
Hart, the British strategist, said, ``The only thing harder
than getting a new thought into the military mind is getting an
old one out.'' So, yes.
Senator Hawley. Well, good work. Very good work.
Admiral, can I come back to you? I want to ask you about
anti-ship missiles as well. It looks like the Navy has chosen
not to prioritize them. You have not fully funded requirements
related to the SM-6, LRASMs. They are on the unfunded
requirement list. I am just wondering why that is.
General Heckl. We have LRASM upgrades. Yes, that is part of
the unfunded list in terms of capability. But we have tried to
get all other important anti-ship weapons, to include SM-16B,
which should deliver in the future, if not at maximum capacity
but near maximum capacity of the industrial base to produce.
Senator Hawley. Okay. So you anticipated my next question.
Is it your view then that we are maxing out--Mr. Stefany, weigh
in here if you want to--but are we maxing out the base's
ability--let us stick with the LRASMs if we could--have we
maxed out? Is that your view? Does this request max out the
industrial base's ability to produce LRASMs, or are we----
Admiral Conn. That is my understanding, sir, that we are
maxing out. It is a joint Air Force-Navy----
Mr. Stefany. Across all services, right? You have got to
look at everybody.
Senator Hawley. Right. Right.
Mr. Stefany. Same with SM-6, sir. We are at the max,
without an investment.
Senator Hawley. Okay. So what would it take to expand those
production lines further, so we can field as many as possible
now and also surge production if have a potential conflict?
Mr. Stefany. We have done that analysis. I do not have it
with me but I will take that for the record.
Senator Hawley. Okay. Would you? That would be very
helpful.
My time has expired. If we have time later I will come back
for a second round. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Hirono. Senator Blumenthal.
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you, Chair Hirono. As I am sure
you know, in fiscal year 2020, the Navy unilaterally reversed a
decades-long indemnification policy and stated that going
forward it would no longer cover unusually hazardous risks
involving conventional weapons that rely on high-energy
propellants. This decision essentially shifted a very
significant risk to private industry entities working on
missiles, for example. It essentially risks losing a lot of
private partners who cannot tolerate the risk that is imposed,
and possibly the ability to build major weapon systems and
technologies essential for future conflicts. In some sense the
hazardous risk is a cost of producing the weapon, and under
existing law the military services can and do indemnify
contractors for unusually hazardous risks.
For four decades, the Navy has borne the risk of
catastrophic loss for incidents relating to missiles that rely
on high-energy propellants, like the Tomahawks. Private
industry carries commercial insurance, which will respond first
in the case of catastrophic loss. But my question is, Mr.
Stefany, can you explain why the Navy reversed its position on
this kind of indemnification, and does this change affect major
acquisition programs?
Mr. Stefany. Yes, sir. I appreciate that question, and as a
matter of fact, I was discussing this topic with the president
of Electric Boat earlier today, so very much on our mind.
Historically, the Department of Navy has provided a blanket
indemnification, a blanket--you know, no matter what the issue
is, it is a blanket insurance, if you will, because industry
cannot buy it, for nuclear weapons and nuclear propulsion for
submarines and aircraft carriers.
What happened, of course, over time is particular weapon
systems did not have a nuclear warhead anymore and we, as a
navy, decided that we would not do a blanket indemnification,
but if a company had a specific issue, a specific use case, we
call it, we would be happy to walk through exactly where the
risk was for that weapon, at that production facility, and we
would talk about it with the Secretary. That is what I relayed
to the president of Electric Boat and others. We are not
against necessarily indemnification. We are against a blanket,
across-the-board, no matter what kind of indemnification.
So maybe we are talking with industry maybe past each other
a little bit, but I think there is a way ahead here, sir.
Senator Blumenthal. You are actively engaged in discussion,
I hope constructive discussions with contractors like Electric
Boat.
Mr. Stefany. Yes, we are, you know, Lockheed, Northrop, all
of the big companies we are having these discussions with. But
again, the point is, what is the specific concern you have, not
just a blanket indemnification, sir.
Senator Blumenthal. Let me ask you a question about the CH-
53Ks, Lieutenant General Heckl. I was very pleased to see that
the CH-53K has reached initial operational capability very
recently, I think, maybe yesterday afternoon. As the CH-53E
Super Stallions reach the end of their service lives, the 53K I
think is urgently needed, and so I am hopeful that we will
remain committed to getting this new helicopter on board,
operational, as quickly as possible.
Can you speak to how the Marine Corps air combat element
will use the 53-K and what its importance is to your
capabilities?
General Heckl. Sir, that is impossible to answer in the
time we have available, I will simply tell you, sir, simply
because this is such an incredible aircraft.
You know, sir, the Kilo lifts three times what the Echo
lifted, its predecessor, and we are the Navy family here, but
last September we went up in a 53-K, looked at a downed MH-60
helicopter off of a mountainside in California, at 12,500 feet.
Unbelievable. The Navy thought they were going to have to cut
that thing into thirds or quarters to get it off the mountain.
So the 53-K, sir, absolutely vital to what we are doing in
the Indo-Pacific. To be able to lift that kind of payload,
27,000 pounds, 120 nautical miles, will be absolutely critical
to the intra-theater mobility, sir, that is so important to the
Marine Corps, particularly from the organic mobility
perspective, which is what is unique to the Marine Corps. The
KC-130J, the 53-K, the MV-22, and our surface lift, absolutely
vital, sir. So the Kilo is going to be a critical asset, sir,
and we are seeing a lot of success with it right now.
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you. Thanks, Madam Chair.
Senator Hirono. Senator Scott.
Senator Scott. Thank you, Chair.
I know it is your responsibility, I guess, to defend the
President's budget, but I guess what surprises me is there is a
substantial cut to the force structure of the Navy. You are
going to retire nine combat ships. The most recent was
commissioned less than 2 years ago.
So with fewer ships--is that right?
Mr. Stefany. That is right.
Senator Scott. So with fewer ships, a combatant commander,
how are you going to deal with any requests? I mean, it does
not seem like we have fewer problems. I mean, you have got
Russia and what China is doing. So how are you going to deal
with fewer ships? Are you just going to send fewer ships to
request, or is there some way you are going to make them work
longer, which is very difficult to do? So how are you going to
do this?
I know your job is you have to defend the Administration.
Mr. Stefany. Sir, certainly the number of ships will
increase the risk to meeting the COCOM's requirements, but we
never meet 100 percent of the COCOM's requirements. But I will
turn it over to the Admiral to give more of the specific look
at that.
Admiral Conn. So in looking at specifically the LCS, that
ship was designed or thought about in 2002, over 20 years ago,
and the world has changed. When we looked at the LCS, is it not
that it has no military value. It has less military value in a
high-end fight with China, in the Pacific. When you look at all
the bills we have to pay, and when you look at where
proprietary investments in some of our weapons between
conventional prompt strike, which we are delivering in the
middle part of the decade on DDG-1000, the investments we have
to make in LRASM, in JASMMM, other investments we have to make
in our unmanned systems, if we were to buy back those LCS, our
estimate is it would be $4.2 billion inside the FYDP, and we
believe that those resources are better spent on high-end
capabilities that we are going to need to fight and win. Some
of those investments deliver inside the decade, in the decade
of concern.
Senator Scott. Do you feel comfortable that you have the
resources to be able to do when you watch what China is doing,
expanding their navy, when you look at the expectation we are
going to be able to defend Taiwan? When you look at all these
problems, do you really believe you are going to have the
capability to be able to do the job you are going to be asked
to do?
Admiral Conn. I would talk to CNO's Nav Plan, which the
revision will come out here shortly, which in it there is a Nav
Plan Implementation Framework that describes, in concert with
Distributed Maritime Operations, which is how we must fight in
the Pacific, what are the investments that we need to make in
terms of how we shoot; how we intend to shoot from multidomains
and from long-range fires; how we maneuver, not just in terms
of physical space in maneuvering in the domains but how we
maneuver in the electromagnetic spectrum to deny, deceive,
delay our opponent? How are we going to resupply? How are we
going to defend terminal defense for our ships, and looking for
other means other than missile-on-missile, which is a cost-
imposing strategy on ourselves? We have to come up with
different solutions.
Then the investments we have to make in all the enablers,
in our networks, in Project Overmatch, and moving information
around the task force differently. How unmanned systems are
going to be force multipliers across the domains, whether in
the air, on the surface, or undersea. Then live virtual
constructive investments, to making sure our people, our
sailors that are going to be operating forward can actually use
those weapon systems to their designed limits and beyond.
Then artificial intelligence. What are the specific use
cases we need to go after to deliver those capabilities, that
software, those algorithms, and the bottom line is to drive
simplicity down to the tactical edge?
That is in the CNO's Nav Plan. Those are some of the
priority investments they were going after and reason, because
we are a multidomain force that works from the seabed to space,
and we have to be able to produce effects across all of them.
Senator Scott. But do you believe you are going to have the
resources to be able to do the missions that you anticipate we
are going to have?
Admiral Conn. As always, we will have more requirements
than resources, and within this budget we will make do with the
resources we have to be able to fight and win.
Senator Scott. This morning we heard, at another Armed
Services Committee, that--there was testimony that we could
save 30 to 50 percent of the money that DOD spends on
procurement. Do you believe that, and what are you all doing to
try to get some of that savings so we can allocate the money to
make our military big and lethal?
Admiral Conn. In the essence of time I think we have to
drive our costs across everything we do.
Senator Scott. Thank you.
Senator Hirono. Senator King.
Senator King. Thank you, Madam Chair.
First, Mr. Stefany, I want to compliment you. These
hearings are not always about compliments, but both houses
asked for reports about the transition to DDX and you issued
two, one to the House and one to the Senate. They were
excellent--succinct, clear, written in plain English, and I
think very important.
Madam Chair, I would like to have both of those reports,
117-39 and 117-118, inserted in the record of this hearing.
Senator Hirono. Without objection.
[The information follows:]
[The information has been retained in the Committee files.]
Senator King. The important part of the reports are that
you talked about lessons learned, from the Columbia, from the
Nimitz, to the Ford, and how that will apply to the DDX. I
would like to ask about a couple of those.
One of the important things is that this is handled in such
a way that we do not have a trough in the industrial base
between DDG and DDX. Can you speak to me about that?
Mr. Stefany. Yes, sir. That is maybe a fault that we have
had in the past, right? You stop one program and you start the
next one, not recognizing it is going to take a little time for
that second program to get going and you have a workforce that
atrophies, if you will, in between.
So in the DDG-51 to DDG(X) case, we recognized that in the
first couple of years where we buy a DDG(X) we also need to buy
a DDG-51 for the other shipyard, so that they can keep their
workforce going and avoid that trough, keep the skills up so
that ultimately we can get to two DDG(X)s per year, one at each
shipyard.
Senator King. Well, my comment is hold that thought,
because I think that is critically important. I have seen the
graphs at Bath Iron Works, for example, that show DDG, and then
you have got a loss of a couple thousand workers, and you
cannot just turn that off and on, particularly in this economy
where workers are in short supply.
I think the other piece that I wanted to touch upon is the
industrial base itself and their involvement in the development
of the new ship, so that we do not have the Navy handing
something to the yards and saying, ``Here it is. Build it.''
Comment on that too, because I know Huntington Ingalls and Bath
are in discussions. I think it is a very productive way to
avoid some of the problems that have been incurred in the other
programs.
Mr. Stefany. Yeah, it is a lesson, sir, that we learned in
the Virginia submarine program--bring the two shipyards and the
major suppliers, the engine-makers and others in, up front.
Talk to the Navy as we are putting together the spec and come
up with the design criteria to take the best of all, and to
learn from each other and come up with a single computer model
and a single design that then both shipyards could build to.
That is the most efficient way we have seen to actually get--we
call it the collaborative design process--to get to a final
state that has the least errors, the least defects in it.
Senator King. As I have sat through hearings on the Ford, I
could not help but notice the provisions in the report that
talked about, let's not do all new technology at one time, and
let's test it on the ground first. I think clearly that is an
important lesson learned.
Mr. Stefany. Yes, sir, and we actually, in the 2023 budget,
funded the land-based test facility for DDG(X), to do that
land-based testing.
Senator King. Finally. At the hearing that Senator Scott
mentioned this morning, Former Secretary Lord was one of the
witnesses, and she confirmed the importance of multiyear,
multiyear procurement. She used a term, frankly, I had not
heard before, but maybe I have not been around this stuff
enough. She said the problem is ``lumpy'' procurement, and you
want procurement that can provide some continuity to the
industrial base so that they can make the investments
necessary.
Do you share the importance of multiyear? I think it is
also better for the taxpayers, frankly.
Mr. Stefany. I want to completely agree that planning for
investment and planning for the workforce and those other
things that the shipyards and the suppliers need to do
completely benefits from a long-term, 4- or 5-year commitment
on multiyear type process. I totally agree with Ms. Lord on
that case.
To the previous question about cost, that is one of our
main ways to reduce the cost of our programs is to make those
long-term, multiyear contracts and put them in place.
Senator King. Well, there is no question. We have built
three Zumwalts, and the learning curve just on those three--and
there should have been a dozen--but those three was quite
remarkable, from ship to ship to ship. You are not going to
ameliorate those learning curve costs, particularly on DDX,
without a long-term, multiyear procurement.
Mr. Stefany. Yes, sir. I agree with you completely.
Senator King. Thank you. Let the record show that the
witness said he agreed with me completely.
Mr. Stefany. You complimented me to start with, sir.
Senator King. Thank you.
Senator Hirono. Senator King, I note that every time one of
our testifiers agrees with you, you make a point of noting
that.
[Laughter.]
Senator Hirono. So noted.
We will start on round two of our questions. Just to make
sure, regarding the funding for the shipyard modernization,
does your fiscal year 2023 budget fully fund this year's plan
for the shipyard modernization plan?
Mr. Stefany. Yes, ma'am. The budget this year increased
almost $1.8 billion and fully funds all of our plans for 2023
through 2027. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Hirono. When we talk about a multiyear contract, is
inflation an issue with regard to how you are going to come up
with the negotiations for these multiyear contracts? How do you
account for inflation and some of the other factors that may
need revisions to the contract?
Mr. Stefany. Yes, ma'am. So in our shipbuilding contracts
we have an economic price adjustment clause, a special clause
we put in that accounts for inflation. It actually makes an
assumption, and then if it gets outside of that, higher or
lower, we can adjust the contract as we go. So in our
shipbuilding contracts, we do not have that in other places,
but in our shipbuilding contracts we do have what we call an
EPA clause, to protect the company from risks going up or down.
Senator Hirono. That is good because Asia had come up in
the SASC hearing this morning.
The Navy has presented a 5-year shipbuilding plan that
includes two destroyers per year for a total of 10 ships, and I
understand that the Navy intends to request another round of
multiyear procurement authority for destroyers but for nine
ships, with an option to add another ship to the multiyear
contract at some point in those 5 years and an option to buy a
third each year for a maximum possible of 15. That is what you
are contemplating.
Mr. Stefany. Ma'am, yes. We are modeling the planned
multiyear after the one we have right now, and the one we have
right now has 10 ships in the multiyear with a competitive
option for a third ship in each year. That is the basis for
what we plan to do in the future one, the one exception, as you
noted, being that we would have 9 firm ships instead of 10 firm
ships in that baseline contract. But otherwise the terms that
we are anticipating for the new contract will be the same for
the one that is in place right now. That has not been approved
yet. That is just our initial, you know, plan as we are going
forward.
Senator Hirono. Just so I understand then, I know that
there is interest in this Committee for 15 destroyers instead
of the 10. So you are creating a situation where we can get to
15 if you exercise that option, provided that we fund that
option, which means that you will request funding for that
option to be exercised. Is that correct?
Mr. Stefany. It is.
Senator Hirono. Am I understanding this?
Mr. Stefany. It is our Navy plan at this point to go
forward so that if we did request a third ship we have the
ability to buy it. But again, we are in the early stages,
ma'am. I do not want to make that commitment from the
Department yet.
Senator Hirono. Okay. When you say ``commitment from the
Department,'' does that mean that you do have to request the
money for the addition 5?
Mr. Stefany. We would have to request the money for the
additional 5, yes.
Senator Hirono. Would you do that?
Mr. Stefany. It is a budget process.
Senator Hirono. You said if there is an interest in----
Mr. Stefany. You have seen the 2023 budget, ma'am, and 2024
we will have to play out through the normal requirements
process. So I cannot make a commitment on 2024 and out, and you
have seen our budget proposal for 2023, which is only 2 ships
in 2023.
Senator Hirono. Okay. But going forward, though----
Mr. Stefany. We are kind of in a little----
Senator Hirono. You see what I am getting at, right? I
think some of us would like to get you to 3 ships instead of 2
ships.
Mr. Stefany. So our plan is to have a contract that will
allow that, but we would have to discuss in the budget process
actually how it gets paid for, if we were to do that.
Senator Hirono. Okay. I personally would encourage that,
because I assume that we need more of these ships, right? We
need more destroyers.
Mr. Stefany. I will have to let the Admiral discuss,
actually, the requirements for destroyers.
Senator Hirono. Admiral?
Admiral Conn. The requirements for Large Surface Combatant
is 96, at least from the latest INFSA and the--I am sorry, the
Integrated Naval Force Structure Assessment that was done in
2019. Then the Future Naval Force Study reduced that number a
little bit, and in Alternative 3 we get up to 80, and again
that was based on our understanding of industrial capacity. But
it is Large Surface Combatants, Small Surface Combatants, to
number of frigates, I do not look at any particular capability.
I have to look across a task force, if you will, and how we are
going to employ that force, with our submarines, and the
dominance they have in the undersea domain, with the Large
Surface Combatants, the Small Surface Combatants, and the
carrier and the carrier wing.
Senator Hirono. So do I understand you correctly, Admiral,
that Option 3 of the three options you laid out, that Option 3
gets you where you would like to be?
Admiral Conn. It gets us closer to where we need to be.
Senator Hirono. But how realistic is that option compared
to the other two options, in terms of the funding that would be
made available, and other considerations?
Admiral Conn. The fiscal certainty of that option I really
cannot speak to right now. I can say in terms of where we are
today the answer would be no. But again, this is starting
growth per the shipbuilding plan in 2028 and out in order to
get to the, whether it be three DDGs per year, three frigates
per year, three submarines per year, getting into an SSN(X) by
the 2040s. I mean, all that, I will say, there is some
uncertainty in that path forward.
Senator Hirono. Thank you. Senator Cramer, would you like
to do a second round.
Senator Cramer. Yes, I would. Thank you.
So, Mr. Stefany, as promised I am going to come back to the
issue I mentioned in my opening statement about the double-
counting of the LHA-9, and just for everyone's clarity I am
just going to go through the history real clearly, as best as I
can.
So the LHA-9 was previously authorized in fiscal year 2020,
when we approved the procurement of the ship with incremental
funding authority in the NDAA and added $650 million in the
final appropriations bill.
Subsequent appropriations bills have provided additional
funding. After the 2021 budget request showed LHA-9 as a future
procurement in 2023, the 2021 NDAA removed the ship to avoid
double-counting it, and clarified in Section 126 that any ship
added by Congress may not be specified as a new procurement
quantity in future budget submissions.
So the simple question is why does this budget request
again show the LHA-9 as a new procurement in fiscal year 2023,
and how is this consistent with Section 126?
Mr. Stefany. Yes, sir. So I would say the 2023 budget, the
goal of the folks who put together the budget was to show the
year that we are going to award the contract for the ship, to
construct the ship, which we are planning to do at the end of
this year, at the beginning of fiscal year 2023. So those who
put together the budget exhibits had the best intentions of
showing when we are going to award the contract for the ship,
and I believe, with the change in administration, not all were
aware of the NDAA language that actually told us to do
something different.
So I do not think there was anything, you know, purposeful
here. I think it was really just different parts of the
Department not communicating well on providing you the budget
exhibits that showed the ship as a 2023 ship in what was
provided.
What I do know is we would like to discuss with you
further, you and the staff, when we do an incremental-funded
ship, what the right metric is for that one in the accounting
process. Is it when we order the contract? Is it when it is
funded initially? What is the right method? CVN-81 is a little
different story. CVN-80, a little different story. We would
like to have a consistent approach. I know the Department, at
the comptroller level, and we in the Navy want to get to a
common understanding with you, so we would love to have that
conversation, sir.
Senator Cramer. Well, I think going forward that would be
very helpful. If we did have a consistent pattern, protocols,
that would help you. That would help the Congress. That would
help the taxpayer better understand and have the type of
transparency.
In this case, I mean, it was so clear, I think so clearly
laid out that to see this has been problematic.
Mr. Stefany. Exactly, and what matters to me is we are
going to start construction later this year and deliver that
ship in 2028. That is what really matters to me.
Senator Cramer. Well, I appreciate that and we appreciate
the clarification. We will see whether something else can be
done to improve going forward, for sure.
General Heckl, I want to follow up on a line of questioning
that Mr. Stefany had answered earlier, relating to the
Commandant's requirement for traditional amphibious ships. What
was his requirement?
General Heckl. Sir, the Commandant's absolute requirement
for traditional L-class amphibious warships is 31, more
specifically, 10 LHA/LHD class and 21 LPD.
Senator Cramer. So how important is continuing the LPD
amphibious ship production line to meeting the Commandant's
requirement?
General Heckl. It is critical, sir, to meet that
requirement.
Senator Cramer. You have already answered how many more
LPDs are needed.
I see that the Commandant's top unfunded priority is $250
million in advanced procurement funding for LPD-33. Can you
explain how critical that request may be?
General Heckl. So sir, again, within force design is our
ongoing requirement as a Marine Corps by law to be the crisis
response force for the Nation. Without those LPDs, sir, and the
other amphibious, traditional L-class amphibious warships we
cannot be there, and we are already struggling now. Case in
point was the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit off the East
Coast. General Wolters, the Supreme Allied Commander, Former
Supreme Allied Commander of Europe, requested that that MEU,
that Marine Expeditionary Unit and that amphibious unit sortie
early to be on-station as the Ukrainian situation evolved or
devolved, and we were not able to sortie the ship. When a
reality, sir, based on the way we typically conducted heel-to-
toe deployments, the MEU should have been on-station and
available for combatant commander tasking, and it was not.
Senator Cramer. Thank you, General, and I yield. Thank you.
Senator Hirono. Senator King, would you like round two?
Senator King. I am going to submit a question for the
record of a classified response to the admiral and the general
in terms of defensive capabilities to emerging Chinese
capabilities. I do not think I need to say more than that. I
want to understand better what our strategy is for defending
our forward-deployed naval and the marine littoral regiment. So
I will be submitting that question. I look forward to your
response.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Hirono. Senator Hawley.
Senator Hawley. Thank you, Madam Chair. Just two more quick
things. Mr. Stefany, I want to ask about Quickstrike mines if I
could and then vertical launch tubes. On the Quickstrike mines,
I see that they are at the bottom of the unfunded priorities
list. Can you just walk me through that? This seems like an
important defensive capability. Offensive mining is certainly
important for the pacing scenario in the pacing theater, namely
the fait accompli scenario. So can you help me understand the
thinking here, or Admiral, if you prefer.
Mr. Stefany. Yeah, I think since this is the CNO's list----
Senator Hawley. Yeah. Go ahead. Go ahead, Admiral. That is
fine.
Admiral Conn. The Quickstrike extended-range mine is what
is on the unfunded list, which gives you--I cannot talk ranges
here but it is a little bit different system that is still
under R&D.
Senator Hawley. That is why it is at the bottom of the
unfunded list----
Admiral Conn. Correct.
Senator Hawley.--because it is still in R&D?
Admiral Conn. Correct.
Senator Hawley. Okay. Fair enough. Let me ask you about
vertical launch tubes. The Navy plans to cut a large number of
these. Admiral Davidson has testified before the full committee
and others that they expect the coming years to be particularly
a dangerous zone, let us say, for Chinese aggression. How does
the Navy plan to offset the loss here of strike capacity
between now and the late 2020s, so end of this decade?
Admiral Conn. In terms of the VLS tubes we have to be
careful. A comparative view is part of Appendix 7, which is a
classified annex to the shipbuilding plan. So you get the full
view of not just we will have but what intel tells us China
will have. So you have to look at that. We must be careful that
we do not go domain-versus-domain and make that comparison. We
have significant advantages in the undersea domain that we will
continue to make modernization to maintain that dominance, and
how, through operational art, we use our submarines and the
capabilities they have to open up maneuver space for the air
wing coming off the carriers and the long-range fires from our
surface ships and distributed maritime operations. Yes, are
taking risk in VLS between now and about 2030.
I will say we have, with the DVGs that are delivering
inside the FYDP, it is about 1,344 VLS tubes on new ships that
are coming into the fold.
So I fully acknowledge we are taking risk in VLS, but the
investments we are making by getting rid of those VLS gives us
a more capable, a more lethal Navy inside the FYDP.
Senator Hawley. I guess what I am driving at, Admiral, is
between now and 2030, when we are in this potential danger
zone, are you confident--you are taking a chance and you have
to make tough decisions--are you going to be able to offset any
loss of striking ability? That is what I am driving at here.
Admiral Conn. As part of the broader Joint Force, if you
are asking me to characterize that risk, I do not think I would
say it in a public hearing. But it is a fair question and I can
take it for the record if you would like.
Senator Hawley. Yeah, I appreciate that. Thank you, Madam
Chair. That is all I have got.
Senator Hirono. Thank you. I would like to thank all of you
for coming before this Committee, and this hearing will come to
a close. The record will remain open for 5 days. Thank you very
much, everyone.
[Whereupon, at 3:49 p.m., the Subcommittee adjourned.]
[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Senator Mazie Hirono
virginia-class submarines
1. 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 V multiyear contract. That is a contract
to build two Virginia boats per year. However, before much work had
begun on the Block V program, serious problems were emerging with
achieving on-time deliveries of the boats from the previous contract,
the Block IV program. The shipyards had been running 12 to 18 months
behind contract delivery dates on the Block IV boats. It appears that
this has led to increasing the cost estimates for Block IV boats yet to
be delivered, cost and schedule increases for all the Block V boats,
and cost increases for the boats in the Columbia-class program. It is
apparent that, among other problems, the yards are struggling to find
sufficient skilled workers and the supplier base is struggling to keep
up. I also understand that the Navy now may be predicting additional
schedule delays in the Block IV and Block V programs. What is the
current status of the Virginia-class program?
Mr. Stefany. The Virginia-class Submarine (VCS) program has
delivered 21 submarines to date with 17 under contract through fiscal
year 2023. The Navy is executing two multiyear procurement (MYP)
contracts; fiscal year 2014 to 2018 (Block IV) and fiscal year 2019 to
2023 (Block V).
The submarine industrial base performance remains challenged to
meet two per year construction. At the start of this year, the Navy
conducted a detailed schedule analysis based on demonstrated
shipbuilder performance and current impacts related to suppliers and
workforce availability/experience. The review resulted in a shift in
estimated delivery schedules for the remaining submarines in Block IV
(7 ships) and Block V (10 ships) in President's Budget 2023. Block IV
deliveries are anticipated to be approximately one year delayed from
previous schedules provided with President's Budget 2022. Shipbuilder
performance, supplier impacts and inflation are also resulting in the
estimated cost increases seen in the fiscal year 2023 Budget
submission. Block V is experiencing early schedule challenges with
deliveries anticipated to be up to two and a half years later than
originally planned.
The VCS program is not causing cost increases on Columbia.
The main drivers of the shifts in construction schedules are
changing workforce demographics and shipbuilders failing to adapt their
management practices to those realities, increasing first-time quality
issues, and supply chain challenges, which were all exacerbated due to
the rapid growth in submarine shipbuilding workload. The Navy is
teaming with the shipbuilders to develop and execute a comprehensive
plan focused on improving program performance. Efforts in strategic
outsourcing, workforce development and proficiency, supplier base
expansion and development, and new technologies are all necessary.
Despite current cost and schedule challenges, VCS continues the
trend of high operational readiness performance at delivery--as
demonstrated by satisfactory Board of Inspection and Survey (INSURV)
scores on the recent deliveries of USS Oregon (SSN 793) and PCU Montana
(SSN 794) in February and March of 2022 respectively.
2. Senator Hirono. Mr. Stefany, can you give us an update on the
schedules for the Block IV and Block V procurement programs?
Mr. Stefany. The Navy's fiscal year 2023 budget request for the
Virginia-class submarine program reflects revised projected delivery
dates for all VCS under contract. The Virginia-class program has
delivered 21 submarines to date with 17 under contract through fiscal
year 2023. The Navy is executing two multiyear procurement (MYP)
contracts; fiscal year 2014 to 2018 (Block IV) and fiscal year 2019-
2023 (Block V).
While these updated delivery dates reflect a delay for remaining
Block IV (7) and Block V (10) submarines, they provide a realistic
baseline by which to address and measure future program performance.
The Navy is teaming with the shipbuilders, General-Dynamics Electric
Boat (GDEB) and Huntington Ingalls--Newport News Shipbuilding (HII-
NNS), to execute a comprehensive plan focused on stabilizing and
balancing the production system, building resiliency and efficiency in
the Submarine Industrial Base (SIB), and meeting the two per year
delivery requirement in the future.
3. Senator Hirono. Mr. Stefany, what are the shipyards proposing to
do to solve the problems?
Mr. Stefany. The Navy is teaming with shipbuilders to stabilize
production and execute a comprehensive plan to effect program
performance. Efforts in strategic outsourcing, workforce development
and proficiency, supplier base expansion and development, and new
technologies are all necessary. The effort includes significant
government and industry investment in building resiliency in the
Submarine Industrial Base (SIB) to address supply chain capacity,
capability and efficiency; partnering with state and local governments,
and industry to develop the future shipbuilding workforce; outsourcing
non-core shipyard work to the vendor base; and working with the
shipbuilders to improve production efficiency within the shipyards,
including first-time quality. Additionally, the Navy and the
shipbuilders are investing in building the shipyard infrastructure
required to meet current and future workload demands.
4. Senator Hirono. Mr. Stefany, what is the Navy going to do to get
the cost and schedule back under control for these programs?
Mr. Stefany. The Navy and shipbuilders are committed to delivering
the best submarines in the world to our sailors. This requires a
continuous assessment of performance to build upon efforts that deliver
results while redoubling focus on areas that underperformed. The Navy
expects that the comprehensive improvement efforts will mitigate
current unfavorable performance and stabilize schedules as the
submarine enterprise ramps to one per year Columbia-class (CLB) and two
per year VCS construction.
The Navy is teaming with the shipbuilders to execute a
comprehensive plan to effect performance improvements. Efforts in
strategic outsourcing, workforce development and proficiency, supplier
base expansion and development, and new technologies are all necessary.
These include significant government and industry investment in
building resiliency in the Submarine Industrial Base (SIB) to address
supply chain capacity, capability and efficiency; partnering with state
and local governments, and industry to develop the future shipbuilding
workforce; outsourcing non-core shipyard work to the vendor base; and
working with the shipbuilders to improve production efficiency within
the shipyards. Additionally, Navy and the shipbuilders are investing in
building the shipyard infrastructure required to meet current and
future workload demands. The Navy is taking proactive steps to improve
the shipbuilding industrial base, which is essential for VCS schedule
recovery and CLB on time delivery.
department of the navy aviation shortfalls
5. Senator Hirono. Vice Admiral Conn, the Navy's strike fighter
shortfall estimate has fluctuated widely over the past several years.
In simple terms, there are two pieces to solving the strike fighter
inventory gap. Buying new aircraft and extending the services lives of
the ones we already have. The budget does not include buying new F/A -
18E/F aircraft, only F-35B and F-35C aircraft. What is your latest
assessment of the strike fighter shortfall?
Vice Admiral Conn. The Department of the Navy's (DON) assessment is
that our current Strike Fighter Shortfall (SFSF) is best mitigated with
a combination of extended service life of FA-18E/F and procurement of
F-35C. The DoN has adequate 4th generation F/A-18 Super Hornet aircraft
inventory, but requires more 5th generation F-35C aircraft to increase
the lethality of the Carrier Air Wing (CVW) to meet current and
emerging threats. The existing F/A-18 inventory is going through the
Service Life Modification (SLM) program that extends service life while
inserting the same Block III capabilities of new production aircraft.
SLM Block III aircraft can be delivered for approximately one third the
cost of a new a production F/A-18 Super Hornet.
Any new procurement or investments need to be directed toward F-35
and follow on capabilities to ensure the CVW maintain an ability to
compete with emerging threats. Currently, the Navy has 559 F/A-18E/F
aircraft with 68 new production aircraft still being delivered between
now and fiscal year 2025. In conjunction with the SLM program, these
numbers are enough to meet the operational demands placed upon Naval
Aviation for deployments and also enough to meet the required 4th
Generation/5th Generation mix inside a CVW. As more F-35Cs enter the
Fleet, the overall requirement for F/A-18E/F aircraft will decrease
while the combat capability of the CVW increases.
6. Senator Hirono. Vice Admiral Conn, has as the situation improved
since last year?
Vice Admiral Conn. The Strike Fighter Shortfall (SFSF) situation
has not improved since last year due to competing DON funding
priorities. The DON is still able to manage current and projected
Strike Fighter inventory to meet all operational requirements.
7. Senator Hirono. Vice Admiral Conn, if not, why aren't you buying
more aircraft to fill the gap?
Vice Admiral Conn. The Navy is procuring new F-35C in order to
increase the capability and lethality of the Carrier Air Wing (CVW) to
meet current and emerging threats. The Navy physically has enough F/A-
18 Super Hornets to meet the 4th generation aircraft demands. These
existing F/A-18 Super Hornets will be upgraded though our Service Life
Modification (SLM) program that extends service life while inserting
the same Block III capabilities of new production aircraft. SLM Block
III aircraft can be delivered for approximately one third the cost of a
new a production F/A-18 Super Hornet.
Any new procurement needs to be F-35C aircraft to ensure the CVW
advanced capabilities outpace adversaries for a future conflict. The
Navy has requested six additional F-35C aircraft in the fiscal year
2023 Unfunded Priorities List (UPL) and is committed to achieving the
most lethal and capable CVW as soon as possible.
8. Senator Hirono. Admiral Conn and General Heckl, the Air Force
has been experiencing significant shortfalls in both pilots and in
aircraft maintainers. Have the Navy and Marine Corps been suffering
shortages in pilots and maintainers as well?
Vice Admiral Conn. Naval Aviation continues to meet all operational
requirements; however, pilot inventory challenges exist in certain
type/model/series, specifically within the strike fighter (VFA)
community primarily with operational Department Head (DH) and
Instructor Pilot (IP) manning levels.
All enlisted aviation maintenance ratings are manned between 98
percent to 102 percent of requirement with the exception of the
Aviation Ordnanceman rating, which is manned at 96 percent.
Lieutenant General Heckl. The Marine Corps has had issues with F-35
pilot and maintainer shortfalls. However, maintainer inventory levels
for F-35 are now projected to be healthy for the duration of the
transition. Pilot inventory levels continue to grow and improve, and it
is important to clarify that every F-35 operational squadron is
sufficiently staffed with F-35 pilots. The shortfall exists with staff
and other non-flying billets, which have a lower-than-desired number of
jet pilots, but that shortfall continues to improve each year.
9. Senator Hirono. Vice Admiral Conn, Lieutenant General Heckl, if
so, how large are the shortages and what are you doing to correct them?
Vice Admiral Conn. The strike fighter (VFA) community currently has
Department Head (DH) gaps in 22 of 34 squadrons with only 104 of 126
(82.5 percent) of VFA DH billets filled. Naval Aviation is mitigating
this shortfall by slating only three DHs per squadron. Additionally,
although overall VFA junior officer manning has improved to 89 percent
of billets authorized (BA), strike fighter instructor pilot (IP)
manning remains below requirements at 86 percent of BA with mitigations
that include tour length extensions and the utilization of post-DH
pilots, activated reservists, and Professional Flight Instructors.
The Navy has been working to address the pilot manning shortfall
through both monetary and non-monetary incentives. The fiscal year 2022
Aviation Department Head Retention Bonus program approved the VFA pilot
community to remain at the highest tier level ($35,000 per year). In
addition to the DH bonus, Navy has pursued and encouraged non-monetary
incentives to address manning shortfalls including increased
professional growth opportunities such as in-residence graduate
education; Career Intermission Program and concierge detailing to
assist with family planning; addressing quality of life and service
challenges at remote locations such as Lemoore, CA, Fallon, NV, and
China Lake, CA; and offering the Professional Flight Instructor program
to allow some aviators to serve continuously as flight instructors.
The Aviation Ordnance (AO) rating is short by 331 of 8,922 sailors,
mainly in the Journeyman payband (E5-E6). Our current efforts to remedy
the shortage consists of retention levers:
Professional Apprenticeship Career Track (PACT) is a
program designed for enlisted sailors to enter into an apprenticeship
program that provides apprentice-level formal and on the job training
that leads to a permanent rate/career field within 2 years. AO is
historically a popular rating chosen by PACT sailors.
Selective Re-enlistment Bonus is being offered for the
targeted Journeyman pay grades.
Sea Duty Incentive Pay (SDIP) is being offered to
incentivize sailors to voluntarily remain on or transfer to sea duty
billets in order to prevent critical manning gaps on sea duty. SDIP
levels for the AO rating in the journeyman paygrades of E-5 and E-6 are
set at $800 per month and $700 per month respectively.
Convert-in opportunity to the AO rating is being offered
to sailors who either by choice or by necessity leave their current
rating for another.
High Year Tenure waivers are being used where possible.
Assignment Incentive Pay (AIP) aims to increase voluntary
assignment to billets determined to be historically hard to fill.
Eligible sailors in paygrades E5-E9 can request a maximum bid of $250
per month in the detailing marketplace for commands located at Lemoore,
CA, China Lake, CA and Fallon, NV.
Lieutenant General Heckl. Both F-35 pilot and maintainer numbers
are projected to be healthy for the duration of the F-35 transition.
Maintainer inventory levels were improved by capitalizing on the
experience base in other platforms and converting them to F-35. The
Marine Corps continues to look at ways to further capture the
experience base from sun-setting platforms, like the AV-8B and FA-18,
and transition that to F-35. The Marine Corps has increased pilot
inventory levels by prioritizing pilot production through resourcing
our flight schools and fleet replacement squadrons with the necessary
manpower and equipment. However, the Marine Corps recognizes that pilot
production is only half the equation, and retention is equally
important. The Marine Corps' Manpower branch is working aggressively on
ways to retain our experienced aviators so that in the future we can
possess the most proficient pilots for our fifth-generation fighter
aircraft. The Marine Corps continues to be on a positive sustainment
path, and F-35 squadron staffing is not at risk.
usmc ground modernization
10. Senator Hirono. Lieutenant General Heckl, 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, 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 Heckl. The Marine Corps concept of operations is
as a stand-in force that has the ability to gain and maintain custody
of adversary targets--and hold some of those targets at risk
continuously in support of targeting for the naval and joint force. We
recognize that our value, largely, is in daily competition, building a
strong coalition of partners, and being ready at a moment's notice to
hold the adversary to task. In the realm of the defense, we recently
finalized a functional concept which addresses integrated air and
missile defense and force protection. These concepts reinforce the
employment of systems which enable forces to leverage deception,
mobility, and early detection in order to provide an additional layer
of defense within the weapons engagement zone. While this functional
concept--and its suggested force multiplying capabilities--require
further development, planning, resourcing, training and a unified
effort across the Naval Expeditionary Force, this concept will greatly
strengthen our defensive and force protection capabilities. Meanwhile,
we are also developing logistic capabilities to move small forces
quickly and constantly in order to overcome the adversary's ability to
find, fix, target and track us. Through enhanced signature management
and decoy/deception capabilities, combined with high-mobility, we
believe adversary weapons effects can be overcome.
11. Senator Hirono. Lieutenant General Heckl, 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 Heckl. Joint systems are critical to the
completion of the digital kill web and must have a robust command and
control architecture that will enable joint decisionmaking and
interoperability. Joint exercises conducted with Marine units on the
ground allow the Marine Corps to improve both its concept for stand-in
forces and expeditionary advanced based operations. Additionally, the
capabilities provided by the Common Aviation Command and Control
System, especially its ability to communicate with joint systems, such
as Link-16, have been used to integrate all elements of the Marine Air
Ground Task Force into the joint fight.
change for logistics fleet
12. Senator Hirono. Mr. Stefany, the Navy has indicated that
operations in a contested environment meant that the Navy's logistics
fleet will need to include smaller, faster, multimission transports.
Two year ago, 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.'' What progress have you made progress on implementing
these concepts or sorting through alternatives since last year, and has
the situation improved?
Mr. Stefany. Industry Studies for the Next Generation Logistics
Ship (NGLS) program were awarded on 17 December 2021 for initial
Concept Studies to Austal, Bollinger, and TAI Engineers. The results
from these studies will inform a commercial alternative to be analyzed
during the Analysis of Alternatives (AOA) phase for the NGLS program.
The AOA is anticipated to complete in fiscal year 2023. Additionally,
Next Generation Logistics Tactics, Techniques & Procedures Ship (NTS)
Charter Demonstrations and Operational Logistics (OPLOG) studies are
ongoing. These demonstrations and studies are intended to provide proof
of concept for NGLS Concept of Operations (CONOPS).
Regarding amphibious intra-theater platforms, the AOA is complete
and concluded that a purpose built ship is best suited for the mission
from a cost and effectiveness perspective. The Navy awarded the Concept
Study/Preliminary Design effort to five industry partners June 2021
(Austal, Bollinger, Fincantieri, VT Halter, and TAI Engineers). The
Concept Study phase completed in October 2021. The Navy exercised the
Preliminary Design options with all five industry partners in January
2022. Early industry engagement for refinement of concepts and
requirements will aid the Navy in reducing risk to cost-effectively
meet mission needs.
13. Senator Hirono. Mr. Stefany, what is the schedule for getting
to decisions on the appropriate path forward?
Mr. Stefany. The NGLS AOA is ongoing and expected to complete in
fiscal year 2023 with a preferred material solution. The Navy is on
track to support the acquisition timeline to procure the lead ship,
which is notionally planned in fiscal year 2026.
The Navy recently approved the medium lift intra-theater amphibious
platform AOA and is incorporating the AOA results and feedback from the
five industry concept studies and preliminary design efforts into the
Capabilities Development Document (CDD). Next steps include preliminary
design, and formal definition of requirements in the CDD. The Navy is
on track to have an approved CDD to support the acquisition timeline to
procure the lead ship, which is notionally planned in fiscal year 2025.
14. Senator Hirono. Lieutenant General Heckl, what are the
implications for amphibious shipping of operations in a contested
environment?
Lieutenant General Heckl. Naval forces must campaign, by persisting
forward to respond quickly to a crisis, and enable integrated
deterrence. Fleet Marine Forces deployed on and employed from multi-
mission capable amphibious warfare ships as part of a Naval force
provide unique attributes that generate options and decision space for
national leadership and combat credible options for Fleet and Joint
force commanders when strategic agility, combat credible deterrence and
prompt crisis and contingency response is required, regardless of
access to overseas bases.
Amphibious Ready Groups/Marine Expeditionary Units (ARG/MEUs)
exemplify globally deployable, integrated all-domain naval power. As
one of several standard combat credible fleet constructs, each ARG/MEU
is organized, trained, equipped, and certified to operate forward to
cooperate with our allies and partners in key regions, yet remain
capable of strategic, operational, and tactical maneuver in support of
regional crisis and global contingency response. It represents a combat
credible and operationally suitable force effective for competition,
countering gray zone activities and setting the conditions for the
joint force. The Navy-Marine Corps team persistently operates forward
to compete below the level of armed conflict and respond to crises
while remaining ready, if necessary, to swiftly transition to conflict
and achieve Joint Force and Fleet objectives.
To operate in the future environment, future MEUs must have the
right mix of capabilities, which requires an updated conceptual
foundation for employment that is informed by analysis and
experimentation. To address this concept of employment we are
developing a ``Concept for 21st Century Amphibious Operations.''
As adversary capabilities and tactics improve, updating our
mission, enemy, troops/fires, terrain, space, time, and logistics
(METTSTL) analysis will enable a partnered maritime defense in depth as
part of an integrated Naval kill web that can deny the adversary
freedom of action.
Moreover, amphibious warfare ship survivability and lethality
should not be viewed through a lens of an organic single ship
capability, but rather through its holistic aggregate (system of
systems) capability and capacity enabled by embarked naval forces and
in the context of cross-functional Fleet operations.
The Marine Corps is designing, building, and investing in a
relevant and capable Fleet Marine Force that will operate in contested
environments and that requires no less than 31 ready, lethal and
survivable amphibious warfare ships in order to meet our national
imperative as a Naval expeditionary force.
15. Senator Hirono. Lieutenant General Heckl, how will this
contested environment affect the Marine Corps' ability to conduct
amphibious assault operations?
Lieutenant General Heckl. The Marine Corps is designing, building
and investing in a relevant and capable Fleet Marine Force that will be
capable of operating in contested environments and that requires no
less than 31 ready, lethal, and survivable amphibious warfare ships to
meet our national imperative as a naval force.
The Marine Corps is entering the fourth year of a 10-year
modernization effort to create a single, integrated total force that
supports joint maritime campaigning and other joint operations, yet
retains the ability to perform traditional Marine Corps roles and
functions, such as global crisis response. Understanding that the
pacing threat for Force Design 2030 and the National Defense Strategy
is the armed forces of the People's Republic of China (PRC), the Marine
Corps is modernizing to build a force capable of executing concepts
against this pacing threat, not one exclusively tailored to them.
In the most recent Force Design 2030 Annual Update issued in May
2022, the Commandant of the Marine Corps tasked the Marine Corps with
developing a ``Concept for 21st Century Amphibious Operations.'' This
concept will be linked to how the Marine Corps' thinking has evolved
after 3 years and is continuing to evolve in its ongoing Campaign of
Learning through wargaming, analysis, experimentation, and large-scale
Fleet Marine Force exercises.
As amphibious warships are being decommissioned faster than they
are procured and delivered, the inventory of amphibious warfare ships
under the current plan will decrease to 25 ships over the next few
years. With this lower inventory, we will likely still support the
Indo-Pacific region, while accepting risk elsewhere in the world. For
instance, Marines from amphibious warfare ships in the past decade
evacuated the US embassy in Yemen; reinforced the embassy in Iraq; put
artillery units ashore to bombard ISIS in Syria; and most recently in
August, were the first on the ground to support the evacuation efforts
out of Afghanistan. The Marine Corps' ability to respond to crises like
these in AFRICOM, CENTCOM and EUCOM will be at risk as the number of
amphibious warfare ships decrease below 30.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Jeanne Shaheen
light amphibious warship
16. Senator Shaheen. Vice Admiral Conn, the fiscal year 2023
shipbuilding plan defers the start of procurement of Light Amphibious
Warships by two years, from fiscal year 2023 to fiscal year 2025, and
it shows only a slow ramp-up in annual procurement quantities over the
final three years of the FYDP. This does not appear to align with the
Marine Corps' desire to get these ships into service sooner rather than
later. The Navy states that it deferred the procurement start of these
ship two years because it is still examining requirements for these
ships. Continually examining and adding requirements increase costs and
complexity of the platform. What additional requirements is the Navy
considering and how will it impact the program?
Vice Admiral Conn. The Navy is following the deliberate
requirements process for LAW in order to determine the material
solution that will meet the Marine Littoral Regiment's need for
maneuver, mobility and sustainment. Due to the requirement to operate
in highly contested environment, the Navy is working closely with our
industry partners to help define the level of survivability required
for LAW. The shift of the lead ship from fiscal year 2023 to fiscal
year 2025 and ramp-up in the FYDP aligns the program milestones to
ensure the Navy is procuring the best ship to complete the mission.
Additionally, the Navy-Marine Corps team is evaluating a broad
range of options to provide a bridging strategy until the Light
Amphibious Warship (LAW) enters the fleet in sufficient numbers to meet
Marine Littoral Regiment maneuver, mobility and sustainment
requirements.
17. Senator Shaheen. Lieutenant General Heckl, since 2020, the
Marine Corps has been undertaking a transformation effort known as
Force Design 2030 as a way to ready the service for the possibility of
a sea-based conflict in the Indo-Pacific region. Some critics say the
Light Amphibious Warship's design may not survive Marine Corps
operations, adding to production costs down the road. How is the Marine
Corps balancing affordability with operational survivability?
Lieutenant General Heckl. A comprehensive analysis of alternatives
was conducted to examine Light Amphibious Warship (LAW) survivability.
The findings reveal that by improving design, employing proper
operational methods, and applying technological means the LAW can
significantly reduce the probability of detection and intercept, which
in turn drastically improves survivability. Survivability is important,
and by working with experts throughout DOD and industry, the LAW will
be designed and built to an affordable survivability standard.
constellation-class frigate
18. Senator Shaheen. Mr. Stefany, the Navy previously planned on
procuring Constellation-class (FFG-62) frigates at a steady rate of two
per year. In the Navy's fiscal year 2023 5-year shipbuilding plan, that
has been reduced to three ships every two years, or an average rate of
1.5 ships per year. Why did the Navy do that, and how is that
consistent with the Navy's goal of moving toward a more-distributed
fleet architecture that includes a larger proportion of smaller ships
like the FFG-62?
Mr. Stefany. The fiscal year 2023 Shipbuilding Plan restructures
the FFG 62 procurement profile to 1/2/1/2/1 for fiscal year 2023-2027
due to affordability and design maturation. The reduction to one ship
in fiscal year 2023 manages execution risk in the FFG program for
fiscal year 2023 as the shipyard works to start construction on the
lead ship later this year.
Assuming no real budget growth, the plan beyond fiscal year 2024
does not procure all FFGs at the desired rate (2-3 per year), but does
maximize capability within projected resources, industrial factors, and
technology constraints to build the most capable force. Overall, this
approach accepts risk in capacity in order to field a more capable and
ready force.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Angus King
defense against hypersonic missiles and evolving chinese threats
The Committee has received multiple briefings about China's
progressive leaps ahead in hypersonic weapon development and other
offensive capabilities. I am concerned that our joint force elements in
the Indo Pacific region would be at high risk in a fight with China.
19. Senator King. Vice Admiral Conn, please provide a classified
response on the ability for the aircraft carrier and the carrier strike
group to operate and impose cost on People's Republic of China (PRC)
elements, in a potential fight, while concurrently defending against
evolving threats (including advanced anti-ship missiles and hypersonic
weapons) in a denied/degraded electromagnetic spectrum environment.
Vice Admiral Conn. [Deleted.]
20. Senator King. Lieutenant General Heckl, please provide a
classified response on the ability for the Marine Littoral Regiment to
operate and impose cost on PRC elements, in a potential fight, while
concurrently defending against evolving threats (including hypersonic
weapons) in a denied/degraded electromagnetic spectrum environment.
Lieutenant General Heckl. [Deleted.]
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Thom Tillis
depot-level sustainability
21. Senator Tillis. Vice Admiral Conn and Lieutenant General Heckl,
in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022, the
Committee called on the Navy and Marine Corps to focus on depot-level
sustainability, especially at FRC East aboard MCAS Cherry Point. FRC
East is the Vertical Lift Center of Excellence and is a leader in
pioneering public-public partnerships with the State of North Carolina,
which I strongly support. What are the Navy and Marine Corps doing to
ensure the long-term stability and sustainability of its organic
aviation depots?
Vice Admiral Conn. The Department of the Navy is currently
developing a long-term plan to transform the organic Naval aviation
maintenance organization by modernizing and optimizing facilities and
equipment, developing a clear human capital strategy and transitioning
to the digital depot required to support the Air Wing of the Future.
On 29 April 2022, the Navy submitted a 5-year plan to the
Subcommittee on Readiness, Committee on Armed Services, which outlines
the near-term infrastructure efforts at the three aviation depots. This
Infrastructure Modernization and Optimization plan is a key enabler for
providing the Fleet the mission capable aircraft they need at a cost
the Navy can afford. The plan integrates all infrastructure and
industrial plant equipment investments at the Navy's three aviation
depots to improve Navy maintenance capabilities by expanding depot
capacity and optimizing depot configuration. The Department of Navy has
resourced an H-53K Gearbox Repair and Test facility as part of the
President's Budget 2023 submit and has programmed with the HQMC an F-35
Aircraft Sustainment Center on MCAS Cherry Point.
This plan will enable the aviation depots to synchronize business
process improvements with facility, equipment and digital technology
upgrades to improve repair cycle times and reduce operating costs. It
is the foundation for strategic investment in the Navy's organic
industrial base necessary to ensure that industrial facilities are
properly positioned and optimized to maintain legacy aircraft, as well
as the next generation family of systems under the Naval Aviation
Enterprise (NAE) governance.
Lieutenant General Heckl. The Department of the Navy is currently
developing a long-term plan to transform the organic Naval aviation
maintenance organization by modernizing and optimizing facilities and
equipment, developing a clear human capital strategy and transitioning
to the digital depot required to support the modern Marine Corps
Aviation Combat Element.
On 29 April 2022, the Navy submitted a 5-year plan to the
Subcommittee on Readiness, Committee on Armed Services, which outlines
the near-term infrastructure efforts at the three aviation depots. This
Infrastructure Modernization and Optimization plan is a key enabler for
providing the Fleet the mission capable aircraft they need at a cost
the Navy can afford. The plan integrates all infrastructure and
industrial plant equipment investments at the Navy's three aviation
depots to improve Navy maintenance capabilities by expanding depot
capacity and optimizing depot configuration.
This plan will enable the aviation depots to synchronize business
process improvements with facility, equipment, and digital technology
upgrades to improve repair cycle times and reduce operating costs. It
is the foundation for strategic investment in the Navy's organic
industrial base necessary to ensure that industrial facilities are
properly positioned and optimized to maintain legacy aircraft, as well
as the next generation family of systems under the Naval Aviation
Enterprise governance.
22. Senator Tillis. Vice Admiral Conn and Lieutenant General Heckl,
what support can you lend to partnerships with the State of North
Carolina, especially at the Global TransPark?
Vice Admiral Conn. The Navy and Marine Corps are committed to
leveraging public-private partnership opportunities and are
specifically looking at current opportunities with the State of North
Carolina at Global TransPark. The Navy will look at all opportunities
that are in the best interest of the government to maximize our depot
capacity, reduce cost of ownership, and foster cooperation with private
industry in accordance with all applicable laws and DOD guidance. North
Carolina businesses--the Global TransPark among them--provide critical
competition undergirding this public-private partnership supporting
Navy and Marine Corps Aviation, both now and into the future.
Lieutenant General Heckl. The Navy and Marine Corps are committed
to leveraging public-private partnership opportunities that are in the
best interest of the government to maximize our depot capacity, reduce
cost of ownership, and foster cooperation with private industry in
accordance with all applicable laws and DOD guidance. North Carolina
businesses, including the Global TransPark, provide critical
competition undergirding this public-private partnership supporting
Navy and Marine Corps Aviation both now and into the future.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Dan Sullivan
amphibious warship requirement
23. Senator Sullivan. Lieutenant General Heckl, in a statement to
Defense News on April 4th, you stated, ``the Marine Corps has a
requirement for absolutely no less than 31 amphibious warfare ships,''
and also highlighted that the current fiscal year 2023 funding plan
would shrink the amphibious force to just 25 ships in the next five
years. Could you please elaborate on the operational imperative for 31
amphibious warfare ships?
Lieutenant General Heckl. The Marine Corps has a requirement for no
less than 31 amphibious warfare ships. As ships are being
decommissioned faster than they are procured, delivered, and eventually
employed, the inventory under the current plan will decrease to
approximately 25 ships over the next few years. With this lower
inventory, we will likely still support the Indo-Pacific region but
will have to accept risk elsewhere in the world. For instance in the
past 12 years in AFRICOM and CENTCOM, Marines from amphibious warfare
ships evacuated US embassies in Libya and Yemen; reinforced the embassy
in Iraq; rescued a downed Air Force pilot in Libya; put artillery units
ashore to bombard ISIS in Syria; and most recently in August, were the
first on the ground to support the evacuation efforts out of
Afghanistan. The Marine Corps' ability to respond to crises like these
in AFRICOM, CENTCOM and EUCOM will be at risk as amphibious warfare
ship numbers decrease to approximately 25 ships in the next few years
and remain at that level for the remainder of the decade.
24. Senator Sullivan. Lieutenant General Heckl, how would having
only 25 amphibious warships degrade our ability to deter and, if
necessary, defeat an adversary?
Lieutenant General Heckl. The primary deployed formation of
America's crisis response force is a Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU)
aboard a Navy Amphibious Ready Group (ARG). The ARG consists of 1 LHA
and 2 LPDs. Removing 7 amphibious warfare ships reduces the battle
force inventory by one-third, or over two ARGs worth of expeditionary
warfare capacity.
With our current inventory of 32 amphibious warfare ships we can
produce an average campaigning global presence of 2.5 deployed ARG/MEUs
at any given time. This readiness allows for consistent campaigning
activities that do not cede key areas of the global commons to the
enemy, making it difficult to retake that terrain after a conflict has
commenced. This same formation enables joint force maneuver during the
early stages of conflict--a key factor in denying the enemy's ability
to achieve fait accompli objectives as observed in campaign analyses.
With 25 ships and based on historical readiness rates, the Marine
Corps projects an average global presence of 1.9 ARG/MEUs deployed.
Gaps between the consecutive ARG/MEUs and our forward presence will
become pronounced and are likely to increase substantially over time
due to a proportionally higher demand on a smaller set of aging
platforms. Moreover, if the Nation decides to conduct an amphibious
assault in a formation larger than an ARG/MEU, our war planning
requirements dictate 15-20 amphibious warfare ships. The Marine Corps
estimates that with an inventory of 25 ships, a significant effort
would be required to assemble an amphibious task force of that size.
An inventory of 25 amphibious warfare ships reduces our Nation's
forward presence that supports campaigning and limits our Nation's
ability to respond to crisis. Moreover, the limited amphibious warfare
ship inventory increases the time necessary to assemble assets in
conflict. Last, an inventory of 25 amphibious warfare ships poses a
significant risk for training and readiness as substantiated by the
KEARSARGE ARG's inability to deploy inside of 30 days prior to its
scheduled departure, despite the fact that today's battle force
inventory includes 32 L-class ships.
25. Senator Sullivan. Vice Admiral Conn, how are the Navy and
Marine Corps working together to resolve their differences regarding
the amphibious ship requirement?
Vice Admiral Conn. The Navy and Marine Corps team have been in
constant dialog to assess our requirement for amphibious ships from an
analytical perspective. The Navy and Marine Corps co-lead the
Amphibious Fleet Requirement Study with the Navy's Assessment Division
(OPNAV N81) and the Marine Corp's Operations Analysis Directorate (OAD)
leading the analysis. Three table top exercises conducted as part of
the study were held in Quantico, VA at the OAD with stakeholders from
the OPNAV staff alongside Marine Corps subject matter experts from
Concepts Development and Integration (CD&I), NAVSEA, and the Fleet
Marine Force. The study was a joint effort to determine requirements
across the range of operations to support presence, deterrence and
crisis response with the study providing the Department of the Navy the
requirement for both traditional amphibious ships and the Light
Amphibious Warship. The study team is in the process of briefing senior
leaders on the results of the study.
divest to invest
26. Senator Sullivan. Lieutenant General Heckl, in your statement
submitted to this subcommittee, you write, ``[i]n this budget request,
the Navy/Marine Corps Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System (NMESIS)
continues to be the Marine Corps' top modernization priority and is the
critical lethality component to our anti-ship capability.'' Continuing
later in the statement, you write, ``the Marine Corps has successfully
tested NMESIS twice, once in November 2020 and more recently in August
2021.'' What did these two operational tests show you that allowed the
Marine Corps to request $345 million for the program in the fiscal year
2023 budget?
Lieutenant General Heckl. Guided Flight Tests, Characterization
Tests, and Early User Evaluations for the Navy/Marine Corps
Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System (NMESIS) have been ongoing since
2020 with positive results, leading to a planned fiscal year 2022 3d
Quarter Operational Assessment that includes Ballistic Flight Tests.
Characterization Testing has assessed leader/follower operations, cross
country movements, road movement, and deep water fording. Early User
Evaluation has reported positive results in execution of three
different mobility field exercises and two raid missions utilizing KC-
130's with simulated firing missions and 11th Marines continues to
evaluate the system. Additionally, testing and certification for
transport via helicopter (externally), landing craft air cushion, and
KC-130 has been completed.
Based on the NMESIS program's positive trend, the Service has
request $343.8 million to procure 24 NMESIS systems and 115 Naval
Strike Missiles. These procurements will build on the initial fiscal
year 2022 procurement, increasing inventory levels to support
operational requirements.
27. Senator Sullivan. Lieutenant General Heckl, the Marine Corps is
quickly divesting of several legacy weapon systems to field
capabilities like NMESIS. This process has not been without some
internal Department of Defense (DOD) controversy regarding whether the
Marine Corps would keep the $8 billion in savings it generated through
divestment so it could invest in new capabilities. How is the Marine
Corps balancing the need to validate new concepts with the need to
rapidly field necessary new capabilities?
Lieutenant General Heckl. The Marine Corps must be ready to respond
to a crisis and be ready to fight, both now and in the future. The
balance needed to execute Service responsibilities while modernizing is
a question of risk of what, to what, and of when. The Service balances
this risk by fielding modernized systems with capabilities that are
applicable in a peer fight, as well as across the range of military
operations. Moreover, the Marine Corps recognizes that any delay in
modernization only exacerbates that risk, especially when considering
the context that the pacing threat continues to increase its defense
spending to develop and field advanced systems. This balance between
tempo of modernization and capabilities is continually assessed through
experimentation--live, virtual, and constructive--to inform Service-
level decisions.
light amphibious warship
28. Senator Sullivan. Lieutenant General Heckl, the Navy announced
recently that the Light Amphibious Warship would be delayed again, this
time until fiscal year 2025. In your estimate, how close is the Marine
Corps to validating the Light Amphibious Warship (LAW) requirements for
production and delivery?
Lieutenant General Heckl. The Light Amphibious Warship (LAW)
analysis of alternatives (AoA) and final report is complete. Next
actions include AoA sufficiency analysis by the Cost Assessment and
Program Evaluation office, a Joint Staff Review, a Joint Requirements
Oversight Council (JROC) review, and JROC memorandum publication. These
actions are scheduled to occur between now and July 2022. This process,
coupled with inputs from industry, will inform the writing of the
capabilities development document (CDD), planned to be approved in
early fiscal year 2023. Prior to CDD publication, preliminary design is
expected to be complete in August 2022.
29. Senator Sullivan. Lieutenant General Heckl, I understand the
Marine Corps plans to lease two commercial stern-ramp landing vessels
starting in late summer 2022 to experiment with the LAW concept. Is
this a preliminary effort to validate the LAW's requirements, give
Marine Littoral Regiments platforms to experiment, or both?
Lieutenant General Heckl. The Marine Corps is leasing an existing
civilian Offshore Support Vessel, modified with a stern beach landing
capability, to support service level experimentation over the next 5
years. While experimentation is the primary purpose, the Marine Corps
anticipates these actions will help inform and validate Light
Amphibious Warship requirements.
30. Senator Sullivan. Lieutenant General Heckl, some DOD officials
and commentators have questioned the survivability of these Light
Amphibious Warships given their comparative lack of defensive systems.
Can you explain why and how these ships are survivable?
Lieutenant General Heckl. A comprehensive analysis of alternatives
was conducted to examine Light Amphibious Warship (LAW) survivability.
The findings reveal that by improving design, employing proper
operational methods, and applying technological means the LAW can
significantly reduce the probability of detection and intercept, which
in turn drastically improves survivability. To operate effectively in
key maritime terrain littoral maneuver is a primary function to enable
success. The survivability of the entire Stand-in Force is enhanced
when they can be delivered to a shoreline, a littoral transition point,
at the time and place of our choosing and execute the functions
outlined in expeditionary advanced base operations. The unit's
survivability is further enhanced when the unit can rapidly displace
from key maritime terrain and reposition via LAW.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Josh Hawley
long range anti-ship missile (lrasm) production
31. Senator Hawley. Mr. Stefany, what would it take to expand LRASM
production lines so we can field as many LRASMs as possible now, while
also increasing our ability to surge LRASM production prior to or
during a potential conflict?
Mr. Stefany. The Navy Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM)
production line is shared with the Air Force Joint Air to Surface
Standoff Missile (JASSM). The maximum production capacity is 720
missiles of either variant with 120 maximum allotted to LRASM, since
current world events have driven the planned production of Air Force
JASSM in consuming all additional production capacity. The President's
Budget 2023 Request does not currently max out the production capacity
of 120 LRASMs. With an additional $109.8 million provided in fiscal
year 2023, 28 more LRASMs can be produced to max out the production
capacity.
The prime contractor is currently working with sub vendors to
provide a proposal for the increased production capacity of both
missiles. A Rough Order of Magnitude provided by the contractor
identified $36.0 million for LRASM unique tooling and components to
increase the production line quantity to 240 LRASMs of the C-1 variant.
A full proposal to include all common JASSM/LRASM tooling and
components is expected in the July 2022 timeframe.
vertical launch system (vls) capacity
32. Senator Hawley. Admiral Conn, how many VLS tubes will the Navy
lose from the fleet between now and 2030?
Vice Admiral Conn. Based on the Navy's Annual Long-Range Plan for
Construction of Naval Vessels for Fiscal Year 2023, Alternative 1 force
structure, the Navy is forecasted to decommission 3932 surface and
undersea VLS tubes from fiscal year 2022 through the end of fiscal year
2030.
33. Senator Hawley. Admiral Conn, how many VLS tubes will the Navy
add to the fleet between now and 2030?
Vice Admiral Conn. Based on the Navy's Annual Long-Range Plan for
Construction of Naval Vessels for Fiscal Year 2023, Alternative 1 force
structure, the Navy is forecasted to gain 2560 surface and undersea VLS
tubes through new construction from fiscal year 2022 through the end of
fiscal year 2030.
34. Senator Hawley. Admiral Conn, you testified, ``Yes, we are
taking risk in VLS between now and about 2030.'' When asked further
about the character of that risk, you offered to provide a response for
the record. This in mind, how would you characterize the risk generated
by the Navy's net loss of VLS tubes between now and 2030?
Vice Admiral Conn. There is a reduction in the overall number of
VLS cells but warfighting capability and capacity can't just be
measured by the number of VLS cells, it also needs to take into account
the weapons the can be employed from those cells as well as the combat
system elements supporting the engagements. The older ships that will
decommission are not as capable as the newer ships in terms of Anti-Air
Warfare or Ballistic Missile Defense, with less capable weapons being
employed paired with less capable combat systems and radars in many
cases restricting effectiveness to Anti-Air Warfare only within the
ships own radar horizon.
The Navy had to make a value decision on the investment required to
get these older platforms with less capable combat systems forward
versus the investments we need to make to deliver a more capable, more
lethal Navy in the future. These decisions were made within the context
that the Navy fights from the seabed to space, our submarines, our
surface ships and aviation assets all contribute to the fight in
addition to those platforms hosting VLS cells.
The new era of strategic competition requires a more capable,
global, forward, and multi-domain Navy. The National Defense Strategy
(NDS) underscores the need for DOD to move away from systems that
provide less capability and do not significantly support our strategy
and ability to win in a future fight.
In the fiscal year 2023 budget, Navy prioritized technologies,
systems and platforms that need to be fielded quickly and at scale to
be operationally relevant in the coming years to ensure that Navy meets
Joint Force operational requirements, and made difficult choices to
divest of older and less capable ships in order to make investments
that better support warfighting requirements.
[all]