[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


.                                    
                         [H.A.S.C. No. 118-29]

                                 HEARING

                                   ON

                   NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT

                          FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024

                                  AND

              OVERSIGHT OF PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED PROGRAMS

                               BEFORE THE

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                   SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS HEARING

                                   ON

         FISCAL YEAR 2024 BUDGET REQUEST FOR MILITARY READINESS

                               __________

                              HEARING HELD
                             APRIL 19, 2023


                                     
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

                              __________

                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
53-874                  WASHINGTON : 2024                    
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------     
 

                       SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS

                    MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida, Chairman

JOE WILSON, South Carolina           JOHN GARAMENDI, California
AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia                MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey
MIKE JOHNSON, Louisiana              VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, Florida           MARILYN STRICKLAND, Washington
BRAD FINSTAD, Minnesota              GABE VASQUEZ, New Mexico
DALE W. STRONG, Alabama              JILL N. TOKUDA, Hawaii
JENNIFER A. KIGGANS, Virginia        DONALD G. DAVIS, North Carolina
JAMES C. MOYLAN, Guam                MARC VEASEY, Texas

               Patrick Nevins, Professional Staff Member
               Jeanine Womble, Professional Staff Member
                  Ethan Pelissier, Research Assistant
                           
                           C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

              STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

Garamendi, Hon. John, a Representative from California, Ranking 
  Member, Subcommittee on Readiness..............................     3
Waltz, Hon. Michael, a Representative from Florida, Chairman, 
  Subcommittee on Readiness......................................     1

                               WITNESSES

Allvin, Gen David. W., USAF, Vice Chief of Staff, United States 
  Air Force......................................................     8
Franchetti, ADM Lisa M., USN, Vice Chief of Naval Operations, 
  United States Navy.............................................     6
George, GEN Randy A., USA, Vice Chief of Staff, United States 
  Army...........................................................     4
Smith, Gen Eric M., USMC, Assistant Commandant, United States 
  Marine Corps...................................................     7
Thompson, Gen David D., USSF, Vice Chief of Space Operations, 
  United States Space Force......................................    10

                                APPENDIX

Prepared Statements:

    Allvin, Gen David. W.........................................    80
    Franchetti, ADM Lisa M.......................................    42
    Garamendi, Hon. John.........................................    28
    George, GEN Randy A..........................................    30
    Smith, Gen Eric M............................................    63
    Thompson, Gen David D........................................    94
    Waltz, Hon. Michael..........................................    27

Documents Submitted for the Record:

    [There were no Documents submitted.]

Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:

    Mr. Gimenez..................................................   107

Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:

    Mr. Finstad..................................................   120
    Mr. Garamendi................................................   119
    Mr. Rogers...................................................   111
    Mr. Strong...................................................   121
    Mr. Waltz....................................................   115
         
         
         FISCAL YEAR 2024 BUDGET REQUEST FOR MILITARY READINESS

                              ----------                              

                  House of Representatives,
                       Committee on Armed Services,
                                 Subcommittee on Readiness,
                         Washington, DC, Wednesday, April 19, 2023.
    The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 3:44 p.m., in 
room 2212, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Michael Waltz 
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL WALTZ, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM 
          FLORIDA, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS

    Mr. Waltz. Call to order this hearing of the Readiness 
Subcommittee of the fiscal year 2024 budget request for 
military readiness.
    I ask unanimous consent that the Chair be authorized to 
declare a recess at any time. Without objection, so ordered.
    We obviously have a lot to discuss today and you all have--
everyone has my apologies for running a few minutes behind. 
That is what happens when my team lets me disappear into a SCIF 
[secure compartmentalized information facility] with HPSCI 
[House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence].
    We have a lot to, obviously we have a lot to discuss as it 
pertains to readiness. I want to thank all of your for time in 
having our one-on-one meetings in the run-up to this hearing.
    Lots to talk about: pilot shortages, recruiting/retention, 
weapon system sustainment, infrastructure management and 
restoration, just to name a few. I would like to highlight the 
detriments of operating under a continuing resolution. I want 
to highlight that as much for my colleagues here, as all of our 
Vices well know.
    That without an on-time budget, the Department is unable--
and I think this is lost a lot of times in the conversation 
here--that the Department is unable to begin any new projects. 
I am convinced that there is an underlying belief here that the 
Department gets a lot money. And if it gets the same amount of 
money as last year, then everybody will be okay.
    But not having those new starts is just critical and 
devastating. I ask the witnesses to elaborate these, as you 
make your--on these effects as you make your comments.
    I do remain concerned with this administration's continuing 
priority on climate change. I want to be clear that we have to 
deal with climate change, that resiliency is absolutely an 
important issue.
    But as we had today with the Secretary of the Army, when we 
are outfitting our bases and our fleet with things that come 
from the--our greatest adversary, with panels, with turbines, 
with technology, with software that it literally comes from 
China, I have real concerns with our control of that supply 
chain as we move towards transitioning our fleet.
    In fact, you know, in addition to that, the Secretary of 
the Navy recently stated that climate change is a top priority 
of his. Yet we stand to have those same supply chain issues. I 
am supportive of efforts to increase resiliency, I want to be 
clear there. But these policies can't be an end to themselves.
    I am also concerned, just to be candid here, and we have 
had these conversations of what we are seeing within the 
Department of the Navy with regards to amphibs [amphibious 
assault ships]. And we want to talk about that today.
    And in fact, the Marine Corps' number one unfunded 
requirement is a ship for the Navy. And that is something that 
we have to resolve. We will help you resolve it here.
    But I think that is endemic of an ongoing issue. And years 
of delayed maintenance due to high OPTEMPO [operations tempo] 
frankly has gutted the readiness of our amphibs. This has led 
to delayed deployments for ARG-MEUs [amphibious ready group-
Marine expeditionary units], and decreased capacity with our 
ships at sea.
    These are obviously critical capabilities to INDOPACOM 
[U.S. Indo-Pacific Command] and that combatant commander, and I 
remain somewhat baffled as to why these problems persist. I 
applaud force modernization taking place across the services. 
We support the Army's REARMM [Regionally Aligned Readiness and 
Modernization Model] and the Marine Corps' Force Design 2030.
    I am concerned, however, about the timeliness of these 
efforts, and you will continue, Ranking Member Garamendi and I 
think agree on this, that the timelines for the threats don't 
match the timelines to get our readiness in shape and to get 
our modernization in shape. And I am eager to hear how the 
services have revised and accelerated these timelines to 
counter China's ambitions.
    And finally, taking care of our soldiers, taking care of 
our service members across the board is the utmost 
responsibility of everybody here in this room. Service 
leadership continuously touts the rhetoric of people first. But 
when we look at some of our facilities, when we look at some of 
the living conditions for our service members, I still remain 
skeptical of this actually being put into practice.
    And so the condition of some of this housing truly is 
outstanding. It no doubt affects retention. We must provide 
safe barracks and housing to our service members and put their 
welfare first to match, have our budget match the priority.
    So I just look forward to hearing from everybody here 
today. And I hand over to you, Mr. Garamendi, for your opening 
comments.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Waltz can be found in the 
Appendix on page 27.]

    STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN GARAMENDI, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM 
     CALIFORNIA, RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS

    Mr. Garamendi. I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am delighted to 
work with you. I am pleased to hear your interest and support 
for climate change issues. And you are quite right about 
addressing that issue using Chinese materials.
    That is why we wrote into almost--well, in all of the 
infrastructure and the energy issues of the future very strong 
buy-America requirements. And so we need to push the American 
industry into the manufacturing of these systems, from solar 
panels to turbines and the like.
    And we can do that, and that is also an issue for the 
military. Are they buying American-made equipment for their 
ships and planes, or are they buying others. And complex issue, 
but a very, very important one.
    So each year as we prepare for this hearing, I am struck by 
the vast jurisdiction of the Readiness Subcommittee. As I often 
say, other subcommittees get to buy the new, bright, shiny 
stuff, and it is left to us to maintain it and keep it 
operating.
    And so in this subcommittee, we need to pay particular 
attention to the facilities that support this equipment, that 
sustain the modernization of the weapon systems themselves, and 
in which the men and women of the military are trained.
    So we have an enormous task here. And over the years, both 
the minority and the majority as it has changed over time have 
paid attention to this issue, as you are Mr. Chairman, and I 
thank you for that.
    Now, we have also learned from Putin's immoral invasion of 
Ukraine that many of the issues that we have dealt with over 
the years here trying to make sure that the--that our military 
is ready in every way has brought to the attention and to the 
forefront many of our concerns.
    We have been forced to think about the organic industrial 
base, which was heretofore not with this committee, but with 
the--even the larger committee often ignored.
    And so in this budget request, I am finally seeing evidence 
that we are getting serious about the modernization of the 
depots, the shipyards, the infrastructure, the bases, the 
housing, and all of the rest. And we need to continue to push 
that.
    I know that you intend to do that, Mr. Chairman, and I hope 
that the members of this subcommittee will continue also with 
that effort.
    Through the media, we have also watched the cost of 
Russia's other readiness failures for the Russians. We have 
watched its equipment fail because it was poorly sustained and 
maintained. And we have witnessed the cost of poorly trained 
troops, Russian troops. We cannot let that happen, and it falls 
to this subcommittee to make sure that as we go forward, that 
we are fully prepared.
    There is another piece of this puzzle that falls within the 
jurisdiction beyond the training of the troops. And that is 
that we have to make sure that the access to sustain the fight 
is available. And so we will be working on that also.
    Now, the Comptroller General has analyzed that the 
readiness of our weapon systems over the course of years has 
not been good enough. When we analyze the aircraft type, the 
majority of the systems in our inventory fail to--by more than 
10 percent below the Department's own mission capability rate 
goals.
    So we have to continue to work on this issue. 
Cannibalization seems to be the way in which we keep most of 
the fleet, whether that is an aircraft or it is a truck or a 
plane or a tank, or a ship, cannibalization seems to be the way 
in which we keep these things operating. That doesn't work for 
long.
    And so we need to pay attention to that as we have in the 
past, and we must continue to make sure that all of the 
equipment has the necessary parts and pieces on time when 
necessary.
    So I am looking forward to the hearing today, our witnesses 
as they discuss these issues, what they have learned or the 
lessons they have learned. And it will be displayed in this 
year's budget.
    And we are certainly seeing the lessons in Ukraine. More 
importantly, what we are doing to operationalize those lessons 
that have been learned from Ukraine and beyond.
    So, look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman. Look 
forward to working with the members of the committee, the 
subcommittee, and we will push along. Thank you very much. 
Yield back.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Garamendi can be found in 
the Appendix on page 28.]
    Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Mr. Garamendi. I'd like to again 
welcome our witnesses and thank them for their participation 
today.
    We are joined by General Randy George, the Vice Chief of 
the Army; Admiral Lisa Franchetti, the Vice Chief of Naval 
Operations; General Eric Smith, Assistant Commandant of the 
Marine Corps; and General David Allvin, Vice Chief Staff of the 
Air Force; General DT Thompson, Vice Chief of Space Operations.
    General George, over to you for your opening remarks.

  STATEMENT OF GEN RANDY A. GEORGE, USA, VICE CHIEF OF STAFF, 
                       UNITED STATES ARMY

    General George. Okay, thanks, Chairman.
    Chairman Waltz, Ranking Member Garamendi, distinguished 
members of this subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to 
discuss the readiness posture of our Army.
    Eighty years ago, American troops were fully engaged in the 
allied war effort in Europe, in Africa, and in the Indo-
Pacific. Among them was a company of soldiers holding a 
roadblock near a village at Sanananda in northern New Guinea. 
They were enduring malarial fevers, venomous snakes, torrential 
rains, and holding off a perpetual onslaught of competent enemy 
fighters.
    I reflect on this because it reminds me that our Army must 
be ready for anything. We must be ready to deter war, and if 
deterrence fails, to take the fight to the enemy anywhere 
around the globe, even in the most hostile environments, just 
as we have always done.
    It also reminds me that warfighting is a team effort. It 
takes teams on the ground, like at Sanananda, and teams at 
every echelon above providing a menu of lethal options to our 
combatant commanders.
    Our Army is focused on warfighting and training for battle 
in which all domains are contested. And we are focused on 
supporting our combatant commands with ready formations around 
the world. And right now we have 137,000 soldiers in over 140 
countries.
    We are strengthening our partnership with defense industry 
and rapidly modernizing our organic industrial base to increase 
productivity and ensure that we have the stocks to fight when 
called upon.
    We are deterring the pacing challenge China by exercising 
and campaigning across the Indo-Pacific theater and holding the 
line in the European theater along our NATO [North Atlantic 
Treaty Organization]--alongside our NATO partners. All the 
while, adapting in real time to lessons learned from the war in 
Ukraine and rapidly incorporating new tactics into our doctrine 
and our training.
    But readiness for today is not enough. Our Army is also 
transforming, because honestly we don't have an option. Warfare 
is changing, and we must change because of it to ensure we stay 
ahead of our potential adversaries.
    So among many things, we are modernizing long-range 
precision fires, air and missile defense, ground combat 
capabilities, and developing counter-UAS [unmanned aerial 
systems] capabilities and doctrine.
    Finally, we are building the team. And like I said, 
warfighting is a team effort. This includes providing 
commanders with the resources they need to support soldiers' 
mental and physical well-being, to maintain a healthy command 
climate, and to built cohesive teams.
    And it means investing in the quality of life of our 
soldiers and our families, ensuring that they have safe housing 
in barracks, adequate childcare, and spouse employment 
opportunities.
    I will end with recruitment, a critical readiness priority 
for us right now. We are challenged by the fact that a small 
number of young Americans, 23 percent, are qualified to serve. 
Fewer still, we are finding, are interested in serving. And 
that is something that we are working very hard to change.
    Our Army remains a great place to be, and I think our high 
retention rates speak to that. The trouble is, many Americans 
don't realize it or believe it.
    Military service to many people seems like a life setback. 
In reality, it is a life accelerator. That has certainly been 
my experience since I enlisted as a private right out of high 
school.
    It is a great team with an important mission and ample 
opportunity to learn, grow, and make an impact. And we have to 
get that story out, and we are pouring all of our energy into 
that effort. And we appreciate Congress' assistance in 
amplifying our call-to-service message.
    And Chairman, the last on--to answer your question on a 
continuing resolution, I will just give you an example from 
last year. Over 3 months, we had about 25 new starts that we 
were looking to get going and we couldn't because of the 
continuing resolution impacted about 1.9 billion.
    And you can imagine some of that in there, for example, was 
OIB [organic industrial base] modernization that we were trying 
to get started. So as you mentioned up front, it is the new 
starts that a continuing resolution would be a problem for us.
    Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of General George can be found in 
the Appendix on page 30.]
    Mr. Waltz. Thank you, General.
    Admiral Franchetti, your opening statement.

 STATEMENT OF ADM LISA M. FRANCHETTI, USN, VICE CHIEF OF NAVAL 
                 OPERATIONS, UNITED STATES NAVY

    Admiral Franchetti. Chairman Waltz, Ranking Member 
Garamendi, and distinguished members of the committee, good 
afternoon. On behalf of the Secretary of the Navy and the Chief 
of Naval Operations, thank you for the opportunity to discuss 
Navy readiness with you today.
    The United States is a maritime nation. Our security and 
prosperity depend on the seas. For the past 247 years, your 
Navy has stood the watch.
    We are America's away team, operating forward to deter war, 
protect our economic interests, uphold international law, 
ensure freedom of and access to the seas, and respond to crises 
and natural disasters. We provide our Nation's leaders with 
decision space and options and stand ready to fight and win 
when called to do so.
    Over the past year, we have safely executed 22,000 steaming 
days, almost 1 million flight hours, and participated in nearly 
100 exercises. With operations spanning the globe, we have 
supported the allied response to Russia's illegal and 
unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, conducted freedom of navigation 
operations, interdicted illegal narcotics traffickers, and 
provided humanitarian assistance.
    As I speak, our sailors and Marine Corps counterparts are 
deployed on more than 100 ships and submarines around the 
world, ready to meet the security needs of our Nation. Our 
fiscal year 2024 budget request is consistent with CNO's [Chief 
of Naval Operations'] priorities of readiness in sailors, then 
capability, then capacity, with the Columbia SSBN [nuclear 
ballistic missile submarine] program as our number one 
procurement priority.
    We continue to prioritize readiness to sustain our forces 
through better maintenance performance, more training, improved 
parts availability, and increased weapons inventories.
    Navy readiness begins with our people, the sailors, 
civilians, and families who are the foundation of our true 
warfighting advantage. We are committed to improving their 
quality of service and personal resilience, investing in 
initiatives such as quality housing and childcare, access to 
the full continuum of mental healthcare, improved education, 
and an environment free of sexual harassment and sexual 
assault.
    In this 50th anniversary of the All-Volunteer Force, we 
continue to focus on recruiting, retention, and reducing gaps 
in our billets at sea.
    Navy readiness is also centered on the readiness of our 
platforms. Using data analytics, improving our planning 
processes, and procuring long lead time materials, we have 
decreased maintenance delays in public and private shipyards. 
But there is more work to be done.
    Our budget request fully funds public and private ship 
maintenance, aviation depot maintenance, increases parts and 
spares, and continues to grow our highly skilled public 
shipyard workforce.
    Finally, Navy readiness is also driven by the readiness of 
our bases. Shore infrastructure is critical, and we continue to 
fully fund the once-in-a-century recapitalization of our four 
public shipyards through the Shipyard Infrastructure 
Optimization Program.
    Our budget request supports increased sustainment of our 
shore infrastructure while prioritizing restoration and 
modernization for water, electrical, and safety systems.
    As our strategic competitors continue to improve and 
enhance their capabilities, maintaining a responsive, combat-
ready, worldwide deployable Navy is our first line of defense 
and deterrence. Sustained readiness investments in today's Navy 
are a down payment on American's future security.
    I thank the committee for your leadership and partnership 
in keeping the world's greatest maritime force ready to fight 
and win at sea, and I look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Admiral Franchetti can be found 
in the Appendix on page 42.]
    Mr. Waltz. Thank you.
    General Smith, your opening statement.

  STATEMENT OF GEN ERIC M. SMITH, USMC, ASSISTANT COMMANDANT, 
                   UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS

    General Smith. Chairman Waltz, Ranking Member Garamendi, 
and distinguished members of this subcommittee, I am pleased to 
appear before you today to discuss Marine Corps readiness and 
the fiscal year 2024 budget.
    Your Marine Corps remains the Nation's force in readiness. 
We are ready to deter adversaries, and when that deterrence 
fails, we are ready to strike and enable others to strike.
    We also provide the crisis response forces that American 
citizens abroad and our allies have come to expect from their 
Marines. We provide this expeditionary combined arms force 
utilizing the minimum 31 amphibious warships that Congress has 
directed.
    Those ships provide the organic mobility required to bring 
all of our assets to bear at the critical time and place for 
our combatant commanders. The most important asset we bring to 
bear remains the individual Marine.
    Our modernization efforts, known as Force Design, ensure 
that we are manned, trained, and equipped to deter a peer 
adversary and to campaign to a position of advantage should 
deterrence fail and lethal force be needed.
    Our modernization efforts are required to fight and win on 
future battlefields. About that, we can make no mistake. Our 
aviation readiness has increased more than 10 percent in the 
past few years, thanks to the work of this subcommittee to 
provide us with the operations and maintenance funding we need, 
and due to our aviation modernization and reorganization 
efforts.
    When a Marine expeditionary unit deploys on a big-deck L-
class amphibious warship today, they provide the combatant 
commander with 66 percent more fifth-generation aircraft than 
before we made Force Design changes.
    Our efforts to modernize our training and education are 
bearing fruit as we produce an even more lethal Marine. From 
our basic rifleman training to our service-level training 
exercises, we are becoming more lethal.
    Our new training integrates our joint and organic fires, 
improved communications, and updated ISR [intelligence, 
surveillance, and reconnaissance] to sense, make sense, track, 
and destroy targets at ranges and complexities never before 
seen by our Marine Corps.
    Our individual Marine remains the most lethal weapon on the 
battlefield. Our efforts to improve the quality of life for 
those warriors, to retain them once we train them, are vital 
and important. Your continued support matters to them and their 
families, so thank you.
    Finally, to your point, Mr. Chairman, I would note that of 
the past 10 years, approximately 4 have been spent in a 
continuing resolution status. During any CR, we are unable to 
improve as rapidly as we might have otherwise done. Our 
adversaries don't have that problem.
    Your help to deliver on-time and predictable funding to the 
18- and 19-year-old lance corporals who do the fighting for our 
Nation is sincerely appreciated.
    As an example, in the past we had the opportunity to 
procure our Amphibious Combat Vehicle faster, but were unable 
to do so because of a CR. That leaves older equipment in the 
hands of the 18- and 19-year-olds who will fight for us. So the 
continuing resolution is absolutely detrimental.
    I look forward to answering your questions, and I am 
grateful to appear before you.
    [The prepared statement of General Smith can be found in 
the Appendix on page 63.]
    Mr. Waltz. Thank you, General Smith. General Allvin for 
your opening statement.

 STATEMENT OF GEN DAVID. W. ALLVIN, USAF, VICE CHIEF OF STAFF, 
                    UNITED STATES AIR FORCE

    General Allvin. Chairman Waltz, Ranking Member Garamendi, 
and distinguished committee members, on behalf of our Air Force 
Secretary and Chief of Staff, thank you for the opportunity to 
discuss the critically important topic of readiness.
    We greatly appreciate this body's continued partnership and 
support in delivering the resources necessary for the Air Force 
to respond to today's threats while preparing for tomorrow.
    The events of the past year remind us that global actors 
have the capability and intent to challenge peace and 
stability. In the case of the pacing challenge, the People's 
Republic of China, the speed at which they are developing 
advanced capability and capacity should serve as a warning for 
us to act with a greater sense of urgency.
    We must maintain the necessary advantage to deter them from 
violent pursuit of objectives at odds with our national 
interests. Your Air Force is laser-focused on this task.
    Readiness starts with our airmen, both uniformed and 
civilian, who consistently prove to be our greatest strength 
and competitive advantage. Since the beginning of the All-
Volunteer Force 50 years ago, we have been fortunate enough to 
attract the best of America's youth in sufficient numbers. But 
recent realities have put this under pressure.
    As a result, we will likely not meet our recruiting goals 
this year. We are aggressively exploring multiple options while 
streamlining processes to attract a broader pool of those 
talented Americans into our formation.
    We also know that a ready airman is a focused and resilient 
airman. And we must demonstrate that we continue to value our 
service members and their families. We will continue to explore 
opportunities to expand or initiate programs that better 
support quality of life, and we greatly appreciate this 
committee's support for these efforts.
    The aircrew deficit persists due to several factors, but 
this shortage has not extended into the operational units or 
the pilot training bases. We are continuing on the path to 
transform our approach to pilot training to increase production 
while leveraging numerous monetary and non-monetary programs to 
retain the experience of those trained aviators.
    We look forward to working with the committee on these 
programs, as well as our pursuit of targeted relief from 
current legislation to enable the hiring of contract simulator 
instructors to maximize training and optimize our manpower to 
produce those pilots.
    While the proposed budget increase--increases weapon system 
sustainment funding by $1.1 billion over last year, this will 
only still resource 87 percent of the estimated requirement due 
to sustainment challenges of our ever-aging fleet, inflation, 
supply chain issues, and labor costs.
    We are pursuing improvements in reliability and 
maintainability, supporting initiatives that advance data-
driven decisions. This drives efficiency in what we do today, 
and it enables responsiveness in dynamic wartime environments.
    Significant challenges and tough decisions still lie ahead. 
We must be thoughtful in adequately funding our readiness 
accounts while pursuing the right investments to develop 
advanced capabilities to meet future threats. This year we feel 
we have struck the right balance.
    In closing, I would offer this Congress can make the most 
positive impact on our readiness through a timely budget 
appropriation. An extended continuing resolution would result 
in the inability to start critical new programs and continue 
the momentum that we are building to meet the pacing challenge.
    It also creates instability in support to our airmen and 
families at a time when this has never been more important. A 
CR will essentially rob us of something both critical and 
irreversible as we face growing threats to our Nation, and that 
is time.
    So Mr. Garamendi, to your point as well, specifics, and 
Chairman Waltz, on a CR. We estimate that the CR will decrease 
our buying power for the United States Air Force by $5.4 
billion, an extended CR.
    The key things that we are looking at that will directly be 
impacted by a continuing resolution are the initiation of a 
research and development in collaborative combat aircraft. This 
is integral to our design to have affordable mass against the 
People's Republic of China to be able to gain and maintain air 
superiority in a highly contested environment.
    These collaborative combat aircraft, we are working not 
only the platforms, but developing the autonomy to ensure we 
can leverage them with our crewed aircraft, as well as 
experimental operational units that we have funded in 2024 to 
be able to better integrate into our formations.
    And as I mentioned, with the uncertainty, we see this in 
every CR. Families that are getting ready to PCS [permanent 
change of station] and prepare their families for the schools 
they are going to go into, if we don't have the certainty of 
being able to do that on time, that just puts more tension into 
the families, and it doesn't show that we support them the way 
that we should.
    Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of General Allvin can be found in 
the Appendix on page 80.]
    Mr. Waltz. Thank you, General Allvin. And those specifics, 
General Smith, yours as well, are incredibly important for us 
as we go out to our respective caucuses as we try to get the--
as we try to get this done.
    General Thompson.

 STATEMENT OF GEN DAVID D. THOMPSON, USSF, VICE CHIEF OF SPACE 
             OPERATIONS, UNITED STATES SPACE FORCE

    General Thompson. Chairman Waltz, Ranking Member Garamendi, 
and distinguished members of the subcommittee, on behalf of the 
Secretary of the Air Force and Chief of Space Operations, thank 
you for the opportunity to testify today regarding the 
readiness of the Space Force.
    In examining the readiness of the Space Force to accomplish 
its missions, the overriding consideration remains the dramatic 
shift to the space domain from a comparatively benign military 
environment to one that is undeniably contested.
    Given that the capabilities and benefits provided from 
space are essential to our way of life and crucial to effective 
military operations in every other domain, this shift was the 
compelling reason for the creation of the Space Force 3\1/2\ 
years ago.
    Since then, with the tremendous support of Congress, the 
Space Force, Department of the Air Force, and broader 
Department of Defense have moved out aggressively to address 
the challenges the Nation faces in space. We have begun to 
pivot to more resilient and defendable space architectures that 
ensure soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines can count on 
space forces across the spectrum of conflict.
    We have begun designing and developing satellite 
constellations that address the migration of missions to space, 
including moving target indication, domain awareness on the 
land, at sea, and in the air. Key elements of command and 
control and the movement of the data and information enables 
the joint force in the way it expects to fight in the future.
    Finally, the Space Force has begun to shift to a new 
training and readiness approach that I described last year as 
the Space Force Generation Model. We achieved initial 
capability for this approach on October 1 of last year. Once 
complete, it will ensure space forces are combat-ready against 
the pacing challenge.
    While much remains to be done in each of these areas, the 
main challenges of Space Force readiness today are twofold. The 
first is creating a combat-ready force that--the first to 
creating a combat-ready Space Force is an advanced full-
spectrum test and training infrastructure.
    This infrastructure will be a system of systems that 
provides test and training opportunities with high-fidelity 
mission simulators and threats, a professional aggressor force, 
and a suitable range. It will allow us to validate tactics, 
test system limitations, and train operators in a live and 
synthetic environment against a thinking adversary.
    Without this infrastructure, Guardians would not have 
defendable systems, proven tactics, or the confidence and 
competence they need should it come to conflict in space. The 
operational test and training infrastructure will be a force 
multiplier, allowing Guardians to maintain and improve our 
strategic advantage in space.
    The second primary challenge of Space Force readiness lies 
in whether budgetary resources will be available in a timely 
manner to execute all we are planning to do. As I stated 
previously, Congress has been a tremendous partner in defining 
and building the Space Force.
    In each year since its existence, the Space Force has seen 
12-15 percent increases in its budget year over year. The 2024 
request is nearly $4 billion more than it was in 2023, a 15 
percent increase. In the event of a continuing resolution, that 
increased budget authority would not be available to meet our 
needs.
    This budget request includes at least 17 new initiatives, 
many of which are focused on this operational test and training 
infrastructure.
    Beyond that, new initiatives that were begun in 2023, 
already delayed because of the continuing resolution this year, 
are programmed for increases in 2024. As a specific example, 
the missile warning system that will track advanced hypersonic 
threats was begun in 2023. The budget for this vital capability 
doubles in 2024, allowing us to deliver real global capability 
by 2027.
    None of that additional authority and none of the new 
starts required for the test and training infrastructure can be 
begun during a CR.
    The President's fiscal year 2024 budget request affirms the 
DOD and Space Force's commitment to a bold, threat-informed 
shift. It acknowledges the need for a more robust proliferated 
architecture, intelligence-driven space domain awareness, 
aggressive cybersecurity, measured investment in space 
superiority, and combat-credible forces anchored in a full-
spectrum training enterprise.
    The most important thing Congress can do to help us in this 
endeavor is pass an on-time budget. Thank you all for your 
steadfast partnership and support. I look forward to your 
questions.
    [The prepared statement of General Thompson can be found in 
the Appendix on page 94.]
    Mr. Waltz. Thank you, General. I'm just going to dive right 
in. I just have one question, I want to get to other members 
that we--since we have votes looming.
    Can we just go down the line. I'll start with you, General 
George. What are your current projections for your recruiting 
shortfalls this year?
    General George. Chairman, right now we are doing better 
than we were doing. I would say right now we are probably 
projecting to be about 55,000. We had set our goal up to be 
65,000 this year, which is higher than what we did last year. 
So that is where I expect we will----
    Mr. Waltz. About 10,000 short.
    General George. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Waltz. Admiral.
    Admiral Franchetti. Chairman, we expect to be about 6,000 
short. Also doing better than we started, but about 6,000 short 
is our projection.
    Mr. Waltz. General.
    General Smith. Chairman, the Marine Corps will meet its 
recruiting mission this year, as we did last year.
    Mr. Waltz. Roger that. Semper fi.
    General Allvin. The total force Air Force will be coming in 
approximately on this path 10,000 short. That is about 3,400 in 
the Active Duty, 3,100 in the Guard, and a little over 4--in 
the Reserves, and a little over 4,000 in the Guard.
    Mr. Waltz. Thank you. General.
    General Thompson. Chairman, we have a little different 
challenge than the other services. We need about 700 new 
recruits off the street, but we still need and will for the 
next several years need about 700 interservice transfers from 
the other services.
    And while we are doing very well in recruiting off the 
street, as the other services have challenges in their 
recruiting, it becomes more difficult for them to release folks 
for interservice transfer.
    Mr. Waltz. So will you fall--are you projecting to fall 
short in those transfers?
    General Thompson. Don't know yet. We will meet our off-the-
street needs. The question will be working with services, how 
much can they afford to give us. And we just don't know that 
yet. We will need to wait and negotiate later this year.
    Mr. Waltz. Thank you. And minus the Army, because you are 
already doing it, in terms of polling and collecting data on 
why we are in this crisis that we are in, will all of you 
commit to the committee to begin collecting data, look at 
programs, initiate programs to start understanding why this 
shortfall is happening?
    So I am looking at Navy, Air Force.
    Admiral Franchetti. Yes.
    General Allvin. Absolutely, Chairman. That is underway and 
will continue.
    Mr. Waltz. Great, thank you.
    Mr. Garamendi.
    Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I have had the privilege of meeting with each of the 
presenters today ahead of this meeting, and I am going to turn 
over my time to Ms. Sherrill.
    Ms. Sherrill. Thank you. And thank you all for your service 
and for your support to our troops across the globe.
    It is important that we build and procure clean energy 
sources appropriately without influence and ties to our 
strategic competitors, who use forced labor, conduct 
intellectual property theft, and forced technology transfers.
    It can be done. GAF, a national roofing company 
headquartered in my district, has been able to successfully 
transition from Chinese suppliers to manufacturing and 
producing solar panels in domestic facilities in Texas and 
California, as well as in Southeast Asian nations including 
Vietnam, Cambodia, and Taiwan.
    As we work on increasing our energy resiliency, we need to 
ensure our Armed Forces are looking at all energy options 
available.
    And General Smith, we had a discussion yesterday about how 
this impacts logistics. Can you talk a little bit about that 
discussion and how energy options can improve your logistics 
challenges?
    General Smith. Yes, ma'am. Logistics is the pacing function 
against the pacing threat in the expanse of the Pacific. As a 
warfighter, I don't want to move 1 pound that I don't have to 
move. I want to reserve every poundage of movement for 
lethality.
    So if I am, for example, if I don't need to bring diesel to 
operate a reverse osmosis water purification unit to produce 
water in the middle of the South China Sea, which doesn't seem 
to make sense to me to ship water, I want to produce it there, 
and I can do that via some other means?
    It is about, for me it is about lethality. Because that 8 
pounds give or take per gallon, that is 8 pounds of a warhead 
that I can bring.
    This is about lethality for us. And anything we can do to 
move less, and polymer ammo means I could bring more bullets 
instead of more casings, that is what we want to do because it 
is about warfighting and lethality.
    Ms. Sherrill. Thank you for that plug for polymer ammo. We 
are working on that in my district.
    And with that, I will turn it back in the interest of time. 
Thank you.
    Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Ms. Sherrill. Mr. Wilson
    Mr. Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank each of you. 
I particularly appreciate your service as a 31-year veteran 
myself.
    And, but I am really grateful to be a Army dad of three 
sons who served in Iraq, Egypt, and Afghanistan. I also can 
claim the Navy, a son that served in Baghdad. And so I am 
really grateful as a doctor. And then I have a nephew in the 
Air Force. And one day I will have somebody in the family smart 
enough to be in Space Force.
    So, but I thank you all for what you do.
    And General George, I am so grateful to represent Fort 
Jackson. It trains over 50 percent of all soldiers in the basic 
combat training facility.
    And I am also grateful that what you are doing is 
providing, all of you--are providing opportunity for young 
people to achieve to their highest level and to be so 
meaningful. And that is why I appreciate what you are doing.
    And General, there is the Future Soldier prep course. And 
can you explain what that is, and how successful it has been?
    General George. Yes, sir. It has been very successful for 
us. We have come into this, we did not want to lower our 
standards. And so the idea of the Future Soldier prep course is 
actually to get people to meet our standards.
    So they basically come there on average, I would say they 
are there 4 or 5 weeks. We have some that need help with the 
ASVAB [Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery] testing. 
Some that need help with the body fat. And we have seen about a 
97 percent success rate, 96, 97 percent on both of those 
accounts getting to basic training. So we are really proud of 
that program down there at Fort Jackson.
    Mr. Wilson. And in lieu of a question because of time, I 
just want to commend all of you for the placement of troops in 
Eastern Europe to provide for peace through strength with 
deterrence. I have met with the military personnel in Poland. 
President Donald Trump was ahead of the curve to put troops 
there.
    I have met with our American troops working at Novo Selo in 
Bulgaria with young Bulgarians to be at MK Air Base in Romania 
to see success there. And Larissa and Greece. And so over and 
over again, to me it is just so important that we have 
sufficient military effectiveness backing up our NATO allies to 
back up the very courageous people of Ukraine.
    So thank you for what you have done. And any other 
enterprising maneuvers you can do to back up the people of 
Ukraine, I know the chairman and I would appreciate it. Thank 
you.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Mr. Wilson.
    Ms. Tokuda.
    Ms. Tokuda. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
    In the interest of time, I am just going to go over a few 
questions. Admiral Franchetti, in February the Navy closed 
three dry docks at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, and another at 
the Trident Refit Facility in Bangor due to seismic concerns, I 
believe.
    This means that at least right now, of 18 dry docks in our 
4 public shipyards, almost a quarter of them are offline at a 
time when over one-third of the Navy's attack submarine fleet 
desperately needs maintenance and repair.
    Admiral Franchetti, given our already limited shipyard 
capacity and the growing demand for ship maintenance, what is 
the Navy doing to address the challenges posed by these 
closures and continue to meet our shipyard needs?
    Admiral Franchetti. We are very focused on our shipyards in 
general, the focus through SIOP [Shipyard Infrastructure 
Optimization Program], but specifically to the shipyards in 
Puget Sound. So there are three dry docks that are being 
repaired right now.
    One of them is already complete and in testing. The other 
one should be complete by the beginning of June, and the other 
one by late June. So right now we don't see any impact to the 
closures of those dry docks.
    Separately from that, we are continuing to work through all 
of our public shipyards to improve their performance through 
project management, fundamentals, workforce development, and 
taking a big effort to buy long lead time supply materials in 
advance that will help us get our shipyards out--our submarines 
out on time.
    Ms. Tokuda. Thank you, that is very good to hear. Related 
to the SIOP and shipbuilding industry industrial base, recently 
you may have heard the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural 
Resources issued a letter to Navy Region Hawaii about the 
discovery of an invasive octocoral, or soft coral species, in 
Pearl Harbor.
    What was initially 10 acres when discovered back in August 
2020 has now grown to be at least 20 acres and is estimated to 
be potentially impacting 90 acres.
    Unmitigated, the spread of this invasive species has 
potential risks to operations at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-
Hickam, including the new Dry Dock 5 at Pearl Harbor Navy 
Shipyard. And obviously poses serious threat to our native 
corals, but more importantly just the operation of this area.
    Can I get your commitment that the Navy is going to work 
quickly with us to address and mitigate this invasive soft-
tissue coral so that we can continue operation, and of course 
the new dry dock at Pearl Harbor?
    Admiral Franchetti. Yes, as part of the SIOP program, the 
Navy has been working with the National Marine Fisheries, all 
of the interagency, to better understand the problem and 
develop that mitigation plan originally for the 9 acres of this 
invasive coral. And the cost for that removal effort was 
included in the MILCON [military construction].
    We are also looking at how do we adopt biosecurity 
protocols to mitigate any risk of spreading of the coral for 
any work we do there. Right now, we don't anticipate that there 
will be impacts to Dry Dock No. 5, but we are continuing again 
to work, and you have my commitment, to work with your team and 
with everyone to make sure that that does not spread any 
further.
    Ms. Tokuda. Thank you very much. As you can see, it is 
exponentially increasing, and we want to get this addressed 
before it impacts. Thank you.
    I yield back, Chair.
    Mr. Waltz. Thank you. Mr. Scott.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for being here. I want to 
piggyback a little bit on what Ms. Sherrill said just a second 
ago. Less than 15 days after China flew a spy balloon across 
the United States of America, Ford Motor Company announced a 
partnership with Communist China and CATL battery technology.
    I want to just make sure that none of our DOD funds are 
going to purchase Chinese battery technology or any other 
technology that is coming from China. I think that you will see 
language to that effect coming in the NDAA [National Defense 
Authorization Act]. We are not going to spend U.S. tax dollars 
to support Communist China or CATL battery technology.
    I don't need you to comment on it, I just need you to be 
prepared for it. And if Ford Motor Company decides that is who 
is going to develop their batteries, this is America, they have 
got the right to decide who is going to develop their 
batteries. But we are not going to buy them.
    General Allvin, I am going to focus on the Air Force if I 
could. Seven months ago, General Kelly, commander of Air Combat 
Command, said that he has 48 fighter squadrons, 9 attack 
squadrons doing the work of 60 squadrons, 3 squadrons short of 
what he needs.
    He said he needs 28 fighter squadrons to project power in 
the Indo-Pacific region, Europe, and the Middle East; 8 
squadrons to respond to an unfolding crisis; 16 squadrons for 
homeland defense; 8 squadrons for modernization and training.
    We are in pretty much peacetime right now as we speak. Do 
you agree with his assessment?
    General Allvin. I do, Congressman. And I think the point 
that General Kelly was trying to point out is not only that we 
can't just count the numbers, but the missions that those 
were--are tasked to do. So those 9 attack squadrons are 
primarily the A-10 squadrons that aren't as survivable and they 
aren't multi-role.
    So that is why we are aggressively, in the fiscal year 2024 
budget, we are asking for 72 fighters, front-line fighters, to 
include 48 F-35s and 24 F-15 EXs, which will enable us to be 
able to do those missions and be able to compete and succeed in 
the Indo-Pacific theater.
    Mr. Scott. But the A-10s are deployed right now, correct?
    General Allvin. I'm sorry, sir?
    Mr. Scott. A-10s are deployed right now, correct?
    General Allvin. They are right now on their--I don't think 
they are in CENTCOM [U.S. Central Command], but they are set to 
go to CENTCOM in a single-role mission, and they are adapting 
to that as we speak.
    Mr. Scott. Quantity to me is a quality in and of itself in 
some cases, and I do worry about standing down fighter 
squadrons when we have an acknowledged need for more squadrons. 
But I understand the A-10 is an old platform and it is not 
going to be the platform of the future.
    You did say over the past two decades that we have offered 
forces to the joint force in an unsustainable manner, and the 
readiness impact is becoming more apparent in the face of our 
pacing challenge.
    I assume that means it is safe to say the Air Force needs 
more resources to maintain current levels of readiness, and 
that our current levels of readiness are not what they have 
been in the past?
    General Allvin. Congressman, I would say for sure to the 
latter, that our readiness is not what it has been in the past. 
That is a reference to my written statement.
    Primarily the point we are making is in addition to 
additional capacity and more modernized capacity, what we do 
need is also to reimagine ourselves and understand to be ready 
for what? To optimize our training, to make sure we are 
generating and presenting the forces in the best way.
    In the past, we had just been all in without really looking 
at how to focus on the high-end readiness. And so our new Air 
Force Generation Model is enabling us to see that and really 
hone in on our new mission-essential tasks and get the very 
best readiness out of every flying hour that we can get.
    Mr. Scott. So when we talk about the best readiness, one of 
the concerns I have is when I look at the readiness rate, it is 
significantly below where any of us in this room want it to be. 
And yet there are two different definitions of readiness.
    One of them is able to perform one of the primary missions. 
And the other one is able to perform all of the primary 
missions.
    My understanding is that we are using the definition when 
we talk about readiness that they are able to perform one of 
the primary missions, not all of the primary missions. Is that 
correct?
    General Allvin. That is correct in some cases. The 
readiness is really talking about the mission-essential tasks, 
which as I mentioned, we are rewriting specifically to go 
against the China threat. So there is both a shortage of being 
able to do the full spectrum of missions----
    Mr. Scott. So if I could, again, it is written specifically 
for the China threat.
    General Allvin. We are adapting it to make the primary 
mission the China threat.
    Mr. Scott. Okay. And I, again, Mr. Chairman, if I may, in 
the--the primary mission being the China threat, and yet less 
than 15 days after China flies a spy balloon across the United 
States of America, we have one of America's most iconic brands 
announcing a multibillion dollar partnership to buy Chinese 
battery technology, which they intend and think that they are 
actually going to sell to the DOD in some cases.
    And I would just encourage you to make sure that you are 
not preparing to buy any CATL batteries. Thank you.
    Mr. Waltz. I think your sentiment is shared across multiple 
supply chains.
    Mrs. Kiggans.
    Mrs. Kiggans. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    And briefly, I know that votes are happening, but just to 
echo Mr. Scott about having the corporate buy-in for, I mean, 
you guys are doing a great job on the ground and with people 
and weapons and lethality. But getting that corporate buy-in.
    We are not, this is not a, just a military fight with 
China. We have got to get the corporate buy-in as well. So I 
fully support everything he just mentioned.
    And also to echo the previous comments about ship repair 
and shipyards. In my district, I am Hampton Road, so Virginia 
Beach, Norfolk. And I hear from those guys all the time about 
challenges.
    And I know it is, that is multifaceted too, from workforce 
to supply chain. But scheduling, gosh, and it is like this, 
they want to blame the Navy and the Navy wants to blame them.
    So if we could get it together on that front. And I don't 
know if that is doing a better job at repairs out at sea 
internally what we are doing. But then when they come to port, 
making sure that we are staying on schedule.
    Because we can't keep this old fleet of ships that is 
already fewer numbers that I wish we had at sea if we don't get 
our ship repair industry behind. It is not just the shiny new 
ships and toys, but we have got to keep those old ones out 
there too. So that is important in my district, whatever you 
can do to help that.
    I just specifically and real quick want to ask about pilot 
training. I have asked about this before, but we know that all 
of those new toys and wonderful things that we can purchase go 
nowhere without the people behind, specifically the pilots, 
which I know Army, Navy, and Air Force and Marine Corps, you 
know, all of us.
    So how long does it take, and if you guys could answer just 
in order, how long does it take to train a pilot from 
commissioning time 'til the time they touch a gray, combat-
ready aircraft?
    General George. Ma'am, that does depend a little bit on the 
aircraft. But I would say on average a year to 15 months, you 
know, for helicopter pilots that are down at Fort Rucker after 
they do their other initial training.
    Mrs. Kiggans. And do those commissioned pilots start right 
away, or is there a lag time before they actually start flight 
training?
    General George. No, they go down to, like for us, they go 
down to Fort Rucker and go to their basic course for aviation, 
and then get started, you know, soon thereafter.
    Mrs. Kiggans. How about the Navy?
    Admiral Franchetti. I will get back to you with the exact 
number. It is roughly 2 years. And of course, we have a pilot 
delay right now in training, backlog, which we are working 
through as rapidly as possible.
    Mrs. Kiggans. So actually closer to four. We were in 
Kingsville about 2 weeks ago, and they will tell me 4 years 
from the time that they get commissioned from the Naval Academy 
or ROTC [Reserve Officers' Training Corps] 'til the time that 
they are actually flying a fleet-ready F-18.
    That is 4 years--that is too long. We are not going to be 
able to, God forbid, replace or have the pilots that we need if 
we continue to have a 4-year lag time. I think the Army is a 
little bit better.
    How about the Marine Corps? Well, you guys run with the 
Navy, so.
    General Smith. What is different for us is every Marine 
lieutenant goes to The Basic School for 6 months----
    Mrs. Kiggans. Right.
    General Smith [continuing]. To learn to be an infantry 
platoon commander. Then we begin flight school or any other MOS 
[military occupational specialty]. So it is in excess of 2 
years, depending on the airframe.
    Mrs. Kiggans. Right.
    General Smith. And those delays from everything from 
weather to aircraft availability all contribute to that. Which 
is why those 6- and 8-year commitments post-wings are so vital 
to us. And we are not having any problems with those who wish, 
we just need the additional bonuses and help because the 
airline industries can hire them faster than I can.
    Mrs. Kiggans. Yes, yes. Air Force.
    General Allvin. Ma'am, to your point, from when they enter 
pilot training to when they are flying a gray tail, if it is 
mobility, it is about 18 months. If it is a fighter/bomber, it 
is closer to beyond 24 months.
    But to your point about from the time they are 
commissioned, because of the challenges we are having with T-6 
and T-38, we have a little bit of a backup. And it can be as 
many as 4 years.
    So almost an 18-month to 24-month wait just to get into 
pilot training. So that is why we are trying to accelerate, and 
our budget asks for more help with the T-38 engines and the T-
6, to move those through.
    Mrs. Kiggans. Yes, you guys have had kind of comparable 
challenges with the Navy, and I am a little bit more familiar 
with the Navy side, but with the T-45 and some of those OBOGS 
[On-Board Oxygen Generating System] issues, the blade issues. I 
mean, we are--and COVID [coronavirus disease] issues.
    But we are seeing those challenges now become where 
instructor pilot shortage, you know, we are short instructor 
pilots. So now we can't train the naval aviators and all the 
other aviators that we do need because we don't have the 
teachers. So now we are robbing the fleet to get those 
teachers.
    And you talk about retention and competing with airlines 
and whatnot, we have got to do a better job at this. And I 
think part of it is the onus is on us. And I echo and agree 
with everything you said about continuing resolutions and how 
detrimental that would be.
    But having the right training equipment in place, and you 
guys tweaking the syllabuses too. But so that we can tighten it 
up. I just, I want to do it faster. We need more, we need 
faster. So I think every service branch has its challenges. I 
am mindful of it, but it is something that I just want to 
prioritize.
    So thank you very much.
    Mr. Waltz. Thank you. Mr. Gimenez.
    Mr. Gimenez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you to 
everybody here.
    If you really want to scratch your head, it has come 
under--somebody gave me information that the VA [U.S. 
Department of Veterans Affairs] just bought $430 million worth 
of computers from Lenovo. Lenovo is a Chinese computer company.
    So I will ask an overhead question. Are any of the services 
looking at buying large purchases of computers in the near 
future? And if you are or if you have bought some, have 
anybody--has anybody bought Lenovos, Chinese computers?
    General George. I am going to have to take that one. I 
don't know right off. I mean, we do buy tech and computers, but 
I can't answer that one, sir. I will take that for----
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 107.]
    Mr. Gimenez. I would certainly hope that whatever 
technology you buy, any computers you buy, any printers you 
buy, etc., are American-made and not made in China. Every 
taxpayer dollar that goes to China is just funding more 
equipment, more military capability against ourselves, which is 
ludicrous.
    So I will be looking into this VA thing. And I hope that I 
am wrong, but that is the information I am getting.
    On the question of pilots, is it fair to say we have more 
airframes than pilots, or do we have more pilots than 
airframes?
    General Allvin. By broad numbers, we have many more pilots 
than airplanes.
    Mr. Gimenez. Okay, so but you do have a pilot shortage, is 
yes or no?
    General Allvin. Well, we have a pilot shortage in the 
pilots that we want throughout our entire Air Force. We do not 
have empty cockpits. So in order to have a healthy pilot--a 
professional force, you need first and foremost the combat 
cockpits filled, then you need the trainer cockpits filled, 
then you need the test cockpits filled.
    And after you fill all the cockpits, then you go to those 
that our next priority is the leadership, you want the 
leadership positions filled. And then after you have all those 
filled, then you go to the staff positions. That is where we 
are currently absorbing our shortage, is in the staffs.
    So where you would traditionally want pilot experience, 
rated experience, we are manning those are somewhat less than 
70 percent. So we are not sacrificing our front-line units.
    But if this sustains over time, then we will have a sort of 
misshapen force where you won't be able to have professionally 
developed enough of the rated membership to provide that 
expertise in the leadership at the higher level.
    But for right now, we have not had any of our combat 
training or test cockpits go empty.
    Mr. Gimenez. What about Reserve units? Have you looked at 
the expanding Reserve units or adding Reserve pilots to the 
force?
    General Allvin. Frankly, the Reserves are having about the 
same issue that we are having with respect to shortage overall. 
Now, I believe as--we are, in the Active Duty, we are 
advantaged by retention.
    But in our total force we are disadvantaged because as the 
retention in the Active Duty goes, a large part of their sort 
of business model in the Guard and Reserves is those who want 
to continue to affiliate with the military will go from the 
Active Duty to the Guard and Reserves.
    And so oftentimes when the retention becomes poor, people 
still want to stay affiliated with the Air Force, the Guard and 
Reserves will get a little bit healthier. But as of right now, 
they are feeling about the same pain as we are.
    Mr. Gimenez. Your Reserve bases, are they based in large 
urban areas where you would have a good, I guess a pool of 
folks that may be wanting to be, are interested in serving in 
the Reserves? I mean, if you have a Reserve base somewhere in 
the middle of nowhere, it is hard to find I guess reservists 
that actually live around the area.
    So how do you make your bases on Reserve bases versus 
Active bases?
    General Allvin. For the most part, we take advantage of 
being able to leverage both historical old fields which used to 
be Active Duty. So some of them are just, they are sort of 
godfathered from--or grandfathered from being existing old 
Active Duty air bases and take advantage of infrastructure 
there. Those are the ones that have been around 30, 40 years.
    Oftentimes what we have now is the associations that the--
we have Reserve members flying on what are sort of owned and 
maintained, these classic associations, by the Active Duty. So 
it really is a mix of those that are just on Active Duty bases.
    I am trying to go through my head and see if there are any 
remote, very remote and isolated Reserve-only bases, and none 
come to mind, frankly.
    Mr. Gimenez. Fair enough. Okay, I guess most of my time is 
up. I yield back.
    Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Mr. Gimenez.
    Thank you again to our witnesses. Obviously the vote 
schedule is getting in the way of a more fulsome conversation 
here. But I think if you hear a theme, obviously it is a real 
concern about the recruiting crisis that we are in. And I know 
you share those concerns, are getting after it.
    And secondly, though, I am just not sure the Department as 
an institution and all the way down through the services and 
through our contracting officers are really looking at the 
supply chain issue.
    And I think you are hearing bipartisan concern across the 
board in having that supply chain surety. One, having 
visibility on it, but then two, driving our practices along 
those lines in a systematic way. I know I think the committee, 
and I share Mr.--I think I can speak for Mr. Garamendi here, 
looks forward to working with you on that.
    I hope that is something that the services and the 
Department can get ahead of, rather than really it being driven 
by this side of the foxhole. Because I certainly look forward 
to hearing what you are doing in that regard as we move forward 
through the defense bill.
    With that, the hearing is adjourned. And thank you, 
genuinely, thank you again.
    [Whereupon, at 4:43 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

     
=======================================================================

                            A P P E N D I X

                             April 19, 2023

      
=======================================================================


              PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                             April 19, 2023

=======================================================================
      

    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
    
=======================================================================


              WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING

                              THE HEARING

                             April 19, 2023

=======================================================================

      

             RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. GIMENEZ

    General George. The Army is not actively pursuing a large contract 
purchase of Lenovo computers. As of April 24, 2023, Army Cyber Command 
reported 1,840 out of 735,105 systems on the unclassified system were 
Lenovo, and 316 systems out of 35,448 on the secret network were 
Lenovo. Under current authorities, policies, and regulations, Lenovo is 
not a prohibited source.
    Army Cyber Command is providing direction to commands and 
organizations to provide a holistic understanding of security risks and 
operational impact regarding the Lenovo systems currently on Army 
networks. The Army understands the importance of the potential security 
threat and will ensure a comprehensive review.   [See page 19.]

     
=======================================================================


              QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING

                             April 19, 2023

=======================================================================

      

                   QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. ROGERS

    Mr. Rogers. According to the Department, DOD is the third largest 
city in the United States with 3.2 million people--placing it behind 
Los Angeles and New York City and ahead of Chicago. From an emergency 
services perspective, DOD manages 150,000 first responders, 220 public 
safety answering points (PSAPs), and 1500 operators across 4200 
installations. As you may be aware, states and communities are rapidly 
transitioning from outdated, analog 9-1-1 systems to Next Generation 9-
1-1 (NG911) which will ``enhance emergency number services to create a 
faster, more resilient system that allows voice, photos, videos and 
text messages to flow seamlessly from the public to the 911 network 
while also improving public safety answering points' ability to help 
manage call overload, natural disasters and transfer of 911 calls based 
on caller location data.'' According to the 2020 National 911 Progress 
Report, 12 states have fully implemented NG911 while 9 are rapidly 
approaching that threshold. However, DOD, whose installations are 
connected to the surrounding communities, is not transitioning to NG911 
at the same rate. As a recent Institute for Defense Analyses report 
highlighted, ``NG911 is both an operational requirement and a strategic 
capability supporting multiple missions.'' Migrating to NG911 will 
enhance ``capabilities to save lives and protect property'' and will 
have a ``direct, positive impact on several mission areas including 
Public Safety, Emergency Management, Force Protection, Anti-Terrorism, 
Mission Assurance, and Critical Infrastructure Protection.'' Failure to 
migrate to NG911 in a timely manner will turn installations into 
islands unable to coordinate with local partners and leverage modern 
technology. As IDA concluded, ``This situation is likely to result in 
higher risk to life and property, and degraded capabilities to fulfill 
safety obligations to their military personnel and under the numerous 
mutual aid agreements in place today.''
    Questions: 1. Does DOD have a detailed NG911 rollout plan? If so, 
please provide. 2. Specifically, what is the timeline associated with 
the plan? 3. Does it include individual installations? 4. What 
budgetary resources are needed to fulfill the plan? 5. What budgetary 
resources are needed to implement NG911 at all DOD installations? When 
will this be completed? 6. Are any installations currently fully NG911 
operational? If so, which ones?
    General George. Answer 1: In order to comply with federal laws 
(e.g. the Ray Baum Act) and national standards, the Army has a fiscal 
year (FY) 2025 plan to roll out Next Generation 911 (NG 911) as one of 
the five interoperable Public Safety Communications (PSC) capabilities 
that make up the Base Emergency Communications System (BECS). BECS will 
modernize the Army's PSC and will increase interoperability between 
first responders and mutual aid partners. It will provide them with the 
ability to send, receive, and exchange information, data, imagery, and 
video, thus enhancing the protection of life, health, and safety on 
Army installations.
    Background: On September 30, 2022, the Army approved the BECS 
Capabilities Development Document, codifying BECS as an Army Program of 
Record. Subsequently, on February 16, 2023, the Army identified the 
Program Executive Office Enterprise Information Systems to lead the 
BECS acquisition program for the Army.
    Answer 2: The Army has already initiated its NG 911 incremental 
implementation with the voice modernization project which improves 
networks, voice, and data capabilities across our installations. 
Concurrently, the geographic information system upgrades incorporate 
residential addressing and mapping on Army installations. The FY 2025 
comprehensive BECS acquisition strategy will begin with NG 911 
implementation at a rate of five to ten installations per year. 
Ultimately, the pace at which the Army can transition to NG 911 is 
contingent upon its ability to: 1) fully resource the requirement; and 
2) maintain synchronicity between the Department of Defense (DOD), 
states, and our installation migration plans.
    Answer 3: The BECS Capabilities Development Document estimates 93 
Army installations will require NG 911.
    Answer 4/5: The Army NG 911 implementation and sustainment plan 
spans 12 years (FY 2025-FY 2036) and estimates a cost of $18 million 
annually across 93 installations, totaling approximately $216 million.
    Answer 6: No Army installations are NG 911 fully operational at 
this time.
    Mr. Rogers. According to the Department, DOD is the third largest 
city in the United States with 3.2 million people--placing it behind 
Los Angeles and New York City and ahead of Chicago. From an emergency 
services perspective, DOD manages 150,000 first responders, 220 public 
safety answering points (PSAPs), and 1500 operators across 4200 
installations. As you may be aware, states and communities are rapidly 
transitioning from outdated, analog 9-1-1 systems to Next Generation 9-
1-1 (NG911) which will ``enhance emergency number services to create a 
faster, more resilient system that allows voice, photos, videos and 
text messages to flow seamlessly from the public to the 911 network 
while also improving public safety answering points' ability to help 
manage call overload, natural disasters and transfer of 911 calls based 
on caller location data.'' According to the 2020 National 911 Progress 
Report, 12 states have fully implemented NG911 while 9 are rapidly 
approaching that threshold. However, DOD, whose installations are 
connected to the surrounding communities, is not transitioning to NG911 
at the same rate. As a recent Institute for Defense Analyses report 
highlighted, ``NG911 is both an operational requirement and a strategic 
capability supporting multiple missions.'' Migrating to NG911 will 
enhance ``capabilities to save lives and protect property'' and will 
have a ``direct, positive impact on several mission areas including 
Public Safety, Emergency Management, Force Protection, Anti-Terrorism, 
Mission Assurance, and Critical Infrastructure Protection.'' Failure to 
migrate to NG911 in a timely manner will turn installations into 
islands unable to coordinate with local partners and leverage modern 
technology. As IDA concluded, ``This situation is likely to result in 
higher risk to life and property, and degraded capabilities to fulfill 
safety obligations to their military personnel and under the numerous 
mutual aid agreements in place today.''
    Questions: 1. Does DOD have a detailed NG911 rollout plan? If so, 
please provide. 2. Specifically, what is the timeline associated with 
the plan? 3. Does it include individual installations? 4. What 
budgetary resources are needed to fulfill the plan? 5. What budgetary 
resources are needed to implement NG911 at all DOD installations? When 
will this be completed? 6. Are any installations currently fully NG911 
operational? If so, which ones?
    Admiral Franchetti. 1. The Navy is in the process of modernizing 
information systems to include transition to internet protocol services 
(IP). In 2015, the Navy awarded a contract to AT&T Government Services 
to establish private IP networks to be used to route 911 calls 
originating from existing Navy End Office TDM telephone switches, to 
deliver them to one of seven regional 911 dispatch centers in the 
United States and Guam. The Navy is working closely with the Defense 
Information Systems Agency (DISA), the lead DOD agent, in implementing 
modernized solutions that take advantage of the latest technologies 
while ensuring the solutions maintain the integrity and security of the 
networks employed by DOD.
    2. The Navy is working closely with the Defense Information Systems 
Agency (DISA) on the modernizations solutions and strategy to achieve a 
cohesive 911 operating system, while maintaining the integrity and 
security of Navy networks.
    3. Should the Navy invest in upgrading its installation telephony 
and switching infrastructure, we will make a phased investment that 
includes individual installations.
    4. All of the Navy's Public Safety Answering Points (PSAP), public 
safety networks, and telephone infrastructure will require significant 
investment to attain compliance with applicable laws. This improvement 
will eliminate dependency on the third-party commercial service 
providers which are not providing compliant NG911 solutions and carry 
cybersecurity non-compliance risk if used for NG911 in its current 
configuration. Naval Information Warfare Center (NIWC) Atlantic has 
completed the design and cost estimates for implementing Location 
Information Servers (LIS) with the Navy Voice-Over-IP (VoIP) upgrades. 
The final plan from N2N6 will inform resource requirements.
    5. Budgetary resources are required to upgrade the telephony and 
switching infrastructure. There is no estimated completion date. Navy 
seeks to balance the requirements for facility investment with the 
requirements for continued investment in quality of life/quality of 
service and operational readiness of the fleet.
    6. No Navy installations are fully NG911 operational.
    Mr. Rogers. According to the Department, DOD is the third largest 
city in the United States with 3.2 million people--placing it behind 
Los Angeles and New York City and ahead of Chicago. From an emergency 
services perspective, DOD manages 150,000 first responders, 220 public 
safety answering points (PSAPs), and 1500 operators across 4200 
installations. As you may be aware, states and communities are rapidly 
transitioning from outdated, analog 9-1-1 systems to Next Generation 9-
1-1 (NG911) which will ``enhance emergency number services to create a 
faster, more resilient system that allows voice, photos, videos and 
text messages to flow seamlessly from the public to the 911 network 
while also improving public safety answering points' ability to help 
manage call overload, natural disasters and transfer of 911 calls based 
on caller location data.'' According to the 2020 National 911 Progress 
Report, 12 states have fully implemented NG911 while 9 are rapidly 
approaching that threshold. However, DOD, whose installations are 
connected to the surrounding communities, is not transitioning to NG911 
at the same rate. As a recent Institute for Defense Analyses report 
highlighted, ``NG911 is both an operational requirement and a strategic 
capability supporting multiple missions.'' Migrating to NG911 will 
enhance ``capabilities to save lives and protect property'' and will 
have a ``direct, positive impact on several mission areas including 
Public Safety, Emergency Management, Force Protection, Anti-Terrorism, 
Mission Assurance, and Critical Infrastructure Protection.'' Failure to 
migrate to NG911 in a timely manner will turn installations into 
islands unable to coordinate with local partners and leverage modern 
technology. As IDA concluded, ``This situation is likely to result in 
higher risk to life and property, and degraded capabilities to fulfill 
safety obligations to their military personnel and under the numerous 
mutual aid agreements in place today.''
    Questions: 1. Does DOD have a detailed NG911 rollout plan? If so, 
please provide. 2. Specifically, what is the timeline associated with 
the plan? 3. Does it include individual installations? 4. What 
budgetary resources are needed to fulfill the plan? 5. What budgetary 
resources are needed to implement NG911 at all DOD installations? When 
will this be completed? 6. Are any installations currently fully NG911 
operational? If so, which ones?
    General Smith. The DOD Chief Information Office C3, supported by 
Defense Information Systems Agency's (DISA) Global Public Safety 
Communications Office is the executive agent for DOD Public Safety 
Communications. They have established four overarching levels of 
efforts to modernize DOD's Public Safety Communications, which includes 
Next Generation 9-1-1 (NG911), Next Generation Wireless, Public Safety 
Internet of Things (IoT), and Enterprise Mass Warning and Notification 
(EMWN). The Marine Corps is collaborating with DOD stakeholders to 
conduct technical reviews between Emergency Communications, Public 
Safety and its Title 10 Command and Control Communications to seek 
alignment each of these independently regulated communications 
capabilities into a single communications solution. The Marine Corps 
timeline is aligned with the DOD governance and funding timeline and 
will initiate planning actions in FY24 and across the FYDP. DOD's 
guidance includes development of Public Safety Communications policies 
and supporting technical requirements with State and local-level 9-1-1 
authorities, identifying Memorandum of Understanding/Agreement 
requirements and aligning NG911 transition efforts.
    DOD's Guidance for FY24-28 proposes a number of installations be 
modernized by fiscal year for each Component. The Marine Corps 
tentatively plans to transition 13 installations as follows: four in 
FY24 (MCLB Albany, MCAS Beaufort, MCAS Yuma, MCRD Parris Island), two 
in FY26 (MCB Camp Butler, MCAS Iwakuni) and seven in FY28 (MCAGCC 
Twentynine Palms, MCLB Barstow, MCB Camp Lejeune, MCB Camp Pendleton, 
MCAS Cherry Point, MCAS Miramar, MCB Quantico). Complex challenges, 
including the fast pace of State and local level transition plans, 
resourcing levels and DOD information technology architectures, impact 
the Marine Corps' timely to transition to NG911. The Marine Corps' 
overseas installations requirement to connect to Host Nation emergency 
and public safety communications infrastructure faces additional 
technical and political challenges. The Marine Corps identified NG911 
funding requirement investment costs of $212M across the FYDP for 
procurement, operations and maintenance to support the material 
solution, system sustainment, and labor. Additional requirements (and 
costs) are being analyzed now to support Military Construction and 
Installation Communication infrastructure, which are necessary at 
several installations to eliminate legacy technologies and to implement 
an Internet Protocol (IP) technical solution that is fully 
interoperable and resilient with State/local and industry mission 
partners. The Marine Corps' current estimate is $212 million, comprised 
of $81.3M in labor and $130.7M for procurement of materiel. We 
currently expect deployment to occur over a seven-year period.
    The Marine Corps currently does not have any installations that are 
fully NG911 operational.
    Mr. Rogers. According to the Department, DOD is the third largest 
city in the United States with 3.2 million people--placing it behind 
Los Angeles and New York City and ahead of Chicago. From an emergency 
services perspective, DOD manages 150,000 first responders, 220 public 
safety answering points (PSAPs), and 1500 operators across 4200 
installations. As you may be aware, states and communities are rapidly 
transitioning from outdated, analog 9-1-1 systems to Next Generation 9-
1-1 (NG911) which will ``enhance emergency number services to create a 
faster, more resilient system that allows voice, photos, videos and 
text messages to flow seamlessly from the public to the 911 network 
while also improving public safety answering points' ability to help 
manage call overload, natural disasters and transfer of 911 calls based 
on caller location data.'' According to the 2020 National 911 Progress 
Report, 12 states have fully implemented NG911 while 9 are rapidly 
approaching that threshold. However, DOD, whose installations are 
connected to the surrounding communities, is not transitioning to NG911 
at the same rate. As a recent Institute for Defense Analyses report 
highlighted, ``NG911 is both an operational requirement and a strategic 
capability supporting multiple missions.'' Migrating to NG911 will 
enhance ``capabilities to save lives and protect property'' and will 
have a ``direct, positive impact on several mission areas including 
Public Safety, Emergency Management, Force Protection, Anti-Terrorism, 
Mission Assurance, and Critical Infrastructure Protection.'' Failure to 
migrate to NG911 in a timely manner will turn installations into 
islands unable to coordinate with local partners and leverage modern 
technology. As IDA concluded, ``This situation is likely to result in 
higher risk to life and property, and degraded capabilities to fulfill 
safety obligations to their military personnel and under the numerous 
mutual aid agreements in place today.''
    Questions: 1. Does DOD have a detailed NG911 rollout plan? If so, 
please provide. 2. Specifically, what is the timeline associated with 
the plan? 3. Does it include individual installations? 4. What 
budgetary resources are needed to fulfill the plan? 5. What budgetary 
resources are needed to implement NG911 at all DOD installations? When 
will this be completed? 6. Are any installations currently fully NG911 
operational? If so, which ones?
    General Allvin DOD CIO is the lead for the DOD and DAF CIO is in 
close coordination with them for the rollout of NG911. All questions 
regarding the roll out of NG911 should be directed to the office of DOD 
CIO.
    Mr. Rogers. According to the Department, DOD is the third largest 
city in the United States with 3.2 million people--placing it behind 
Los Angeles and New York City and ahead of Chicago. From an emergency 
services perspective, DOD manages 150,000 first responders, 220 public 
safety answering points (PSAPs), and 1500 operators across 4200 
installations. As you may be aware, states and communities are rapidly 
transitioning from outdated, analog 9-1-1 systems to Next Generation 9-
1-1 (NG911) which will ``enhance emergency number services to create a 
faster, more resilient system that allows voice, photos, videos and 
text messages to flow seamlessly from the public to the 911 network 
while also improving public safety answering points' ability to help 
manage call overload, natural disasters and transfer of 911 calls based 
on caller location data.'' According to the 2020 National 911 Progress 
Report, 12 states have fully implemented NG911 while 9 are rapidly 
approaching that threshold. However, DOD, whose installations are 
connected to the surrounding communities, is not transitioning to NG911 
at the same rate. As a recent Institute for Defense Analyses report 
highlighted, ``NG911 is both an operational requirement and a strategic 
capability supporting multiple missions.'' Migrating to NG911 will 
enhance ``capabilities to save lives and protect property'' and will 
have a ``direct, positive impact on several mission areas including 
Public Safety, Emergency Management, Force Protection, Anti-Terrorism, 
Mission Assurance, and Critical Infrastructure Protection.'' Failure to 
migrate to NG911 in a timely manner will turn installations into 
islands unable to coordinate with local partners and leverage modern 
technology. As IDA concluded, ``This situation is likely to result in 
higher risk to life and property, and degraded capabilities to fulfill 
safety obligations to their military personnel and under the numerous 
mutual aid agreements in place today.''
    Questions: 1. Does DOD have a detailed NG911 rollout plan? If so, 
please provide. 2. Specifically, what is the timeline associated with 
the plan? 3. Does it include individual installations? 4. What 
budgetary resources are needed to fulfill the plan? 5. What budgetary 
resources are needed to implement NG911 at all DOD installations? When 
will this be completed? 6. Are any installations currently fully NG911 
operational? If so, which ones?
    General Thompson. DOD CIO is the lead for the DOD. The Department 
of the Air Force CIO is in close coordination with them for the rollout 
of NG911. We have forwarded this question to the office of DOD CIO.
                                 ______
                                 
                    QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. WALTZ
    Mr. Waltz. Do you see benefits with the JROTC program and its 
ability to help with recruiting?
    General George. The mission of Junior Reserve Officers' Training 
Corps (JROTC) is to assist high schools in motivating students to be 
better citizens. The Army's JROTC program is an overwhelmingly positive 
youth citizenship program supporting more than 272,000 cadets at more 
than 1,700 high schools across the nation. JROTC's presence in high 
schools in areas that lack a military presence helps connect those 
communities with our Armed Forces. Across all programs, JROTC cadets 
have higher attendance, graduation rates, and grade point averages than 
their peers, who do not participate in the program. While JROTC is not 
a recruiting program, approximately 44% of Army enlistees came from a 
high school with a DOD JROTC program.
    Mr. Waltz. An ongoing GAO study details the current disrepair of 
barracks across the services. Some of the photos show rooms that are 
similar to condemned buildings, rather than barracks for our service 
members. What are you doing to ensure safe and sanitary places for 
service members to live? How are these problems allowed to persist?
    General George. The Army is investing over $1 billion per year in 
barracks for construction, facilities sustainment, restoration, and 
modernization across the 5-year Future Years Defense Program. This 
investment will help to improve conditions for unaccompanied soldiers 
across all types of barracks-permanent party, training, and transient. 
Issues such as facility condition, functionality and deficit are the 
main factors that are weighed when identifying barracks projects for 
investment. Earlier this year, senior Army leadership directed all 
components to inspect all barracks for life, health, and safety 
conditions. We have also implemented an Army-wide inspection program 
for all barracks to identify and prioritize deficiencies. As concerns 
are observed or identified for remediation or correction, we are taking 
immediate action.
    Mr. Waltz. Do you see benefits with the JROTC program and its 
ability to help with recruiting?
    Admiral Franchetti. The Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps 
(JROTC) program has historically had a positive impact on the Navy's 
recruiting efforts. JROTC instills a sense of patriotism and a desire 
for younger individuals to serve their country. This early exposure 
significantly increases the likelihood of students to consider a career 
in the Navy. JROTC emphasizes leadership skills by fostering personal 
growth and self-discipline in its participants. These qualities are 
highly valued in the Navy.
    By nurturing leadership abilities, JROTC prepares students for 
future naval service, making them more attractive candidates to 
recruiters. Most importantly however, the program's strong presence in 
high schools facilitates recruiter access to the student population by 
developing relationships with school administrators and their faculty. 
These relationships provide Navy recruiters with an easier path to 
engage with school officials, thereby gaining access to the student 
population. This access allows recruiters to provide firsthand 
information about Navy opportunities, career paths, and benefits to 
students who may be curious about the service and those who may already 
be interested in serving.
    Mr. Waltz. The Commandant of the Marine Corps cites amphib 
availability at about 32 percent. Our ability to project power, on a 
persistent basis, is critical to our ability to successfully operate 
from competition to conflict. What is the Navy doing to improve Navy 
surface vessel maintenance and increase readiness for ARG-MEUs? Why is 
the Navy requesting to decommission amphibious ships to a level below 
the requirement set by the FY23 NDAA?
    Admiral Franchetti. The Navy continues to emphasize its focus on 
achieving measurable performance improvement to improve surface vessel 
maintenance. The Navy is accomplishing this by improving schedule 
adherence, reducing new and growth work during availabilities and 
identifying and improving Maintenance Figures of Merit. The Navy is 
investing in maintenance and readiness in PB-24, fully funding all 
executable ship maintenance. The Navy is committed to working closely 
with private shipyard partners to improve surface ship maintenance and 
modernization outcomes. In particular, Performance-to- Plan-driven 
improvements--such as the goal of awarding contracts 120 days before 
the start of a maintenance availability, level loading ports through 
better prediction of workload, better availability planning, and 
improved long-lead-time material acquisition have provided effective 
solutions for readiness and reduced maintenance delays. As part of the 
joint force, the Navy has met every global force demand for naval 
amphibious forces. Navy Amphibious Forces provided over 100% of the 
SECDEF Global Force Management Allocation Plan base order in FY22, and 
is on course to do so again for FY23. Further, the Navy supports the 31 
amphibious ship requirement, but it needs to be the right 31 ships with 
a capable, sustainable mix of ship classes to ensure we meet the 
nation's need for ARG/MEUs for decades to come. The Navy recently 
delivered the Battle Force Ship Assessment and Requirements report 
which continues to validate the need for 31 amphibious ships.
    We prioritize readiness and modernization over maintaining force 
structure. In doing so, we maintain a combat-credible Navy now and in 
the future.
    Mr. Waltz. An ongoing GAO study details the current disrepair of 
barracks across the services. Some of the photos show rooms that are 
similar to condemned buildings, rather than barracks for our service 
members. What are you doing to ensure safe and sanitary places for 
service members to live? How are these problems allowed to persist?
    Admiral Franchetti. As directed in Section 2814 of the Fiscal Year 
2022 NDAA, Navy is developing a sustainable path to eliminate poor and 
failing Unaccompanied Housing (UH). The Secretary of the Navy and the 
Chief of Naval Operations' joint memo, ``Setting a New Course for Navy 
Quality of Service,'' states that every Sailor deserves the opportunity 
to live off the ship. This intent is a line of effort under the Quality 
of Service (QoS) Cross Functional Team, which is developing a 
comprehensive and integrated approach to improve UH; the Navy is 
targeting investments to improve the condition of inadequate UH and 
identifying sustainable, optimized UH policies to ensure safe, reliable 
housing for all Sailors.
    The Navy is focusing on several efforts to increase ownership, 
advocacy and visibility of UH issues to improve living conditions. To 
that end, on 2 May, Navy released NAVADMIN 102/23, Navy Unaccompanied 
Housing Resident Bill of Rights and Responsibilities. This bill of 
rights and responsibilities outlines what residents should expect while 
residing in Navy-controlled UH. It also highlights their individual 
responsibilities while residing in UH.
    Last fall, Commander Navy Installations Command (CNIC), the Navy 
Housing program manager, standardized the inspections program that 
includes semi-annual preventive medicine unit to ensure the health and 
safety of residents, and the installation UH management staff conducts 
monthly inspections for adequacy and habitability of facilities. The 
standardized inspections conducted by UH staff identify issues 
requiring correction to ensure safe, reliable housing for Sailors. In 
addition, as part of our UH improvement efforts, we have reinvigorated 
the Command inspection program to better monitor daily living 
standards. This intrusive leadership provides UH management and unit 
command leadership the ability to proactively identify any relevant 
maintenance, health or safety issues in UH.
    To help Sailors self-advocate, in 2022, CNIC rolled out a 
maintenance request QR code program across the enterprise to improve 
the maintenance request process. The QR code initiative allows 
residents to report routine maintenance issues at any time of the day 
or night using their cellular phones. Since the rollout, there has been 
an increase in the volume of service calls, while completion times have 
remained steady. As there has not been an increase in staff within UH 
or Public Works, CNIC is monitoring operational metrics closely to 
determine optimal staffing requirements.
    The Navy has requested $165M in PB24 ($400M FYDP) to renovate and 
replace poor and failing UH. We appreciate Congress' support for these 
investments in Navy UH.
    Mr. Waltz. Do you see benefits with the JROTC program and its 
ability to help with recruiting?
    General Smith. JROTC is among the largest youth development 
programs in the United States. These programs instill the value of 
citizenship and civic responsibility, service to our country (including 
opportunities within the military, national, and public service 
sectors), personal responsibility, and a sense of accomplishment in 
participating students. Over the last decade, Marine Corps JROTC 
(MCJROTC), serving over 27,000 students in 254 high schools, has 
provided opportunities through our co-curricular and extra-curricular 
activities \1\ to introduce students to means for improving career 
readiness skills and knowledge of emerging workforce careers in 
science, technology, engineering, math, computer science, and 
cybersecurity. Although recruiting is not the purpose of JROTC, the 
MCJROTC historical data continues to demonstrate a benefit of MCJROTC 
to service. The data from the last three graduation reports \2\ show 
the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Co-curricular activities--drill, marksmanship, enrichment 
trips, and physical training. These are taught in conjunction with 
academic curriculum. Extracurricular activities--competition teams in 
drill and exhibition drill, marksmanship, and precision marksmanship, 
Cyber, Academic Bowl, and PT/Raider. These are conducted outside of the 
academic curriculum.
    \2\ The graduation report is information submitted by graduating 
cadet.

 
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Graduation Year                 2020       2021       2022
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Graduating Seniors                       4,849      4,683      4,442
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service Academy Appointments             35         29         40
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROTC Scholarships                        88         75         143
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service Enlistments                      1,011      853        1,119
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Military Service                   1,134      957        1,302
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage Military Service              23.4%      20.4%      29.3%
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Mr. Waltz. The Commandant of the Marine Corps cites amphib 
availability at about 32 percent. Our ability to project power, on a 
persistent basis, is critical to our ability to successfully operate 
from competition to conflict. Has the requirement for 31 amphibious 
vessels changed? How does lagging amphibious availability hurt your 
readiness?
    General Smith. Our requirement remains no less than 31 amphibious 
warfare ships. The increased time that our Amphibs spend in the 
maintenance phase consumes approximately half our Marines training and 
certification time. Per the Navy OFRP, our ships should average about 
eight months of their notional 36 month cycles in maintenance. Over the 
past ten years that number is slightly over twelve months since 71% of 
maintenance periods were extended. On top of that, when factoring in 
all other emergent maintenance requirements, our AWS average closer to 
15 of 36 months in maintenance. We prioritize shipboard operations and 
training for our deploying ARG/MEUs, so the maintenance does not impact 
them quite as heavily, however across the Service we've seen over 82 
incidents in the past two years where training or deployments were 
negatively impacted by lack of available ships. In summary, Marines 
cannot become proficient at operating in an amphibious environment, as 
required by Title 10 Sec 8063, unless they are provided time aboard 
amphibious warfare ships.
    Mr. Waltz. An ongoing GAO study details the current disrepair of 
barracks across the services. Some of the photos show rooms that are 
similar to condemned buildings, rather than barracks for our service 
members. What are you doing to ensure safe and sanitary places for 
service members to live? How are these problems allowed to persist?
    General Smith. The Marine Corps inventory of unaccompanied housing 
(UH) is comprised of 672 facilities, of which 16% (108) are below an 
acceptable condition level (rated as Q3 or Q4 facility condition 
index). We want every Marine living in facilities that meet high 
standards. Accordingly, we have embarked upon a path to improve overall 
quality of UH to Q2 or higher by 2030, prioritizing barracks facility 
renovations. For example:
      In FY22, the Marine Corps renovated 14 barracks, totaling 
$117.8M, to improve the quality of life of an estimated 3,353 Marines.
      In FY23, the Marine Corps is on track to execute the 
renovation of an additional 16 barracks, totaling $262.2M, to improve 
the quality of life of an estimated 4,763 Marines.
      In FY24, the Marine Corps plans to renovate 13 barracks, 
totaling $116M, to improve the quality of life of an estimated 4,339 
Marines.
    We are also focusing on oversight procedures to improve the 
condition of inadequate UH and more broadly provide for high quality 
facilities in a predicable, sustainable manner. For example, we are 
testing QR codes on the doors of our barracks rooms at Marine Corps Air 
Station Miramar and Camp Pendleton for Marines to scan and report 
maintenance concerns. Additionally, on the laundry rooms doors of these 
test barracks, we have placed QR codes there to enable Marines to 
report which washers and dryers require maintenance. The goal of QR 
codes access to maintenance reporting is to ensure a more responsive, 
accurate, and connected reporting and remedy system. We are also making 
targeted investments using MILCON projects like P158, which in the FY24 
base budget for a $131M Bachelor Enlisted Quarter and Support Facility 
aboard Marine Barracks Washington, Of course, the Marine Corps can 
accelerate the pace at which we get all barracks assets to Q2 or 
higher, should the President or Congress decide to make additional 
funding be available. The Marine Corps has 12 additional ``shovel-
ready'' barracks renovations projects totaling $155M to improve the 
quality of life for an additional 4,178 Marines. In the end, care for 
our Marines is a leadership issue. Management tools are needed but 
cannot replace on scene leadership.
    Mr. Waltz. Do you see benefits with the JROTC program and its 
ability to help with recruiting?
    General Allvin. Yes, we see the value of JROTC. One of the 
challenges we face in recruiting is an unfamiliarity with what the Air 
Force is and does. Having the presence of AFJROTC in schools offers the 
opportunity for youth and their influencers (teachers) to be educated 
on the value proposition of service, and for our potential future 
Airmen to ``see themselves'' as part of this institution, to include 
all the opportunities for growth/experience/education/leadership that 
will serve them throughout their lives.
    Mr. Waltz. An ongoing GAO study details the current disrepair of 
barracks across the services. Some of the photos show rooms that are 
similar to condemned buildings, rather than barracks for our service 
members. What are you doing to ensure safe and sanitary places for 
service members to live? How are these problems allowed to persist?
    General Allvin. The Department of the Air Force (to include Space 
Force) recognizes that the environment in which our Airmen and 
Guardians live impacts their quality of life, their ability to do their 
job, and our ability to recruit and retain the force. Taking care of 
unaccompanied Airmen and Guardians living in dormitories is a 
fundamental responsibility of leadership, installation commanders, and 
senior enlisted leaders. In keeping with this commitment, the DAF has 
numerous projects underway or planned between FY2023 and FY2026 to 
modernize and ensure safe, quality unaccompanied housing that supports 
mission requirements and provides improved privacy and greater 
amenities for junior personnel. DAF housing offices work to keep our 
families and single Airmen and Guardians safe every day. These housing 
offices conduct dormitory inspections on a routine basis and they brief 
our members upon move-in about maintenance and safety precautions. 
Additionally, during resident change over, dormitory rooms undergo 
maintenance and are again inspected. If problems are discovered, teams 
make corrections before assigning the unit. Overall, our dorms are in 
satisfactory condition--with 99% of dorms above the OSD standard--but 
we continue working hard to increase investment to improve facility 
conditions. The long-range investment plan is captured in the Dormitory 
Master Plan that integrates data and commander assessments. In response 
to Section 2814 of the FY22 NDAA, the DAF made a concerted effort to 
increase investment in dormitory facility conditions. Section 2814 
requires the DAF to invest approximately $1.1B in permanent party dorms 
across FYs22-26--the DAF is exceeding this requirement, targeting 
$1.7B. In FY23, the DAF authorized $342M in O&M funding for dorm 
maintenance & repair projects. DAF's ongoing unaccompanied housing 
projects include construction of a dormitory at Clear Space Force 
Station, Alaska, and a follow-on increment for a Basic Military 
Training dormitory at Joint Base San Antonio, Texas. For FY24, the DAF 
budget request includes $50 million in MILCON for a Surety Dormitory at 
Royal Air Force Lakenheath, UK. Additionally, we are planning to spend 
$251M in O&M funding on 38 projects to maintain, repair, and improve 
dormitory facilities.
    Mr. Waltz. Do you see benefits with the JROTC program and its 
ability to help with recruiting?
    General Thompson. JROTC programs are citizenship programs, not 
military recruiting programs. Our ROTC units teach character, 
leadership skills, the importance of fitness, and a commitment to 
national service. As a result, they familiarize youth with Air Force 
and Space Force core values and increase the propensity to serve. JROTC 
programs can help create positive relationships with educators and 
provide an avenue for recruiters to engage with student cadets. There 
are ten Space Force JROTC detachments managed by the Air Force.
      Arlington Career Center, Arlington, Va.
      Del Norte High School, Albuquerque, N.M.
      Durango High School, Las Vegas, Nev.
      Falcon High School, Peyton, Colo.
      Huntsville High School, Huntsville, Ala.
      Klein High School, Spring, Texas
      Shadow Mountain High School, Phoenix, AZ
      Space Coast Junior/Senior High School, Cocoa, Fla.
      The Academy for Academic Excellence, Apple Valley, Calif.
      Warren County High School, Warrenton, N.C.
    Mr. Waltz. An ongoing GAO study details the current disrepair of 
barracks across the services. Some of the photos show rooms that are 
similar to condemned buildings, rather than barracks for our service 
members. What are you doing to ensure safe and sanitary places for 
service members to live? How are these problems allowed to persist?
    General Thompson. The Department of the Air Force (to include Space 
Force) recognizes that the environment in which our Airmen and 
Guardians live impacts their quality of life, their ability to do their 
job, and our ability to recruit and retain the force. Taking care of 
unaccompanied Airmen and Guardians living in dormitories is a 
fundamental responsibility of leadership, installation commanders, and 
senior enlisted leaders. In keeping with this commitment, the DAF has 
numerous projects underway or planned between FY2023 and FY2026 to 
modernize and ensure safe, quality unaccompanied housing that supports 
mission requirements and provides improved privacy and greater 
amenities for junior personnel. DAF housing offices work to keep our 
families and single Airmen and Guardians safe every day. These housing 
offices conduct dormitory inspections on a routine basis and they brief 
our members upon move-in about maintenance and safety precautions. 
Additionally, during resident change over, dormitory rooms undergo 
maintenance and are again inspected. If problems are discovered, teams 
make corrections before assigning the unit. Overall, our dorms are in 
satisfactory condition--with 99% of dorms above the OSD standard--but 
we continue working hard to increase investment to improve facility 
conditions. The long-range investment plan is captured in the Dormitory 
Master Plan that integrates data and commander assessments. In response 
to Section 2814 of the FY22 NDAA, the DAF made a concerted effort to 
increase investment in dormitory facility conditions. Section 2814 
requires the DAF to invest approximately $1.1B in permanent party dorms 
across FYs22-26--the DAF is exceeding this requirement, targeting 
$1.7B. In FY23, the DAF authorized $342M in O&M funding for dorm 
maintenance & repair projects. DAF's ongoing unaccompanied housing 
projects include construction of a dormitory at Clear Space Force 
Station, Alaska, and a follow-on increment for a Basic Military 
Training dormitory at Joint Base San Antonio, Texas. For FY24, the DAF 
budget request includes $50 million in MILCON for a Surety Dormitory at 
Royal Air Force Lakenheath, UK. Additionally, we are planning to spend 
$251M in O&M funding on 38 projects to maintain, repair, and improve 
dormitory facilities.
                                 ______
                                 
                  QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. GARAMENDI
    Mr. Garamendi. The AIR and SEA Card programs are critical to 
national security and military readiness across the world. The Air Card 
fuel program contract process administered by DLA has previously had 
issues. What effect would the degradation of this program have on your 
service's readiness should aircraft and marine fuel suppliers in the 
network be limited or lost? Are you concerned about the loss of 
competitive prices or disruption of this long-standing network?
    General George. The cost of fuel, efficient contracting, and 
general fuel management are all essential to Army readiness. The Army, 
like the other armed services, relies on the Defense Logistics Agency 
(DLA) to effectively manage fuel contracts. DLA currently uses the 
Aviation Into-plane Reimbursement (AIR) and Ships' bunkers Easy 
Acquisition (SEA) Card programs to manage fuel contracts between 
vendors and purchasing customers; the Army relies on DLA to mitigate 
any readiness concerns or disruptions in the supply network. The Army 
is always concerned with the Standard Fuel Price, though the Stand Fuel 
Price is set by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense 
(Comptroller) for each FY.
    Mr. Garamendi. The AIR and SEA Card programs are critical to 
national security and military readiness across the world. The Air Card 
fuel program contract process administered by DLA has previously had 
issues. What effect would the degradation of this program have on your 
service's readiness should aircraft and marine fuel suppliers in the 
network be limited or lost? Are you concerned about the loss of 
competitive prices or disruption of this long-standing network?
    Admiral Franchetti. 1. The SEA and AIR Card programs are critical 
enablers for procuring commercially available Marine Gas Oil and 
Aviation Fuel from nearly any commercial port and air station/airport 
around the world. In the absence of Combat Logistics Force assets, 
Defense Fuel Service Points, and Fuel Exchange Agreement locations, 
there is no other quick and organic contracting mechanism for U.S. Navy 
ships and aircraft to acquire fuel. Loss, or degradation to the program 
would create significant gaps in logistics support for units deployed 
across the world. Additionally, it would exacerbate the complexity of 
logistics support for distributed maritime operations, which would 
eliminate or weaken our ability to project power.
    2. Inability to meet operational requirements is a greater concern 
than the loss of competitive prices, even in a fiscally constrained 
environment. The greater concern would be if this program were 
disrupted with no functional alternative. From the end-user side, AIR 
and SEA Card provides an effective contracting mechanism to rapidly 
acquire commercially available fuel with minimal lead time. If the AIR 
and SEA Card programs were not available, the Navy would require an 
immediate solution from Defense Logistics Agency in order to meet its 
commercial, bulk fuel requirements for ship port visits to commercial 
ports and aircraft refueling stops at commercial airports. It should be 
noted that fuel and fuel-related services are outside the scope of the 
Husbanding Service Provider Program.
    Mr. Garamendi. The AIR and SEA Card programs are critical to 
national security and military readiness across the world. The Air Card 
fuel program contract process administered by DLA has previously had 
issues. What effect would the degradation of this program have on your 
service's readiness should aircraft and marine fuel suppliers in the 
network be limited or lost? Are you concerned about the loss of 
competitive prices or disruption of this long-standing network?
    General Smith. The proper and effective use of the Defense 
Logistics Agency (DLA) managed, Aviation Into-plane Reimbursement (AIR) 
Card program provides Marine Aviation with the flexibility needed to 
sortie and operate across our Air Stations and commercial aviation 
infrastructure. The Marine Aviation Logistics Squadrons across our 
force continue to execute DLA directed control measures to increase 
program management proficiency at the tactical level and ensure 
accountability. Any degradation, disruption, or serious loss of the 
associated network of aircraft fuel suppliers would immediately compel 
a reassessment of a key planning consideration shaping the execution of 
Sortie Based Training Plans (SBTP) and operational missions. 
Disruptions or loss of competitive pricing will ultimately impact the 
fiscal balance the Service looks to maintain as multiple appropriations 
are brought to bear in resourcing the operation and maintenance of our 
aircraft and units. This would almost surely lead to a degradation in 
readiness of our aviation community.
    Mr. Garamendi. The AIR and SEA Card programs are critical to 
national security and military readiness across the world. The Air Card 
fuel program contract process administered by DLA has previously had 
issues. What effect would the degradation of this program have on your 
service's readiness should aircraft and marine fuel suppliers in the 
network be limited or lost? Are you concerned about the loss of 
competitive prices or disruption of this long-standing network?
    General Allvin. AIR cards are administered by DLA-Energy and the 
AF/A3 community in accordance with DLA Energy Publication P-8: ``Fuel 
Card Program'' and Air Force Instruction (AFI) 11-253, ``Managing 
Purchases of Aviation Fuel and Ground Services.'' The loss or 
degradation of the AIR Card, as a purchase media--without a suitable 
replacement for Mission Planners and Aircrews to utilize at commercial 
airports to purchase fuel and ground services--would have a detrimental 
impact on the Air Force's ability to execute its mission. It is the Air 
Force's understanding that DLA-Energy is in the process of awarding the 
next AIR Card contract and has extended the current contract to ensure 
there is no lapse or disruption to the network. In FY22, the Air Force 
purchased fuel at over 1,200 commercial airports, using the cards 
provided by the AIR Card program. The Air Force purchased over 80 
million gallons at DLA contract/Canadian Bulletin locations and 23 
million gallons at non-contract locations, accounting for 67 thousand 
refuel operations, or 7% of the total gallons of aviation fuel 
purchased.
                                 ______
                                 
                   QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. FINSTAD
    Mr. Finstad. Can you speak to the critical need to modernize the 
Air National Guard C-130 fleet to C-130J aircraft and the importance of 
continuing to modernize the fleet by simultaneously upgrading some C-
130H aircraft with modern technology?
    General Allvin. C-130Js are gradually replacing the C-130H fleet 
through yearly Congressionally added funding which will establish a 
common interoperable MDS fleet. At the current rate of 16 C-130J models 
per year, full recapitalization of the remaining 120 C-130Hs will occur 
in 2033. However, selective C-130H model modernization efforts are 
still required to ensure the remaining aircraft remain effective and 
operationally compatible. Further, continued C-130H model propulsion 
system modernization are needed to improve reliability, fuel 
efficiency, and performance.
                                 ______
                                 
                   QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. STRONG
    Mr. Strong. 1. It is my understanding that the Army has taken up 
its own approach to develop a variant of robotic targets. What is the 
current status of the Trackless Moving Target-Infantry? Is it true that 
it is five years late in development?
    General George. The Army has successfully matured its Trackless 
Moving Targets (TMT) program to meet the Army's requirements for 
trackless targets, including both vehicle (TMT-V) and infantry (TMT-I) 
variants, to operate on live-fire ranges. The program is executing on 
schedule and in accordance with the Army's plan.
    In 2020, the Army awarded a Small Business Innovative Research 
(SBIR) Phase III production contract to a Michigan-based small 
business, Pratt Miller Engineering, which is a wholly owned subsidiary 
of Wisconsin-based Oshkosh Defense. The Army produced and deployed 25 
TMT-Is and 3 TMT-Vs at two Army Installations. These systems have 
commonality for ease of maintenance and sustainability and operation. 
The Army plans to award its Full Rate Production SBIR Phase III 
contract in 2nd Quarter FY 2024 (2QFY24) for the continued production 
of both TMT variants to meet the Army's training requirements.
    Mr. Strong. 2. The Maneuver Center of Excellence at Fort Benning 
has shared that the Army's solution dangerously lacks collision 
avoidance, doesn't accurately register hits, doesn't provide a thermal 
signature for nighttime operation, can't replicate human behaviors and 
has barely been used by soldiers. It is my understanding that the Army 
is still planning on going to Full Rate Production for TMT, is this 
true? If so, why--how does this enhance soldier lethality?
    General George. Yes, the Army plans to award its Full Rate 
Production SBIR Phase III contract for TMT in 2QFY24 to meet the Army's 
training requirements for trackless targets. The Army is confident 
these systems will improve soldier lethality with the additional 
realism that trackless targets provide. The Army is currently unaware 
of any documented concerns with the TMT program from the Maneuver 
Center of Excellence.
    TMT platforms implement collision avoidance and human behavior 
replication via pre-planned path following and positive control of the 
platforms through the Army's live-fire range control software and PME's 
robotic software. Although the initial systems deployed to Fort Moore 
(formerly Fort Benning) had issues with registering hits, those issues 
were addressed and corrected during development. With respect to 
nighttime capabilities, TMTs have power ports for the connection of 
devices including thermal blankets, which are required for day and 
nighttime operations. Although the initial TMT systems deployed to Fort 
Moore had limited soldier use due to the installation's operational 
requirements and an early-on technical issue, the TMTs are now being 
relocated to Fort Liberty (formerly Fort Bragg) to gain more 
utilization. The TMTs sent to the Joint Readiness Training Center have 
been utilized in every training rotation since their deployment in 
October 2022 and more systems are being requested for additional 
realistic training scenarios.
    Mr. Strong. 1. As you know, the Army has led the way with mass 
timber adoption through five privatized hotels. Since the first hotel 
that was built at Redstone Arsenal in 2015, DOD saw mass timber 
buildings consistently go up almost 40 percent faster, with 44 percent 
less personnel hours, and a 90 percent reduction in on-site 
construction traffic. Not only that, but mass timber far exceeds 
installation resilience standards related to anti-terrorism force 
protection, lateral winds, seismic activity, and fire performance. 
Despite these benefits, the DOD has yet to design and build its own 
facility using the innovative wood products from mass timber despite 
that speed, strength, and efficiency. What is the Department doing to 
ensure equal competition in the early MILCON process, particularly to 
ensure mass timber is considered?
    General George. The Army relies on the design and construction 
agent to ensure equitable competition for all building materials within 
our current planning and design process. Life-cycle cost effectiveness 
is required per the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-58). As a 
result, project delivery teams are required to consider multiple 
alternatives for the various components of each design including, but 
not limited to, project location, building type, and material 
availability. Policies currently being written by the Army that 
prioritize sustainability attributes may have the effect of expanding 
the use of cross-laminated timber (CLT) for military construction. The 
Army plans to construct a CLT barracks in FY 2025 at Joint Base Lewis-
McChord, Washington, and will use data from that process to inform 
future decisions regarding building materials.
    Mr. Strong. 2. Considering the lessons learned from the Redstone 
Arsenal hotel, how did USACE ensure education across the MILCON 
workforce, particularly those responsible for designing the buildings 
and soliciting for construction bids?
    General George. Multiple presentations/webinars have been 
facilitated documenting the successes and lessons learned from the 
Candlewood Suites hotel at Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, with an audience 
consisting of a cross-section of groups and disciplines within the US 
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
    USACE also published and circulated technical notes for both CLT in 
January 2016 and nail-laminated timber in April 2019 to promulgate 
knowledge about these materials and the most advantageous building 
types and geographic regions for their utilization.
    Mr. Strong. 3. Specifically, what has the Army done to ensure the 
USACE workforce is aware of mass timber construction benefits to get 
after the MILCON problems we face today?
    General George. While the Army typically does not direct the design 
and construction agent on what materials and methods to use for 
military construction, USACE developed a tri-service Uniform Facilities 
Guide Specification on CLT, which has been approved for use by all U.S. 
military services. The ready availability of this template helps to 
facilitate the use of CLT in military construction. In 2016, the 
International Code Council Tall Wood Building Ad Hoc Committee began 
formulating building code recommendations for tall wood buildings. In 
2018, the Committee's proposals were approved for inclusion in the 2021 
International Building Code (IBC). USACE, with its tri-service 
counterparts, modified and published the Unified Facilities Criteria 1-
200-01 DOD Building Code in September 2022, incorporating the 2021 IBC 
to enable more effective use of CLT and nail-laminated timber in 
military construction.
    Multiple presentations and webinars have been facilitated to 
discuss the above documents and other recent developments. These events 
equip USACE project delivery teams with the understanding and 
confidence to integrate mass timber and other newer technologies.
    The USACE Construction Engineering Research Laboratory (CERL) is 
currently exploring how buildings constructed with mass timber respond 
to blast conditions. CERL is also partnering with the American Wood 
Council to provide expertise for the upcoming Army military 
construction barracks project at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington, 
which will promote decarbonization and electrification. To date, there 
are five Army hotels constructed by Lendlease, the Privatized Army 
Lodging program partner and construction firm. These CLT structures 
include: the Candlewood Suites hotel at Redstone Arsenal, Alabama (92 
rooms); Fort Drum, New York (99 rooms); Joint Base Lewis-McChord, 
Washington (127 rooms); and Fort Jackson, South Carolina (West 
Building--171 rooms; East Building--146 rooms).
    Mr. Strong. 1. I understand that the Marine Corps is planning a 
$250 million, 5-year IDIQ to support Marine lethality and autonomous 
robotic targets. I'd like to commend the Corps for doing this, and for 
using an innovative ``Technology as a Service'' model that saves the 
government time, money, and logistics. Do you believe realistic 
training tools like this are critical to preparing warfighters for 
combat operations?
    General Smith. The Marine Corps' training resources play a critical 
role in the Service's ability to prepare to meet the demands of current 
and future operating environments. The provision of modern capable 
training and range resources remains a Service priority to realize the 
Naval Expeditionary Force required in Force Design 2030 and Training 
and Education 2030 to deter current and future real-world pacing 
threats. The Marine Corps is committed to continued research, 
integration, and use of the latest technological advances in evolving 
our training to prepare Marines to counter a peer adversary. These 
efforts are indicated through the Service's establishment of the 
Trackless Mobile Infantry Target (TMIT) (e.g., autonomous robotic 
target) capability. Based upon a Business Case Analysis, the capability 
is being provided using a Knowledge Based Training Service (KBTS) type 
contract (e.g., ``Training as a Service''). In addition to the TMIT 
system, the contract includes field service support at each location 
for the operations and maintenance, and logistical equipment, spare 
parts, and software/hardware upgrades. The KBTS solution was identified 
as the most advantageous in terms of performance, benefits, and risks. 
TMITs significantly enhance standards-based training events, promote 
enhanced weapons proficiency, and provide the ability to create a more 
challenging training environment. TMITs contribute to the overarching 
missions and activities of the Marine Corps by providing human-like 
behavior in a live-fire training environment to better simulate the 
actions of adversaries resulting in increased lethality and more 
effective warfighters. The capabilities that these targets provide 
allow Marines to conduct a live-fire assault on a realistic enemy, 
chase that enemy from the objective, pursue them by fire, and prepare 
for and repel a counterattack in ways not previously achievable. 
Realistic training tools like this are critical to preparing 
warfighters for combat operations. In summary, the Marine Corps will be 
required to support training of Marines and Marine Corps units in an 
expanding array of mission essential tasks that require ever-increasing 
amounts of training space and increasingly sophisticated training and 
range resources. With the help of Congress we will meet that challenge, 
enabling Marines to serve as the Nation's Force-in-Readiness.

                                  [all]