[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
.
[H.A.S.C. No. 118-82]
HEARING
ON
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025
AND
OVERSIGHT OF PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED PROGRAMS
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
FULL COMMITTEE HEARING
ON
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY FISCAL YEAR 2025 BUDGET REQUEST
__________
HEARING HELD
MAY 1, 2024
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
57-569 WASHINGTON : 2025
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
One Hundred Eighteenth Congress
MIKE ROGERS, Alabama, Chairman
JOE WILSON, South Carolina ADAM SMITH, Washington
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado JOHN GARAMENDI, California
ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia, Vice DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey
Chair RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona
AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts
SAM GRAVES, Missouri SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California
ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York RO KHANNA, California
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts
TRENT KELLY, Mississippi ANDY KIM, New Jersey
MATT GAETZ, Florida CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania
DON BACON, Nebraska ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan
JIM BANKS, Indiana MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey
JACK BERGMAN, Michigan VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida JARED F. GOLDEN, Maine
LISA C. McCLAIN, Michigan SARA JACOBS, California
RONNY JACKSON, Texas MARILYN STRICKLAND, Washington
PAT FALLON, Texas PATRICK RYAN, New York
CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, Florida JEFF JACKSON, North Carolina
NANCY MACE, South Carolina GABE VASQUEZ, New Mexico
BRAD FINSTAD, Minnesota CHRISTOPHER R. DELUZIO,
DALE W. STRONG, Alabama Pennsylvania
MORGAN LUTTRELL, Texas JILL N. TOKUDA, Hawaii
JENNIFER A. KIGGANS, Virginia DONALD G. DAVIS, North Carolina
NICK LaLOTA, New York JENNIFER L. McCLELLAN, Virginia
JAMES C. MOYLAN, Guam TERRI A. SEWELL, Alabama
MARK ALFORD, Missouri STEVEN HORSFORD, Nevada
CORY MILLS, Florida JIMMY PANETTA, California
RICHARD McCORMICK, Georgia MARC VEASEY, Texas
LANCE GOODEN, Texas
Vacancy
Chris Vieson, Staff Director
Ian Bennitt, Professional Staff Member
Phil MacNaughton, Professional Staff Member
Taylor Burns, Research Assistant
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
Rogers, Hon. Mike, a Representative from Alabama, Chairman,
Committee on Armed Services.................................... 1
Smith, Hon. Adam, a Representative from Washington, Ranking
Member, Committee on Armed Services............................ 2
WITNESSES
Del Toro, Carlos, Secretary of the Navy.......................... 4
Franchetti, ADM Lisa, USN, Chief of Naval Operations............. 6
Smith, Gen Eric M., USMC, Commandant, Marine Corps............... 8
APPENDIX
Prepared Statements:
Del Toro, Carlos............................................. 61
Franchetti, ADM Lisa......................................... 115
Smith, Gen Eric M............................................ 132
Documents Submitted for the Record:
[There were no Documents submitted.]
Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:
[There were no Questions submitted during the hearing.]
Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:
Mr. Lamborn.................................................. 155
Mr. Scott.................................................... 158
Mr. Keating.................................................. 158
Mr. Waltz.................................................... 158
Mr. Fallon................................................... 159
Mr. Gimenez.................................................. 161
Mr. Panetta.................................................. 163
Mr. Alford................................................... 163
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY FISCAL YEAR 2025 BUDGET REQUEST
----------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, Wednesday, May 1, 2024.
The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in room
2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Mike Rogers [Chairman
of the Committee] presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE ROGERS, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
ALABAMA, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
Today we complete our fiscal year '25 budget and posture
hearings with the Department of the Navy. I want to thank the
ranking member and all members for their cooperation, hard
work, and dedication as we worked through 26 hearings in 13
legislative days.
These hearings have helped provide the information we need
to mark up the fiscal year '25 NDAA (National Defense
Authorizaton Act)later this month. I also want to thank our
witnesses for being here, for their service to our nation.
Admiral, this is the first time you are appearing before
us. Congratulations on your confirmation as the first female
CNO(Chief of Naval Operations) and thank you for being here.
General, it's the first time for you as well and we are all
thankful for your speedy recovery and are pleased to have you
back leading our Marines.
And, Secretary Del Toro, it's always good to see you back
with the committee.
The President is requesting a 1 percent increase for the
Department of the Navy. Factoring in inflation we all know
that's a 2 percent cut. Just as with the other services, a
budget that fails to provide real growth means the Navy had to
make painful tradeoffs and absorb real risk in their current
and future readiness.
We're seeing that very acutely in the request for
shipbuilding. The President is seeking to build a paltry six
battle force ships in fiscal year '25. At the same time, he
wants to retire at 19. Ten of those ships have several years of
service life remaining.
These retirements represent a huge loss of capability and
they leave us with a fleet of 287 ships in fiscal year '25.
That's under the Navy's plan. The fleet will further drop down
to 280 in fiscal year '27.
Forget about the 500-ship Navy that many say we need to
counter China. At no point over the next 20 years does the size
of the fleet even reach the 381 ships needed to support the
National Defense Strategy.
The budget also cuts the buy for the Virginia-class
submarine below the two per year needed to fulfill our
AUKUS(Australia, United Kingdom, United States) commitment. I
don't see how cutting the size of our fleet and shorting our
AUKUS commitment will deter China.
I also fail to see how it will provide the stability needed
to revitalize our industrial base. I'm also concerned about the
recent findings of the Navy's 45-day shipbuilding review.
It is entirely unacceptable that nearly every single major
shipbuilding program is experiencing significant schedule
delays. We expect the Navy to provide us with a detailed plan
to address these delays as soon as possible. One possible
solution would be for the Navy to stop piling on new
requirements and changing ship designs in the middle of
procurements.
As we have seen with the frigate program that only leads to
ballooning costs and late deliveries. Cutting the buys for new
ships, delaying deliveries, and decommissioning ships before
the end of their service lives will play significant additional
stress on readiness of the fleet.
That's a big problem for two reasons. First, the fleet is
already suffering readiness issues. Maintenance availabilities
are taking much longer than planned, inhibiting our ability to
project power.
The Marines have experienced that firsthand when
maintenance issues with the USS Boxer delayed the return of the
Bataan Amphibious Ready Group earlier this year and last year
maintenance issues meant there wasn't an amphibious ready group
available to evacuate Americans from Sudan.
The second problem is the Navy is currently carrying out
operations at a much higher than planned tempo. The Navy is
quickly using up missiles, burning through fuel, and extending
deployments as it defends the Red Sea and Israel from Iran's
terrorist proxies.
I don't see the security environment improving in the
Middle East anytime soon. I'd like to hear from our witnesses
how they expect to continue to carry out these operations with
a smaller budget.
Finally, I'd like to hear from the commandant on the
progress he's making with Force Design. Preparing our Marines
to be successful in a potential conflict with China is
critically important. Force Design will do just that.
And with that, I yield to my friend, the ranking member,
for any opening statement he may have.
STATEMENT OF HON. ADAM SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM WASHINGTON,
RANKING MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
Mr. Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to echo your comments and welcome our witnesses and
General Smith in particular. It is great to see you healthy and
doing well. Great to have you all here.
I think the chairman outlined very well the challenges that
we face. I mean, certainly the budget is at the top of the
list. Now, the one piece of it I always like to add is what are
we doing with the money that we have? Where are we spending
money that maybe we shouldn't be spending?
I know there's always a desire to look at something and
say, gosh, wouldn't it be better if we had more money. I think
that applies to just about everybody in every aspect of life,
you know, business or government.
But we do have a fair amount. Where are we spending money
that we shouldn't be spending money and how can we get more out
of what we're spending? Because, you know, we are $33 trillion
in debt. The deficit is pretty substantial, over a trillion.
I don't see a rain of more money coming anytime soon so
we're going to have to get more creative about how we spend
that money. I would like to use the Winston Churchill quote
about how "Gentlemen, we're out of money. Now we have to
think."
I know that's a bit of an overstatement but I have found it
to be more fruitful than you might think at first glance.
And the second the shipbuilding challenges, without
question. You know, the chairman outlined those. I know a huge
part of it is workforce, you know, and I think there's a major
challenge we have in this country.
In many instances we just don't have the workers with the
skills necessary to meet those challenges and we need to get
very creative about how we recruit and get more people into the
shipbuilding industry.
You know, this is not a great place to bring up an
immigration debate, you know, but, you know, immigration is
potentially one place where we can find some of those workers
and as we are all painfully aware there are a lot of people who
want to come here. Seems to me that we ought to be able to
match up those two problems a little bit better than we are.
And then on the requirements piece I just really want to
foot stomp what the chairman said, and I don't know the
specific ins and outs about how requirements may or may not
have shifted but I'm very confident that we have too many
requirements.
I was out at a shipyard just next to my district where they
were doing repairs on an LCS and then the people explained to
me -- and I could be getting this slightly wrong but there was
something like 1,200 pages of requirements for how to paint the
subsea part of the ship and the people working on it thought
that was a little bit unnecessary.
I have sort of a standard joke about how, you know, I wish
if I had the power I could do like a Thanos thing where I could
snap my fingers and make half of all the requirements go away,
and I don't really care which half, okay. If we could just
start to look at it that way.
And requirements are also frequently used by various people
lobbying from industry because they want the requirements to
vector it down to where they get picked. That doesn't help us.
We need to build in more flexibility in how we do these
things, and along those lines the modernization challenge. I
know, General Smith, your predecessor General Berger really
took on that challenge -- what is, you know, the current state
of warfare and the future of it and how do we shift to make
sure we're accommodating that.
We got to get better at that. Force protection is part of
it. The chairman mentioned the pace and the tempo, the cliche
of using a $2 million missile to shoot down a $50,000 drone.
We have new innovative technologies that could get us to a
cheaper result. We have got to speed those up so that we're
spending less money and still getting the same result.
Directed energy -- personally, I think the microwave
approach probably is going to work better than the laser
approach.
But let's make a choice and let's start figuring out how we
can build this and get us to a -- you know, a better more cost
effective way to meet our needs. Same true for unmanned systems
-- you know, what are the systems that are really going to help
us meet our challenges in the most cost effective way possible.
And then, lastly, you know, no posture hearing would be
complete without talking about recruitment and retention. You
know, our military is the greatest in the world because of the
people who serve and the families that support them.
I know this committee has taken on the task with our
Quality of Life Task Force to say what can we do to really
improve the quality of life of service members and their
families. That's part of the equation. But I would love to hear
from all of you about how recruitment and retention is going
and what we can do to help it be more successful.
With that, I thank the chairman and thank the committee for
going through another posture season and I look forward to the
testimony. I yield back.
The Chairman. I thank the ranking member.
Now I'd like to introduce our witnesses, the Honorable
Carlos Del Toro, Secretary of the Navy; Admiral Lisa Franchetti
is the Chief of Naval Operations; and General Eric Smith,
Commandant of the Marine Corps.
I'd like to welcome our witnesses and we'll start with you,
Mr. Secretary. You are recognized.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE CARLOS DEL TORO, SECRETARY OF THE
NAVY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
Secretary Del Toro. Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member Smith, distinguished
members of the committee, it's an honor to again appear before
you this morning to discuss the posture of the Department of
the Navy.
First and foremost, I would like to thank General Smith and
Admiral Franchetti for answering again the call of our nation
time and time again. They, like all who devote their careers
and in many cases, indeed, sacrifice their very lives in
defense of their fellow Americans, represent everything that
makes the United States a beacon of hope and freedom around the
world.
Together, our combined years of service to our country
totals over a century, a century marked by multiple
deployments, time away from home, sacrifices made by our
families, and as we gather here this morning tens of thousands
of our sailors, Marines, civilians, and their families are
either stationed or deployed all over the world making the same
sacrifices and enduring the same trials that myself, General
Smith, and Admiral Franchetti have faced throughout our
careers.
In the Indo-Pacific our Navy and Marine Corps are sailing
and operating alongside our international allies and partners
in support of a free and open maritime commons, one where
nations are secure in their access to the seas and where their
rights within their exclusive economic zones are respected and
upheld by all nations including the People's Republic of China,
as they should.
Across Europe we, in cooperation with our NATO allies, are
supporting our Ukrainian partners as they continue their fight
to restore their territorial and national sovereignty as
Russia's illegal full-scale invasion is now into its third
year.
I commend Congress for passing the national security
supplementals last month, allowing us to continue providing
support to our Ukrainian partners as they fight to restore
peace in their homeland and defend democracy for all free
nations.
And in the Red Sea today our sailors and Marines have
encountered hundreds of missiles and drones launched by the
Houthis these past six months, targeting merchant shipping and
the warships of both the United States and our international
allies and partners.
We are confronting an adversary supported by Iran that has
no respect for the innocent lives of civilian merchant Mariners
and one that is actively targeting our ships attempting to harm
our sailors and Marines because we dare to defend the
defenseless.
And last month the USS Carney, the USS Arleigh Burke, both
operating in the eastern Mediterranean Sea, intercepted several
Iranian ballistic missiles heading towards Israel.
For those who question why the American taxpayer should
provide for and maintain a Navy and a Marine Corps look at what
is happening today in the Middle East where we are defending
the free flow of international commerce and actively defending
our international allies and partners.
Members of the committee, we appear before you today to ask
for your continued support, your partnership, and your
commitment to ensuring that the nearly 1 million sailors,
Marines, and civilians of the department that we lead are ready
on all fronts at all times when called upon.
While the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 required us to
make extremely hard choices, the $257.6 billion in the
President's budget request for fiscal year '25 for our
department deftly balances maintaining and modernizing the
fleet and force of today against planning for the future force
while also taking care of our people.
This budget directly supports our department's three
enduring priorities of strengthening our maritime dominance,
building a culture of warfighting excellence, and enhancing our
strategic partnerships around the globe.
We are acquiring the most lethal, agile, and capable
warships, submarines, aircraft, weapons, and systems our world
has ever seen. We are also funding the research and development
transformational technologies and fielding them more quickly to
make our fleet more lethal and persistent within the current
FYDP.
We are investing billions of dollars in the industrial base
that supports us while encouraging them to invest more in
resources themselves at the same time and as responsible
stewards of taxpayer funds we will enforce accountability to
ensure our sailors and Marines have the platforms and
capabilities that they need on time and on budget.
Above all else, we are taking care of our people, our
personnel, their families, by focusing on improving housing,
expanding childcare capacity, and increasing access to mental
health resources amongst other critical areas.
We are clear eyed about the challenges that our nation
faces today in the maritime domain both commercial and naval.
As a maritime nation we must confront the challenges of today
and prepare for the potential conflicts of tomorrow by
investing in a strong Navy and Marine Corps.
Again, it's an honor to appear before you this morning and
we look forward to discussing with you how best to deliver the
Navy and Marine Corps that our nation requires.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Secretary Del Toro can be found
in the Appendix on page 61.]
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Admiral, you're recognized.
STATEMENT OF ADMIRAL LISA FRANCHETTI, CHIEF OF NAVAL
OPERATIONS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
Admiral Franchetti. Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member Smith,
distinguished members of the committee, good morning and thank
you for the opportunity to testify on the posture of the United
States Navy.
On behalf of our sailors, Navy civilians, and their
families deployed and stationed all around the world thank you
for your leadership and your continued support in providing and
maintaining the Navy the nation needs.
I'd also like to thank my teammate General Smith for his
exceptional partnership and collaboration as we guide our
services under the leadership of Secretary Del Toro.
Flanked by two oceans the United States is and always has
been a maritime nation whose security and prosperity rely on
access to the sea, and for over 248 years the U.S. Navy has
guaranteed that access, operating forward, defending our
homeland, and keeping open the sea lines of communication that
fuel our economy and underwrite our nation's security.
The events of this past year and the actions taken by your
Navy and Marine Corps team in the Indo-Pacific, in the
Mediterranean, and the Red Sea and beyond underscore the
enduring importance of American naval power.
With an average of 110 ships and 70,000 sailors and Marines
deployed at sea on any given day, the Navy-Marine Corps team is
delivering power for peace, deterring potential adversaries and
standing ready to fight and win our nation's wars if deterrence
fails.
I could not be more proud of this team. No other navy in
the world can train, deploy, and sustain such a lethal combat
credible force that operates from the seabed to space at the
scope, scale, and tempo that we do.
This year's budget request supports the National Defense
Strategy and my priorities of warfighting, warfighters, and the
foundation that supports them. It enables the Navy to continue
to meet our congressionally mandated mission in both peace and
war.
It is strategy driven, maintaining our focus on the
People's Republic of China as the pacing challenge and the
acute threat of Russia and other persistent threats like the
DPRK, Iran, and VEOs.
Given the discretionary spending caps prescribed by the
Fiscal Responsibility Act and a top line increase of .7
percent, the Navy had to make tough choices, favoring near-term
readiness, investing in our industrial base and prioritizing
our people while assuming risk in future capabilities.
Within this fiscally constrained environment the budget
request fully funds the Navy's top acquisition priority and the
most survivable leg of strategic deterrence, the Columbia-class
submarine.
It provides funds for six battle force ships and
incremental funding for two Ford-class aircraft carriers in
fiscal year '25, and it continues our support to Marine Corps
Force Design by maintaining 31 amphibious ships, procuring
three LPDs, one LHA, and eight Medium Landing Ships.
In total, the budget request procures 57 ships and
submarines across the FYDP(Future Years Defense Program). This
budget request prioritizes warfighting by funding operations,
training, and readiness accounts.
It invests in our foundation with funding for our
installations, for our shipyard infrastructure optimization
program, and for the broader Defense Industrial Base, sending a
strong signal to our industry partners on the need to increase
our capacity to meet the growing demands of the present and the
future.
And it continues our strong commitment to our warfighters
and our families through pay raises for our sailors and Navy
civilians, investments in quality of service initiatives such
as unaccompanied housing, education, childcare, and sailor
resiliency.
These initiatives as well as others, enabled by your
steadfast support, have helped us maintain historically high
levels of retention, which is imperative given the current
recruiting environment.
And while this environment remains challenging and our
manning requirements have increased, we are about 2,500
recruits ahead of where we were last year at this time and I
remain optimistic that our marketing and data analytics
investments will show additional progress throughout the year.
I would also like to thank this committee for your
commitment to our sailors' quality of life. The Navy is in
receipt of the Quality of Life panel report and we look forward
to working closely with Congress and the office of the
Secretary of Defense to ensure our sailors and their families
have all they need as they support our nation's security and
prosperity.
As Chief of Naval Operations I am committed to pulling
every lever available to me to put more ready players on the
field, platforms that are ready with the right capabilities,
weapons, and sustainment and people who are ready with the
right tools, skills, training, and mind set to defend our
nation's security and prosperity wherever and whenever it is
threatened.
I thank the committee for your leadership and partnership
in ensuring the world's premier warfighting force remains ready
to preserve the peace, respond in crisis, and win decisively in
war if called.
I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Admiral Franchetti can be found
in the Appendix on page 115.]
The Chairman. Thank you, Admiral Franchetti.
General Smith, you're recognized.
STATEMENT OF GENERAL ERIC M. SMITH, COMMANDANT, U.S. MARINE
CORPS
General Smith. Good morning.
Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member Smith, ladies and
gentlemen, thank you for the opportunity to represent your
Marines today.
I'd like to start by sincerely thanking this committee for
its enduring support and your advocacy for a timely,
predictable and sufficient budget that enables the Marine Corps
to remain the first to fight.
I'd like to express my deep gratitude for the partnership
between my shipmate Admiral Franchetti and me as we lead our
respective services under the leadership of Secretary Del Toro.
Whether deterring, responding to crisis, or in conflict it
will be the Navy and our Marine Corps Expeditionary Force
forces who make first contact with partners seeking help or
adversaries seeking a fight.
Our partnership, collaboration, and integration is a
decisive advantage. Recently, I published my updated guidance
to the force entitled "Maintain Momentum." I chose this title
as I firmly believe the Corps is on the right path under Force
Design.
A few points from that document. First, I believe that the
Corps must continue to strike a balance between high-end
modernization and our commitment to persistent forward-deployed
naval expeditionary forces that campaign and respond to crises
globally. This effort is represented by our Marine
Expeditionary Units.
Second, we must prioritize our operations with the Navy and
its amphibious ships and we must provide Marines with the
organic mobility to rapidly maneuver from shore to shore, ship
to shore, and back again.
Third, on recruiting our performance speaks for itself. We
will continue to make mission without ever diminishing our
standards. Additionally, our top performing Marines are
reenlisting at historic rates and we must sustain this trend.
Fourth, we must maximize the capability of our reserves to
ensure that our nation has the ready bench of warriors that
they relied on -- have relied on since the founding of the
Marine Corps forces reserve in 1916.
And, fifth, I'm dedicated to ensuring a quality of life for
our Marines that matches the high demands we place on them
every day. That means nutritious food, high quality and
accessible gyms, and a safe quiet place to recover from a hard
day's work.
Our Barracks 2030 initiative is our most consequential
barracks investment ever and it is sorely needed. While
aggressively pursuing these priorities I commit to you that our
Corps will always be frugal and accountable with the resources
that you and the American people provide.
I'm proud of my Marines and civilian Marines who enabled
the Marine Corps to receive an unmodified audit opinion earlier
this year, the first of any service to do so.
They told us what we have long known, that when you entrust
us with the taxpayers' money it is money well spent and fully
accounted for.
All these things are critical to maintaining the strength
and dominance of your Marine Corps. This year marks 249 years
since the founding of our Corps. That is 249 years of battles
won and peace upheld in the name of democracy and prosperity
for our nation and for all nations who abide by the
international rules-based order.
But, increasingly, world events demonstrate that this order
is being challenged. Free trade, unrestricted access to the
seas, peaceful cooperation between nations big and small, are
under assault. Our nation's prosperity is underwritten by a
strong Navy and Marine Corps who maintain a global presence and
keep malign actors at bay.
Thank you again for the opportunity to represent your
Marines today. I pledge to continue to work closely with each
of you to ensure your Marine Corps remains the most lethal
fighting force on the planet and I look forward to your
questions.
[The prepared statement of General Smith can be found in
the Appendix on page 132.]
The Chairman. Thank you, General.
Before I recognize myself for questions I want to
acknowledge the presence of a special guest today. We have got
a former long-term member of this committee and also a
classmate of mine and a retired Marine colonel, John Kline,
with us today. Good to have you, John.
[Applause.]
The Chairman. Now I recognize myself for questions.
Admiral Franchetti and General Smith, the Navy and Marines'
fiscal year '25 budget has $4.5 billion in unfunded
requirements. It's clear you've had to leave some important
programs on the cutting table.
I'd like to ask each of you to speak to some of the
tradeoffs that you've made trying to make this budget number
work.
Admiral, I'll start with you.
Admiral Franchetti. Thank you, Chairman Rogers, and as I
said in my opening statement, you know, we really prioritized,
you know, Columbia first and then readiness and then our
people, quality of service, and everything that they need to be
able to do their jobs. But the --
The Chairman. What could you not make fit?
Admiral Franchetti. -- things that I couldn't really get
after is, you know, we took risk in our future procurement. If
you look at the things that, you know, we weren't able to do in
the future, really, the airwing of the future -- you know,
aircraft carriers, SSNX, DDGX.
So, really, we prioritized on the current readiness that we
need and did not prioritize the future. So if there were
additional resources available certainly my UPL(Unauthorized
Practice of Law) has items on there that either came up after
our budget was submitted but the things that are on there are
things that we need to accelerate or to get some warfighting
advantage.
The last thing I would mention is although I have
prioritized investment in our foundation, which is
installations and everything associated with our
infrastructure, about 60 percent of our MILCON(Military
Construction) budget is going into the SIOP program and so I
think there will always be opportunity to provide more
investment in our installation.
The Chairman. General Smith?
General Smith. Mr. Chairman, our UPL does two things. It
accelerates modernization against the pacing threat who is
moving at an alarming pace.
It accelerates quality of life improvements -- our Barracks
2030 initiative -- and, frankly, the risk, if not funded, is we
will remain capable and ready but deferred funding will
eventually be paid for in blood by our Marines in crisis or in
combat or in training.
In the near term, our success in recruiting and retention
is jeopardized because we won't be able to fulfill commitments
to Marines and their families.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Secretary, the review found every major shipbuilding
program is experiencing significant delays and challenges. Can
you speak to how you plan to correct that?
Secretary Del Toro. Absolutely, Mr. Chairman.
First, let me say that these are concerns that I've had
from the first month I became Secretary of the Navy trying to
address the most difficult challenges and trying to make
improvements to get us to a better place.
I'm pleased to say that due to the support of the Congress
and the administration we are now pumping nearly $18 billion
into the submarine base, $1 billion into the surface industrial
base as well, too, and just in '24 some of the advancements
that were made establishing an additive manufacturing center
down at Danville -- 9,700 workers hired across both GD,
Electric Boat, and HII Newport News -- an installation of
additive manufacturing parts, groundbreaking on the submarine
manufacturing facility at Newport News, for example,
strategically outsourcing 3 million hours of work from the
prime vendors to the sub vendors, something that I've been
encouraging them to do from the very beginning, and we hope to
actually double that in fiscal year '25 along with increasing
other strategic sourcing as well to scaling of attraction,
recruiting, training and retention efforts.
As you know, Mr. Chairman, we have had, again, thanks to
the support of Congress $25 million retention money that's been
passed to Fincantieri, for example, so they can retain more
people. We see another $25 million added to the '25 budget.
So there are a lot of good news stories that are trying to
be executed upon in order to get the state of these production
lines up to where they should be.
The Chairman. Thank you.
We used to execute heel to toe amphibious deployments into
AORs. Now we struggle to maintain one deployment in one AOR.
Can you talk about what you're doing to correct that?
Secretary Del Toro. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
In fact, if my memory serves me right I think it was
sometime in the 2017-2018 time frame when we actually had a
heel to toe deployment of an ARG. Since then we unquestionably
have been challenged by maintenance problems with our
amphibious ships.
And there's no question in my mind that we should have been
buying more amphibious ships earlier. The age of our amphibious
fleet is excessively high. We need to continue to invest in new
ships to replace these old ships.
If you take the Germantown, which we're proposing
decommissioning this year, for example, she is our oldest LSD.
She has wood decks on her that are corroding. She has a crane
that hasn't been able to be fixed in the past six years and
that's with help of the OEM (original equipment manufacturer),
the original manufacturer.
So it's time to actually replace these older LSDs with new
ones in order to be able to meet the missions that face us
tomorrow.
The Chairman. Great. Thank you.
I yield to the ranking member.
Mr. Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll continue along
those lines in terms of the shipbuilding challenges and
particularly focus on the workforce piece of it, and I don't
know exactly so I'm curious how big a factor is that in not
being able to keep up and having so many of our ships behind?
Secretary Del Toro. It is a significant factor, Mr.
Chairman. The blue collar workforce in this country has
actually decreased significantly over the course of the last
decade, I would argue, and we actually need to take measures in
a whole of maritime statecraft effort, quite frankly, to try to
recruit more people to the shipbuilding industry.
Our country doesn't have a commercial shipbuilding industry
either. That significantly hurts the status of naval
shipbuilding in the country, and that's what we're trying to
get back. Try to go after the low-hanging fruit to try to
retrain more people.
Members from my office just came from Ohio just a few days
ago, for example. We're meeting with the Boilermakers Union of
Ohio to try to get them to be able to retrain people at
Bartlett Shipyard, for example, so that they could actually go
into the shipbuilding industry. There's about 4,000
boilermakers in the --
Mr. Smith. Is there a way to quantify this? Are we -- like,
do we need 10,000 workers? Do we need 20,000? Understanding
that it's going to differ special -- to specialty but in
general is there a number that either you or the admiral could
give us on how short we are here?
Secretary Del Toro. I think we -- we're going to need
upwards of 50,000 or more shipyard workers into the future to
be able to constitute the demand signal that we're putting in.
Mr. Smith. Have we worked at all with high schools on, you
know, beginning to show people the -- you know, basically
career and technical education to say -- because I know there's
been a bit of a pivot, certainly, in my area and we have a
robust, you know, shipbuilding industry there.
We're building a maritime high school which focuses on a
number of different issues. But, you know, an effort to take
people in high school and say, hey, this is a career that you
could pursue?
Secretary Del Toro. So we're taking a significant amount of
investment from the submarine industrial base and the ship
industrial base, and Chairman Courtney knows that up in
Connecticut, for example, we're pumping that money into
retraining programs so that we can actually take high school
students, turn them into certified welders and put them right
into the shipyard.
We're doing the same thing with community colleges as well,
too. I just visited a community college up in Maine -- in Bath,
Maine, for example, where we're trying to do the same thing.
Mr. Smith. Okay. And on the requirements piece what can we
do? I mean, it just seems to me like that does drive cost, and
then to the chairman's point, requirements shift for a variety
of different reasons in the middle of a project.
But even before we get to the shifting just the set of
requirements that are thrown up as a starting point is anyone
taking a serious look at that? I'd be interested in all three
of you just giving me a quick comment.
How can we shrink that down so that we can be more nimble
in how we meet our manufacturing needs?
Secretary Del Toro. It's a complicated -- it's a
complicated situation --
Mr. Smith. Yes, it is.
Secretary Del Toro. -- and, of course, made even more
complicated over the years because every time you have a new
operational requirement it adds additional requirements to the
factor as well, too.
When you take a -- just as one example, we want to operate
more in the Arctic, right? Well, our DDGs, for example, are
only designed to operate a set number of days in the Arctic.
But if we're going to operate more in the Arctic we got to
reinforce those hulls on our DG Flight IIIs, for example, and
our DDGXs in order for them to be able to do so.
So there are times when there are legitimate growth in
requirements to support an operational mission but in many
cases it's also telling the shipyard how to do their job and we
shouldn't be doing that.
We should be setting the overall requirements and letting
them build to those requirements as well, too. Sometimes safety
factors are at play as well, too, and lawyers get involved and
so, you know, one lawsuit drives a hundred different additional
requirements to the process as well.
Mr. Smith. Absolutely.
Just very quickly in time I have left, Admiral, General
Smith, do you want to offer thoughts?
Admiral Franchetti. I would just offer that it's really
important, you know, as we are designing the ships initially
and setting the requirements both, you know, as we just did
with the Landing Ship Medium, you know, to really think through
that work very carefully with the concept of employment that
we're going to use and make sure that we're basically saying
exactly what we need for those capabilities when we release
that RFP.
Mr. Smith. General, just --
General Smith. I would echo what my shipmate said, that our
Wargaming and Analysis Center is vital to that, to war game
through what actually you need before you set the requirements
and then our requirements officer, Lieutenant General Heckl, is
there to keep those requirements on pace and to keep them
steady.
Mr. Smith. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield
back.
The Chairman. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from
South Carolina, Mr. Wilson.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and, indeed,
we are so grateful to have with us today Congressman Colonel
John Kline of Minnesota. He served with such distinction and he
still does, and so it's so good to see his bright face here
today. Thank you.
With that, too, I want to thank each of you for your
service. I grew up with a great appreciation of the Navy in the
holy city of Charleston, South Carolina, with the Navy base
there. I was a sea cadet and so I saw firsthand the great work.
And then I'm also grateful to be today a Navy dad and my
son is a orthopedic surgeon in the Navy and then for everyone -
- and military service can be so uplifting. I now -- with his
service in Naples, Italy, I've got three grandchildren who
speak perfect Italian and so who would ever imagine the ripple
effect of military service?
And then, General, I'm really grateful. I previously
represented Parris Island Marine Corps Air Station in Beaufort
and I saw young recruits come and to be totally transformed
from what they were into Marines, having very meaningful lives.
And so it's just an extraordinary opportunity that you provide
for the young people of our country as we defend our country.
And, Secretary Del Toro, the Missile Defense Agency's
budget request for fiscal year '25 cuts the procurement of
Standard Missile 3, or SM-3, Block 1B interceptors, which is
our Navy's primary defense against tactical ballistic missiles
for the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense Weapon System.
This deviates from last year's budget request which set
procurement of these interceptors through fiscal year '29. I'm
concerned that this proposal was drafted prior to the
commencement of the outrageous and illegal attacks on Israel by
Iran and its puppets on October 7, 2023, and beyond where these
SM Block III 1B interceptors have been expended to protect
American troops and freedom of navigation in the Red Sea.
With the current trajectory to end production of this
proven defense against the threats in the CENTCOM(Central
Command) region will this create a gap of a defense capability
and what is the department going to do to address the gap?
Secretary Del Toro. Congressman, thanks for that really
important question. I truly believe that SM-3s will be needed
in greater numbers in the future, given the operations that
took place in defense of Israel here recently where some were
fired and very effectively so.
I think given the future threat and our deterrence mission
in the Indo-Pacific we are going to need more SM-3s in the
future and I think that those decisions were made before recent
operations. I think we're going to have to relook that in order
to add more SM-3s in the future.
Mr. Wilson. And thank you, Mr. Secretary, because it really
is shocking to me. Here we are in the 21st century with the
Iran missile attacks on the citizens of Israel, and then you
have the Houthis, puppets of Iran, with their capabilities --
underwater sea capabilities that -- of nomads.
No, no. Hey, we're dealing with dictators with rule of gun
invading democracies' rule of law. Whether it be war criminal
Putin, whether it be the regime in Tehran, whether it be the
Chinese Communist Party, we have just got to be prepared and
address the changes that occur.
Additionally, with the hearings that we have had the
integrated air and missile defense ballistic systems that we
have -- there has been a dialogue between the departments of
integrating the unmanned aerial systems with the Aegis
Ballistic Missile Defense architecture.
Is that proceeding?
Secretary Del Toro. I'm sorry, Congressman. Can you repeat
it? You're talking about integrated unmanned aerial systems
with --
Mr. Wilson. Yes. Yes. Yes.
Secretary Del Toro. Yes, sir. So as one example we're very
excited, obviously, by the current operations associated with
MQ-4, MQ-9, and in the future MQ-25.
We are very much planning the integration of MQ-25, for
example, with the integrated air missile defense systems so
that we can recognize that the MQ-25 is operating out there as
an unmanned F-18 refueler while we're actually protecting the
entire Carrier Strike Group.
Mr. Wilson. Well, again, as we face the changes it's just
so startling. Again, in the 21st century this shouldn't be
occurring.
And, finally, Admiral Lisa, I'm really grateful there's a
future sailor preparatory course at Fort Jackson giving young
people an opportunity to serve. Is the Navy looking -- and it's
been successful. You need to contact General Kelly. Is that
being pursued by the Navy?
Admiral Franchetti. Yes, Congressman Wilson. We have also a
future sailor prep course modeled on the Army's course for both
physical fitness and academic and it is having a really
positive impact for our future sailors.
Mr. Wilson. Hear, hear. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you.
The Chairman. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from
Connecticut, Mr. Courtney.
Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Again, I want to thank all the witnesses for being here
today.
Secretary Del Toro, we had good news last night on AUKUS
where the State Department issued their ITAR regulations to
implement the Optimal Pathway that you and I witnessed out in
San Diego.
It's great to see you, Admiral Franchetti. Congratulations
on your first hearing and really want to, you know, welcome
Gerald Smith back into the fray and really glad you're back in
the saddle leading the Marine Corps.
Mr. Chairman, before I begin my questioning I request
unanimous consent to enter into the record two letters from the
Machinists Union and the metal trades department of the AFL-CIO
urging sustained investment in the two per year cadence of the
Virginia-class submarine.
The Chairman. Without objection so ordered.
Mr. Courtney. They represent the welders, electricians,
painters, and boilermakers who are hard at work right now
delivering three Virginia-class submarines in this calendar
year and on track to deliver two more in 2025 and are part of
that job training initiative that the Secretary mentioned in
New England -- 5,300 hires last calendar year with an 86
percent retention rate.
I also request unanimous consent to enter into the record a
letter that myself and 119 other House members submitted to the
Appropriations Committee last night in support of restoring the
second Virginia-class submarine.
The Chairman. Without objection.
Mr. Courtney. Thank you.
Admiral Franchetti, we have had our posture hearings over
the last month or so, as the chairman mentioned. We heard from
Admiral Aquiline at INDOPACOM(United States Indo-Pacific
Command), General Guillot from NORTHCOM(U.S. Northern Command),
and General Cavoli from EUCOM(United States European Command
that their requirements for attack submarine missions extend
beyond what the Navy current has in its inventory.
Again, the Navy's shipbuilding three-year plan has a
requirement for 66 attack submarines and at this point we
possess about 50, maybe 51 with the New Jersey that was
delivered last week.
Is that still the Navy's position that that's the target in
terms of what should be an adequate attack submarine fleet?
Admiral Franchetti. Yes. I can't speak highly enough of our
attack submarine fleet, really our asymmetric advantage, and as
you said, yeah, 66 is our requirement.
Mr. Courtney. Thank you.
So, Mr. Secretary, during the budget briefs back in March
Navy officials said, quote, "We are going about the submarine
cut in a strategic way because we're simply not taking a
submarine out. We're also continuing investment in advanced
procurement to make sure that the supplier industrial base is
fully funded."
Unfortunately, committee staff has dug deeper into the
budget books and it's clear that many, many suppliers are not
included in the advanced procurement phase of construction and
are not protected by this strategic way.
Our staff determined that it would cost an additional $1
billion to achieve the goal that was stated with the Navy's
budget brief. When this enormous shortfall was raised at the
Sea Power Subcommittee two weeks ago Assistant Secretary
Guertin replied, "Well, we'll have to take a closer look and
see what we can do to help."
Does the Navy today have an answer to these supply chain
companies which, again, the analysis shows are not going to be
protected the way it was intended?
Secretary Del Toro. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me first also reaffirm our complete commitment on the
part of the entire Department of the Navy to the 66 attack
submarines.
We currently have 50. We have 11 that are actually under
construction and four additional ones under the contract, and
I'm confident with the '26 budget we'll eventually get to the
66 that are required.
Of course, we need to have them built faster and have those
production rates increase. With regards specifically to these
vendors we're in constant contact with these vendors.
The purpose of advanced procurement money, however, isn't
to fully fund all the vendors that are in the supply chain.
It's to fund those vendors that are most critical to the supply
chain.
I don't think there's ever been a confirmation that we can
support, you know, full funding of all the vendors across the
entire spectrum.
Mr. Courtney. So, Mr. Secretary, if I could just say -- my
time is running out -- I know some of those critical supply
chain companies. They are left out, okay, with the plan that
was submitted by the Navy.
They are picked up through full -- the full funding phase
of the submarine program, not advanced procurement long lead
items and, again, this is a real problem which, again, we now
have dollars and cents in terms of what it would take to fix
that.
Not a penny of that would go to the general contractor --
that $1 billion. That was all, again, to make sure that all
these fabricators and parts manufacturers are actually going to
be protected as Mr. Raven had indicated in his opening
statement.
And, again, at some point to really protect them we should
just go forward with what was in the FYDP last year to have two
submarines included in this year's budget. We are going to work
really hard with your team to try and accomplish that goal.
We have done it in the past. We did it in 2013 when the
Obama administration eliminated a submarine and then 2020 when
the Trump administration eliminated a submarine. Sometimes it
was in the UPL's list. Sometimes it wasn't.
But we -- using our constitutional duty Article One Section
Eight Clause 13 to provide and maintain the Navy, we stepped
forward and filled that gap and it's a good thing we did.
With that, I yield back.
The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Virginia, Mr.
Wittman.
Mr. Wittman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to thank our
witnesses for joining us today.
Secretary Del Toro, I want to begin with you. We know that
in the Indo-Pacific in order to deter conflict this is the tip
of the spear effort. It's a Navy-Marine Corps fight. In order
to do that we have to have ships.
Listen, our sailors and Marines are great but until they
can walk on water we better be building them ships. We know
that the entire effort there needs to be about the existing
Navy and building new ships.
The President's budget comes over this year. Build six,
retire 19, 10 of those before the end of their expected service
life.
I'm not a mathematician but seems to me you can't do
addition by subtraction. We know that there's continued cost
growth and schedule movement to the right in building new
ships.
So if we're not going to repair the ships we have and we're
going to be delayed in getting new ships it seems like to me
the delta will get even bigger, and I've warned for years that
there are real consequences to this.
If you look at what's going to happen just in the Hampton
Roads area, one of the great places for ship repair, from
fiscal year '18 to fiscal year '28 will have a reduction in
workload demand there by 50 percent. Employment levels there
will go from 7,800 ship repairs to 3,800 ship repairs. We know
once those people leave they're not coming back.
So, Mr. Secretary, what do you have in mind for the
capacity of our U.S. repair yards? How do we maintain a navy?
How do we make sure that we as members of Congress who have
a constitutional responsibly -- the Constitution says to
maintain navies.
How do we maintain them if this demand signal goes away and
we have this massive decrease in the number of ships that we
are going to keep on when we need them? How does that work?
Tell me what's the Navy's plan, going forward, to sustain our
Navy?
Secretary Del Toro. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First and foremost, as you know, the debt discussions that
took place here on Capitol Hill led to the Fiscal
Responsibility Act that actually puts extensive downward
pressure on the United States Navy and part of that is actually
then having to make the choice to decommission --
Mr. Wittman. Mr. Secretary, I hate to interrupt but it's
the broader --
Secretary Del Toro. I know, but this is a complicated
discussion.
Mr. Wittman. -- it's the broader constitutional
responsibility that we have to defend this nation. I understand
about the Fiscal Responsibility Act but it is about making
priority decisions on the resources that --
Secretary Del Toro. But I have to make those priority
decisions based on the law and if the law does not allow me to
spend more money than the 1 percent increase over last year's
budget I then have to make really tough --
Mr. Wittman. The Constitution says maintain our navies.
Maintain our Navy is what the Constitution says.
Secretary Del Toro. But the laws are what I have to follow
on a year to year basis, and so I have to actually take a look
at retiring legacy systems so that we could actually build new
ships and we're building 58 of them across the FYDP --
Mr. Wittman. None of those come into operation, though,
inside the Future Year Defense Plan. So all of our dreams are
going to come true outside -- you'll be long gone and somebody
else is going to be saying, well, I'd have gotten to the Navy
if I didn't have to deal with what was given to me prior.
Secretary Del Toro. And to the chairman's point, I'm trying
to work with industry to increase the production rates. For
example, the New Jersey, for example, was delivered just last
week and it was delivered almost three years late.
If all the submarines that we had ordered actually had been
delivered on line because of the challenges to the production
rates we'd actually have five additional submarines in our
fleet today to be able to meet our operational needs across the
nation.
So we have to work an entire whole of government maritime
statecraft to actually try to bring these production rates back
up so that we can get the ships delivered on time and on budget
and so that we can keep them operational at sea and actually
free up those shipyards so when they do need to come back and
be repaired they could be made available.
We're also making historic investments in the SIOP(Single
Integrated Operational Plan) program, for example, $20 billion,
thanks to the support of the Congress over these last 10 years,
and those programs are moving along very nicely, obviously.
But these are programs that hadn't been invested in in over
75 years. And so those are the investments that we are making
that I think are truly historic that, hopefully, will get us to
the right place. But it's going to take time to get us there
and there's nothing I can do. I can't snap my fingers have
these ships built faster.
Mr. Wittman. But I -- I understand about new construction
but we got to have the maintainers. If we're going to let the
maintenance side atrophy when you do get those new ships where
are the repairs going to come from? So then we're going to be
in a situation of being able to maintain a 355-ship Navy if and
when we ever get there.
So there is the maintenance side of the formula that I
think is critically important, I would argue probably today
even more important than the build side. I understand the
delays in the build side. All those things are reality.
Let me ask you this. Admiral Franchetti, I wanted to get
your perspective on where we are with SSN projections building
one submarine. Now, the Australians look at that and they go
well, wait a minute -- we thought we had an AUKUS agreement
here.
We thought we were going to build two a year. We thought we
were going to be able to buy some from the United States. How
do we sustain the fundamentals of the AUKUS agreement?
If you were an Australian looking at this and go, is the
U.S. really serious about this -- they're going down to
building one submarine this year when they say we need to have
a pace of 2.3, and they look at it and go, I thought we were
going to buy some submarines from them -- I thought we were
actually going to have a cooperative agreement there.
How do you see this as being able to sustain on SSN --
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
The chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr.
Garamendi.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
So many things here. Money, money, or not enough money. We
had $4.5 billion of unfunded priorities. I think you mentioned
that, Admiral.
I would point out to the committee that the Sentinel
program has been Nunn-McCurdyed, stopped. Four point six
billion dollars is expected to be spent on it this year. Maybe
that could be delayed and spent on the Navy, maybe, if this
committee decides what should be done.
We make choices here about prioritization. The fact of the
matter is we do not need the Sentinel for at least another
decade and a half. But this is the Navy. You do build Columbia-
class submarines, don't you?
Secretary Del Toro. Yes, sir.
Mr. Garamendi. At about $7 billion to $8 billion a copy.
Sentinel is $137 billion over the next decade plus. That's
about eight Columbia-class submarines.
If we had the shipyards which, unfortunately, my colleague
Mr. Waltz is not here. He and the Subcommittee on Readiness has
developed a interim national maritime strategy that speaks to
the commercial side of it, which is also the shipyard side and
the ability of our shipyards to produce ships on the commercial
side but also to repair naval ships. So there's an overarching
strategy that we're working on here.
General Smith, welcome back. Delighted you're here.
Delighted you appear to be in great health. Thank you. You've
always fancied and you've told me and I'm sure others that the
Marine Corps is fast and light, capable, able to operate
independently as part of an integrated joint force. What
capabilities is the Marine Corps pursuing to enable that
mobility in contested environments? What do you need to carry
out that goal?
General Smith. Well, Mr. Garamendi, thanks for the warm
welcome. It's good to be back.
What we need is the Landing Ship Medium. The request for
proposal is out for industry now and we can't go fast enough.
The Landing Ship Medium built to commercial standards and I'm
pleased with the fiscal year '25 shipbuilding plan, which is
11222.
I'll use the Ford F-150 analogy. It's based on existing
commercial standards and the requirement for this is 35 with
the initial purchase of 18 and they will provide littoral
mobility for the stand-in forces.
They're low signature, they're rapid, and they can carry
with them our medium missile batteries, which are a requirement
to deter the People's Republic of China.
Mr. Garamendi. Very good. You mentioned commercial
standards. Unfortunately, the ranking member stepped away. He -
- way into standards right now, listening to him early on.
I assume those commercial standards would relieve part of
the problem that he was talking about.
General Smith. I believe they would, sir.
Mr. Garamendi. Admiral Franchetti, one of my favorite
subjects and I know you're aware of it has to do with the
ability of the shipyards to actually conduct their work. In
order for those shipyards to be efficient and effective they
have to know well ahead of time what the incoming availability
that a ship needs to be done.
Could you help me understand how the Navy is in real time
keeping track of what every ship needs to be done in an
availability?
Admiral Franchetti. Thank you, Congressman Garamendi.
You know, our shipyards do need that information ahead of
time and one of the things that we have been focused on through
the NAVSEA enterprise is identifying all of that work along the
way through the port engineer, the type commander, and working
with all the different program executive offices on whatever
modernization needs to be done in a shipyard to develop that
full package.
Our objective is to have that package locked in 120 days
before a shipyard availability begins so the shipyard can plan
so we can get the materials that we need to be able to do that
so we don't have unnecessary delays or growth work because
that's where you start to see the delays.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you very much.
Secretary Del Toro, I thank you for visiting Mare Island
and I would point out to the committee that the privately owned
shipyards have the -- have a program available through MARAD to
upgrade their shipyards.
However, the amount of money that is available through the
ongoing budget is minuscule.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee, Dr.
DesJarlais.
Dr. DesJarlais. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you all for
being here.
Secretary Del Toro and Admiral Franchetti, the next
questions will be for you. The U.S. Navy has been tasked with
the critical mission to keeping Red Sea commercial shipping
lanes open by neutralizing Houthi missile and drone attacks.
Could you briefly describe this mission for the committee?
And then the activity appears to have died down over the past
month but how do you assess the threat, moving forward?
Secretary Del Toro. Mr. Chairman, it's an incredibly
important mission, as you know, one that we have been
conducting for six and a half months with close to 200
engagements with the Houthis of drones and missiles shot at our
ships directly and also at innocent merchant mariners
throughout the Red Sea.
Regretfully, it has resulted in probably about a 70 percent
decrease in merchant traffic through the Red Sea. It's our
responsibility to do the very best that we can to protect
American lives and protect the lives of those innocent
mariners, obviously, and to keep those ships from being
attacked and I think our Navy has responded brilliantly in
doing so without any loss of life.
On U.S. Navy ships that have been attacked we, regretfully,
have lost three Special Forces operators, obviously, that were
on the USS Puller. But perhaps the CNO can expand on that.
Admiral Franchetti. Thank you. I just also wanted to add,
you know, through Operation Prosperity Guardian it's really,
you know, U.S. Navy leadership of a coalition of folks that are
doing the maritime security mission through the Red Sea and in
the Gulf of Aden.
We're also coordinating with the EU mission which is called
Aspides to make sure that we have an integrated plan, you know,
with them to deconflict any potential. You know, both of us is
skirting the same things.
So I think this operation has gone really well. Really
proud of the team. You know, we have learned a lot through
this. We have embarked on expeditionary resupply. Everything
that we're learning in the Red Sea and through this operation
against a very challenging Houthi threat is some things that we
can replicate and learn from in other areas of the world.
Dr. DesJarlais. Okay. When reviewing the fiscal year '25
budget request I was surprised to see that the number of SM-6s
that you are procuring -- considering the heightened activity
in the Red Sea the budget request just seems insufficient to
meet the need. Would you agree?
Secretary Del Toro. Congressman, we have actually
emphasized the growth in SM-2 missile production, which is the
majority of the missiles that we're actually shooting. The SM-
6s are essential missiles as well as are the SM-3s.
They take a lot longer to actually build, which is part of
the reason why we haven't invested more money into them until
the production rates can come up to a point where we could
actually invest more money to buy more SM-6s and SM-3s as well,
too.
Dr. DesJarlais. You mentioned and touched on it briefly
earlier -- can you discuss the Navy's plan to field directed
energy weapons and high-energy lasers to support maritime
missile defense?
Secretary Del Toro. Yes, sir. We have accelerated the
development and the testing of the Helios laser program, which
in many ways is a replacement -- not a replacement but it
supplements the CIWS system. We also have six other laser
projects and high energy projects, some of which are classified
and I can't talk about openly.
But this is a high priority area for us. We, obviously,
well into the future cannot continue to shoot down drones with
simply SM-2s and SM-6s. We need to develop the high energy,
high lasers, and directed energy programs to be able to counter
these air drones that are being shot at us as well.
Dr. DesJarlais. Thank you. I yield back.
The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
The chair now recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr.
Norcross.
Mr. Norcross. Thank you, Chairman, and to the witnesses for
being here today.
Secretary Del Toro, we were commissioning a ship down in
Key West last year and on the way down there I sat next to a
young lady who happened to be a teacher, and it came up what
her children are going to do. And she said, well, one wants to
go to college -- the other one wants to become a mechanic, and
immediately went to the issue of what we're talking about
today, where is our next generation of worker who work with
their hands and their head come from.
And she said something that I will not forget -- we need to
give our children the permission to pursue an area that they're
interested in whether it's to be a lawyer, a doctor, or an
electrician. Permission to do that, because the narrative in
our country today is you got to go to college to make it.
We're, you know, in the process of taking away debt for
those who went to college. But for those who go to work in the
shipyard they get nothing. I think we as a society have this
role.
Whether you want to become a lawyer or you want to become a
welder we value those the same and until we as a nation value
those things the same way we're not going to get the people in
the shipyard the way we need it. We look at them many times as
a society as second class. I know that and I see that.
So when we talk about that next 50,000 we, as a nation,
have to value that for what it is and do that. You talk about
the blue collar workforce being reduced over the last 50 years
and it has. The number-one reason is we offshored those items,
that manufacturing that we did. We did that to ourselves,
chasing the dollar instead of the capacity.
So here we are trying to build it back up and wondering why
we can't get there. Well, I think we need to look in the mirror
and say we need to make sure that capacity goes on here. We
need friends, we need allies, and we need to work with them but
we need to have the capacity here long term, not just for two
days.
So after that rant we're sitting here, and I want to thank
the admiral for visiting the Philadelphia South Jersey yard,
the capacity that we have there, and we had this very
conversation when we were there -- why can't we get those
people.
The Philadelphia repair yard is literally talking about
closing because they can't get enough work. The work that's
going on there today is with the USS New Jersey that we retired
almost 25 years ago. They're doing it but after that their work
isn't there.
So Mr. Wittman talked about that repair. We have to send
the demand signals. Why would I want to go to work someplace
that's going to shut down in two years?
So other than money, Secretary Del Toro, and to each of --
the general and the admiral, what can we do other than money to
send the right signals to get that workforce, that we value
them? How do you do that?
Secretary Del Toro. Well, Congressman, I think you hit the
nail on the head and I've been calling for a call to national
maritime service, not just to the uniform service -- obviously,
in the Marine Corps and the Navy through our recruiting efforts
but also to increase the number of civilians that we have
working in the Department of the Navy and in our shipyards as
well too because it is honorable service, as you know, and we
need electricians, we need plumbers, we need welders, fitters -
- we need everything to build these great ships.
But in my call to a national maritime statecraft I think
resurgence of the commercial shipbuilding industry would also
help tremendously itself and it would help the economy. It
would help create more jobs across the entire country.
We essentially have given up on commercial shipbuilding and
China and, thank God, our allies and Japan and South Korea have
also invested heavily in shipbuilding. But we have lost that
arc here in the United States. We can't even build our own LNG
ships here in the United States, for example, when we should be
building them.
So I think it's also complicated by some of our immigration
policies. We need to increase legal immigration. We need to
increase work visa programs to allow other workers coming from
other countries to come here as well and fill these jobs that
are being unfilled.
The good news is that unemployment is under 4 percent
across the country. The challenge, however, is that we need
more workers to continue to feed our growing economy, and so
that's the challenge that we have and I think a national call
to maritime service is what I'm committed to.
Mr. Norcross. If I may, in addition to those leaving the
service, recruiting them to go back to work because many of
them continue to work for years after that and more importantly
than that is the number-one way other than telling them their
value is to pay them the right wages.
And with that, I yield back.
The Chairman. In complete agreement with that statement.
The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Mississippi,
the general.
Mr. Kelly. Yeah, I want to concur with a lot of the
thoughts. Listen, we can blame it on money. We can blame it on
budgets. But for the last three years we have asked to give
away more ships than we're bringing. So it's not just that
thing and here's what I will say.
We have to have a consistent message to our shipbuilders
that we're going to build ships. We can't change that. We can't
change the requirements. We have to send a constant message
that we're going to continue because we will never get our
workforce in place if we continue to say we're going to do a
strategic pause on amphibs, we're going to do a strategic pause
on Virginia-class.
You've got to let them catch up to get on schedule. We
never allow them to get on schedule. With that being said,
Admiral Franchetti, what the heck is going on with the Boxer? I
mean, she underwent a $200 million overhaul in 2022 and hasn't
been underway since. In fact, she really hasn't been out of the
dock in five years. So what is going on with the USS Boxer?
Admiral Franchetti. Thank you, Congressman Kelly. I will
give you an update on the Boxer. So, you know the Boxer did
actually go through all of her work-ups for deployment. She
headed out but now she's back in San Diego.
She has bearing on her starboard rudder that is not -- it's
not in good condition so it needs to be replaced. So we are
basically -- right now she is there. We are evaluating the
different procedures that will be done to repair her.
It's about -- right now about a four- to six-week repair.
We look to be able to finish that repair pierside -- the
bearing is available -- and then get her back out on
deployment.
I would say that we're still investigating the cause of the
bearing but it was either potentially installed improperly or
the bearing itself was -- had some type of defect. So we're
going to continue that inquiry right now --
Mr. Kelly. Thank you. Let me get to -- General Smith, how
does the Boxer's unavailability impact the Marine Corps?
General Smith. Congressman, we're designed to operate on a
three-ship amphibious ready group, one big deck LHA, LHD, and
two small boys -- two LPDs(landing platform dock). So when you
lose your big deck you lose most of your aviation assets and
you lose your crisis response force.
Mr. Kelly. You also lose the ability to train and exercise
those Marines also. Is that correct?
General Smith. That is correct, sir.
Mr. Kelly. All right. I want to talk a little bit --
without the 31 amphibious ships and 35 landing ships can the
Marine Corps fight, survive, and meet combatant commander
requirements as a stand-in force?
General Smith. Sir, we cannot. We need those agreed upon 31
anthems and the CNO and I have locked shields on that and we're
determined to get there.
Mr. Kelly. And I want to talk a little bit about the LSM or
the Medium Landing Ship. We have got that. We do not need --
and I know you agree with me, Commandant, we do not need to
turn that into the Navy's version of Pentagon wars. We don't
need to create something that's going to be so expensive and to
be survivable.
The Marine Corps has asked for a requirement and I think we
should trust the Marine Corps to build them the ship that they
ask for because you know how to employ those. Is that correct,
Commandant?
General Smith. Sir, that is correct.
Mr. Kelly. And all the considerations that other people are
taking to create this into something different those -- are
those being asked for by you, Commandant, or did you ask for
the requirement that you need as the commandant of the Marine
Corps?
General Smith. Congressman, I asked for the requirement
that is required for them to be survivable, mobile, and
beachable.
Mr. Kelly. Absolutely. And I guess I think -- Secretary Del
Toro, I think we have made some progress but I do think that we
need to be very careful about when we do a 30-year shipbuilding
plan that the first 10 years are locked in and we never move
those. Or five years. I don't know what that number is.
But what we do is we keep shifting year one and we can't do
that. We have to send a consistent demand signal to industry or
they will never be able to keep up with the maintenance or the
shipbuilding that is required.
So I hope that you guys will understand we have to build
what we're building and we can't change that. Can I get a
commitment to do that, Secretary Del Toro?
Secretary Del Toro. Mr. Chairman, I have -- I've tried to
keep that commitment since the day I came in as Secretary of
the Navy and for the first three years until this budget I
haven't been able to -- I've been able to do that where no
numbers of shifts have changed in the first 10 years of the
shipbuilding plan.
However, it is the Fiscal Responsibility Act that was
passed by the Congress and, again, in response to the very
difficult negotiations that were done around the debt limit
that forced our hand this year to be able to have to remove
that one submarine and a situation where it simply could not be
delivered by the shipyards, and that's opportunity cost. The
opportunity cost on resources we need --
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Maine, Mr.
Golden.
Mr. Golden. Thank you.
Mr. Secretary, last month Admiral Pitts testified that one
Flight III DDG-51 -- to date only one has been delivered to the
fleet.
He also expressed the importance of fielding the new
capabilities that come with Aegis Baseline 10 and the SPY-6
radar. Of course, before Congress passed in a fiscal year '24
approps bill the administration requested two DDGs in the
President's budget request.
Now that we have a '24 approps through -- into law and it
included $1.3 billion for advanced procurement it seems to me
like that's a clear indication from Congress, not to mention
just a lot of the work of the committee over the last several
years that Congress wants to speed the delivery of Flight III
ships.
Is that a priority that you agree with? Would you agree
that Congress should be trying to speed the delivery of Flight
III to the Navy fleet?
Secretary Del Toro. To the extent that it doesn't take away
from other requirements that I have to meet across the
Department of the Navy, yes, I always welcome more DDG Flight
IIIs into the Navy.
Mr. Golden. More ships is good. All right.
Mr. Kelly just stole the question I was going to ask you
but I guess I'll just reiterate. I mean, it sounds like what
you're saying is you would commit to adhering to the five-year
plan on the landing ships and procuring eight of them, assuming
Congress gives you the resources you need. It's a priority for
the Navy as well as the Marine Corps, right?
Secretary Del Toro. Congressman, I've been a big supporter
of the LSM and I've worked to try to accelerate the LSM
schedule as much as possible. We had to go through some very
difficult survivability discussions.
I think we're in the right place, supporting the commandant
of the Marine Corps and the requirements that are set forth,
which the CNO agrees with as well, too. So we're united in the
future of the LSM.
We're committed to building the 18 LSMs initially,
eventually to get to 35. But we want to be able to get these
first few out to have the Marine Corps continue to experiment
with them and make sure that they're the final design before we
go to advanced procurement for the 35.
Mr. Golden. I think it's no secret that some members of
Congress or the appropriators, authorizes, or other talking
about whether or not we should be adhering to these caps that
you keep referring to. It's not necessarily your decision.
But I mean, in a perfect world you would not be structuring
a budget based upon these caps. Does that sound right?
Secretary Del Toro. That's correct, Congressman. Obviously,
we would spend to the amount that the Congress authorizes and
appropriates.
Mr. Golden. Sure. And I think Mr. Norcross touched upon
this. I mean, there's been a pretty good focus today on talking
about the need to really focus on shipbuilding, ship builders,
and developing a workforce that can meet the needs of the Navy
and our national security.
I've tried to do a lot of work on that through the years.
With reporting requirements, it seems like maybe you're
actually benefitting from some of the reporting that Navy has
done as a result of that and have a good understanding of where
we're at and where we need to be.
I just want to reiterate again my office is even hearing
from shipyards in the Philly region who do repairs and
maintenance that they're getting ready to lay people off. I
know that we're behind schedule on maintenance and repairs in
general so I'm hoping that the Navy will do a good job of
spreading some work around to try and ensure that we're not
losing skilled workers at a time when we're talking about
having --
Secretary Del Toro. Congressman, we have robust
conversations with all the shipyards small, medium and large
across the nation. I personally have visited many of them --
Mare Island, Philadelphia Naval Shipyard.
We would, obviously, try to keep them as full as possible
but our primary role is to keep ships out at sea and to keep
them operational. Obviously, we need to maintain them on time.
When we have delays in how we maintain the ships because of
extended operational periods that are driven by real life
circumstances that creates problems, obviously.
Mr. Golden. Has anyone from, like, Atlantic Ship Repair
notified the Navy that they might lay off members of their
workforce in the near term future?
Secretary Del Toro. I'd have to get back to you,
Congressman. We'd be happy to report back to your staff on
recent conversations with regards to the layoff there.
Mr. Golden. Thank you. I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back.
The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Indiana, Mr.
Banks.
Mr. Banks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Navy was the only service last year that failed to meet
its recruit quality benchmarks and continues to fail to meet
them again this year.
Fiscal year 2024 for the first half of the fiscal year the
Navy is 35 percent short of its recruitment goal and in fiscal
year '23 was 20 percent short of recruitment goals.
Secretary Del Toro, why do you think the Navy has had so
much more trouble hitting its recruiting goals than the Army or
the Air Force?
I don't like the Navy losing to the Army or the Air Force
in anything but especially when it comes to recruitment. Why
are we struggling so much more than the other branches?
Secretary Del Toro. First and foremost, Congressman, thank
you for your question. I'm concerned about recruiting for all
our military services. It's one team one fight.
Having said that, the Navy wasn't the only service last
year to fall short on its recruiting goals.
Mr. Banks. You fell much further short than the other
branches.
Secretary Del Toro. Last year we began the year at 17,500
thinking we were going to short -- fall short by 17,500. We
were short by 7,500. This year we have started thinking that we
would fall short by 16,400 and it looks like we're going to
fall short maybe by 6,200.
But what we haven't done -- what we have done actually is
we have increased the goal. So we have actually increased the
goal by 7,000 to 40,000 that we need to make up for the
shortages of past years. So it's kind of a false narrative is
what it is. We're striving to meet the new higher 40,000 goal
that we have actually established for ourselves so that we can
--
Mr. Banks. But you're setting a goal and you're not meeting
it and the other branches are coming closer to reaching their
goals. What are we learning then from the Army and the Air
Force that the Navy --
Secretary Del Toro. This isn't a numbers game, Congressman.
I mean, we hired --
Mr. Banks. You're turning it into a numbers --
Secretary Del Toro. -- we raised the goal to 40,000.
Mr. Banks. Secretary, you're turning it into a numbers
game.
Secretary Del Toro. Well, but you're the one who brought
this up. I mean, if the other services lowered their goals and
met their goals --
Mr. Banks. So I take it -- I take it --
Secretary Del Toro. -- and we hired our goals and we're
striving to meet our goals. I think that's an admirable
challenge, right?
Mr. Banks. So it's admirable to fall --
Secretary Del Toro. We're trying to make -- well, yes,
we're trying to make up for the shortages that we had in
previous years because it's all about filling billets at sea is
what it's all about and that's what we're trying to.
Mr. Banks. I would love to have a Secretary of the Navy
come before us and talk about how you're disappointed that
you're not reaching your goals and what you're going to do to
reach them. So let me ask you --
Secretary Del Toro. I think you misunderstood what I said,
Congressman.
Mr. Banks. Secretary, let me ask you a different way. What
--
Secretary Del Toro. No, but I think it's important for me
to go on the record. I think you misunderstood what I said.
Mr. Banks. Secretary, what are you doing to meet your goals
--
Secretary Del Toro. I said we raised our recruiting goals
to 40,000 and we're striving to meet --
Mr. Banks. Answer my question. What are we doing -- please
answer my question. What are you doing to meet your goals that
you're not doing? What are you going to do to meet those goals
that you --
Secretary Del Toro. Well, we have actually filled all --
we're about to fill all our recruiting billets, for example. We
have taken a lot of lessons learned from the Marine Corps, for
example. We have actually made numerous process changes
actually to try to get us to a better place and I'd be happy to
have the CNO add additional details to that list.
Mr. Banks. I'll stick with you, Secretary. You said the
fighting climate change is the Navy's, quote, "top priority" --
[Simultaneous speaking.]
Secretary Del Toro. No, sir. That's not correct. I said it
is one of the Navy's top priorities, not the top priority.
Mr. Banks. Okay. Is it still a top priority?
Secretary Del Toro. Absolutely it's still a top priority.
Mr. Banks. Where does recruitment fall into your priority
list? Is it above or below climate change?
Secretary Del Toro. Recruitment is also a top priority as
well, too. I have numerous top priorities in the Department of
the Navy that I have to worry about on any given day.
Mr. Banks. So what about delays in shipbuilding? Is that
more of a priority than climate change or less than a priority?
Secretary Del Toro. Actually, we have made significant
changes in delays and in maintenance stays at shipyards to
actually try to get these ships out of the shipyards quicker.
Mr. Banks. Secretary, you don't seem to be too concerned
about recruitment, which is really bad.
Secretary Del Toro. I am significantly concerned about
recruiting and we have actually made a huge difference.
Mr. Banks. You've actually been testifying calling for --
Secretary Del Toro. I just told you that we started the
year off at 16,400 and we're down to --
Mr. Banks. Are you worried -- Secretary, are you worried
that the Navy shrinking by another 5,000 sailors could make it
harder to deter Communist China? Are you worried about that?
Secretary Del Toro. Actually, I just told you we're trying
to increase our goal to 40,000 and recruit to that so that we
have more sailors to close the gaps at sea so that we can be
even more combat ready.
Mr. Banks. All right. I got one minute left. What are you
going to do to meet the Navy's recruitment goals in fiscal year
2024?
Secretary Del Toro. It's all hands on deck with all the
processes and everything that we have put in place to actually
shorten that goal and we're actually 2,500 ahead.
Mr. Banks. What do you mean by that? What are you saying
about it?
Secretary Del Toro. We are actually 2,500 ahead than where
we were last year. So I hope that we get to meet our goals --
Mr. Banks. Are you going to meet your goal in fiscal year
2024?
Secretary Del Toro. We're doing everything we can. I don't
have a crystal ball.
Mr. Banks. What is everything that you can? What does that
mean? What are you doing to meet that goal?
Secretary Del Toro. That means that I'm putting all our
resources, that we have made dramatic improvements in how we
recruit. We have taken lessons from the Marine Corps as well
too to meet our goals --
Mr. Banks. What are those lessons? I asked that question
earlier. What lessons have you learned?
Secretary Del Toro. -- and we are actually doing 2,500
better this year than we were last year.
Mr. Banks. What are you doing?
Secretary Del Toro. So we have six months left in the
calendar year, basically, to get to the fiscal year more or
less and we will continue to actually decrease that gap until
we get close. But it's all hands on deck is what it is.
Mr. Banks. You haven't given me a single concrete -- you
haven't given me a single concrete answer to how you're going
to meet those recruitment --
Secretary Del Toro. I think I've given you many concrete
answers.
Mr. Banks. A lot of hot air. With that, Mr. Chairman, I
yield back.
Secretary Del Toro. We'd be happy to work with your staff
to provide you even more answers, Congressman.
Mrs. Kiggans [presiding]. The gentleman yields.
The chair now recognizes Mr. Carbajal from California.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you very much. Thank you to the
witnesses for being here today. General Smith, welcome back.
The GAO report from September 2023 highlighted there are
major concerns with our military barracks. Some of these
service members reported that the conditions of barracks affect
their quality of life and readiness.
Your number-one unfunded priority was $230 million for
restoration and modernization of barracks for the Barrack 2030
initiative.
While the fiscal year '25 budget request only appears to be
for $65 million, I'm sure we both agree that our service
members are our number-one priority and our most valuable
asset.
With barracks been such an issue can you help me understand
why your budget request did not include the $230 million for
restoration and modernization in your unfunded priority list?
General Smith. Congressman, I can.
Barracks 2030 is our most consequential barracks
investment. We're tackling it from multiple avenues. We're
attacking it from professional management, which returns 500
Marines to the fleet. FSRM -- facilities sustainment,
restoration, and modernization funds, maximizing those. That's
to fix washers, dryers, locks, windows.
We're doing material, furniture, -- again, washers locks --
and I've directed a rigorous inspection of over 58,000 rooms.
We have completed that inspection, and we now know what is --
what needs to be fixed and that's why my number-one unfunded
priority request is the almost $450 million to accelerate
Barracks 2030.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, General Smith.
The reduction in maritime prepositioning ships underway has
significantly reduced the Marine Corps' flexibility for crisis
response operations in the Indo-Pacific, Mediterranean, and
elsewhere. Today, only two squadrons in maritime prepositioning
ships are available to support Marine Corps global commitments.
How are the Marines compensating for this reduction and how
much risk are we accepting strategically?
General Smith. Congressman, I would argue that we're
accepting significant risks strategically. Those MPSRONs --
maritime prepositioning squadrons -- are ready base.
They're designed to flow forward and offload their cargo to
complete such tasks as the Korea Plan and they would be used as
a ready reserve, if you will, of assets. So I would offer that
that's a real risk when you don't have the MPSRONs available to
replace the equipment that will be inevitably lost in combat
and to speed the marrying up of Marines who deploy by aviation
assets and then the seaborne assets that are on those MPSRONs.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you.
Admiral Franchetti, congratulations on your finally being
appointed as the 33rd Chief of Naval Operations. I apologize
for you on -- for the Tuberville national security breach our
country went through in delaying your appointment.
And I know we have many aspiring senators in this
committee. I sure hope they understand the breach that was
created by not allowing many of our appointments to move
forward.
Admiral, can you speak to the Navy's sealift campaign plan,
specifically how the Buy Used Program will work with sealift,
preposition and surge assets?
Admiral Franchetti. Thank you. And, you know, sealift is
critically important, one of our core functions of the Navy,
and we're really taking a three-pronged approach to sealift.
First, we are doing service life extensions on our existing
platforms and then the Buy-Used Program that you mentioned.
This has been very productive, and speaking with TRANSCOM and
MARAD on these conversations this is a very good program.
We have already bought a number of ships and we are
projected to buy up to nine, which is our limit. So we'll have
a legislative proposal in there to remove that limit so we can
continue to do that.
We're also in the process of designing a new sealift ship
and so, again, working with all stakeholders to make sure that
we have that capacity that we need, going forward.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Admiral, and I'm out of time. So,
Secretary Del Toro, thank you for being here. Thank you for
articulating the good answers to the bad questions that
sometimes you receive. Thank you very much for your service.
Madam Chair, I yield back.
Mrs. Kiggans [presiding]. The gentleman yields. The chair
now recognizes Mr. Waltz from Florida.
Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Secretary Del Toro and General Smith, if we can just talk
very quickly about the Abbey Gate families from the disgraceful
Afghanistan withdrawal.
Mr. Secretary, I sent you a letter requesting that the 11
Marines killed at Abbey Gate during the withdrawal be
posthumously promoted in accordance with 10 U.S. Code Section
1563.
It authorizes members of Congress to initiate a
recommendation or an honorary promotion and I'm grateful that
less than two weeks after the bombing you posthumously promoted
Navy Corpsman Soviak to hospital corpsman third class. But it's
been nearly three years since these brave Marines were killed
and more than six months since I made this request to you.
When can we do what's right and promote these Marines?
Secretary Del Toro. Congressman, this is a very sensitive
issue, obviously. The corpsman was promoted, largely, because
she already was under consideration for promotion.
I asked my staff to take a look at Medal of Honor
recipients who received their Medal of Honors posthumously
since the beginning of the Vietnam War. We have had over 50
Marines that courageously lost their lives in battle and
received the Medal of Honor. None of them were promoted --
Mr. Waltz. I have limited time. We have huge issues. I get
five minutes on behalf of my --
Secretary Del Toro. None of them were promoted posthumously
so --
Mr. Waltz. Can we -- when are we going to promote or can
you give me an answer of why you're not going to promote these
11 Marines? It's been three years.
Secretary Del Toro. It's under consideration but it's very
unlikely that they will be promoted.
Mr. Waltz. How long will you -- it's very unlikely?
Secretary Del Toro. Yes, sir, because they were not under
consideration at the time for a promotion. So given the fact
that we haven't posthumously promoted 50 Medal of Honor
recipients since the beginning of Vietnam. It's very unlikely -
-
Mr. Waltz. Were they killed in action, all 50?
Secretary Del Toro. Excuse me?
Mr. Waltz. Were they were killed in action, all 50?
Secretary Del Toro. Yes, sir. They were killed in action,
all 50.
Mr. Waltz. There are a number -- we'll come back to you
within -- as I stated in the letter, there's a number of
instances where soldiers, sailors, Marines, were not under
consideration for promotion including some that I lost in
action and yet they were promoted because their service
secretary decided it was the right thing to do. You have that
authority.
Secretary Del Toro. I have the authority and I'd be happy
to conduct further discussions with you on the subject.
Mr. Waltz. But you're making a decision to not execute that
authority?
Secretary Del Toro. Well, like I said, Congressman, there
have been 50 Medal of Honor recipients that were not promoted
posthumously --
Mr. Waltz. God bless them. But in this case --
Secretary Del Toro. -- and one has to take a look at that
as precedence, basically, for actions moving forward.
Mr. Waltz. Mr. Secretary, if that's your decision that's
certainly -- but I want also out there for the record that you
have the authority to promote those Marines.
General, should those Marines get promoted?
General Smith. Congressman, as a rule we do not grant
posthumous promotions. That does not take away from the
sacrifices of those Marines killed at Abbey Gate. But even our
posthumous Medal of Honor recipients have not been posthumously
promoted.
Mr. Waltz. I don't think the level of award, General,
necessarily should dictate whether you give a posthumous
promotion. You look at -- I mean, this was the worst withdrawal
since Saigon.
These Marines were put in an impossible position -- defend
an airfield yet let people through by the hundreds if not
thousands. They were put in an impossible position so we also
have to look at the mission, not just historic precedent.
And, Mr. Secretary -- and I would think with your
recommendation, General, you have the authority to do it -- I'd
ask you to reconsider and let's at least give these families
that closure, given the entire nature of what happened in that
withdrawal and that they were put in mission impossible, not by
either of you but by the White House. But thank you.
If we could just talk about -- number one, Mr. Secretary, I
told you we're going to recognize the bravery and I want it
loud and clear of those sailors in the Red Sea. They're kicking
ass and taking names and we should absolutely pound the table
and please --
Secretary Del Toro. Thank you, Congressman.
Mr. Waltz. I'll be there in Jacksonville when they come
back to Mayport. God bless the Carney.
Secretary Del Toro. Thank you, Congressman.
Mr. Waltz. But if we -- we ate up my time here but we have
-- the Columbia, the Virginia, the Constellation, our DDGs, are
all behind.
We have a broader systemic problem here and I know it's an
all of society -- I have a maritime strategy that I'm releasing
next week -- issue to get at workforce, to get at shipyards and
steel and materials and all that and I look forward to working
with the legislative recommendations in it. But I think we have
a systemic problem in the Navy as well. Can you speak to that
in the time I have remaining?
Secretary Del Toro. Well, the major reasons for the delays
on most of these ships is actually delays associated with the
delivery of major components from the vendors, particularly
Northrop Grumman with regards to turbine generators and main
reduction gears to their primary vendors. That is the root
cause of the major delays associated with each of these with
the exception of the Fincantieri Constellation-class --
Mrs. Kiggans [presiding]. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Waltz. We're running out of time, Mr. Secretary --
2027. We need to -- thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mrs. Kiggans [presiding]. The gentleman's time has expired.
The chair now recognizes Ms. Jacobs from California.
Ms. Jacobs. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you so much to
our witnesses.
As the representative from San Diego both of these services
are incredibly important to my community and so I'm grateful
for you all being here.
I first wanted to ask about the USS Boxer. I know my
colleague Mr. Kelly already asked some of it but, you know, one
of the things I was interested in is just before its deployment
in March it was reported that the ship won several awards
including the battle effectiveness award.
I guess I'm a little concerned that that shows that we
don't actually have a good way to measure the readiness of our
ships and, you know, that we're awarding ships for mission
readiness that clearly are not mission ready. How do we -- how
do you assess readiness and how do we make sure it's accurate,
given these recent developments?
Whichever of you would like to answer.
Admiral Franchetti. Thank you for your question and thank
you for your support to our folks in San Diego.
You know, in the Boxer casualty -- equipment casualty that
you're having right now this is a materiel failure. So, you
know, we have a very good set of standards for all of our ships
in each one of their primary warfare areas and including
engineering and all of the different things that they need to
be able to do.
They're assessed by an afloat training group and then as
the ship progresses from individual training to intermediate
and advanced training we have standards that each one of the
ships is supposed to meet with very rigid criteria and very
well qualified inspectors.
Ms. Jacobs. So then why was the Boxer awarded this
readiness award when they were clearly not ready?
Admiral Franchetti. So the particular casualty was a
documented casualty. It had an engineering assessment for some
not related departures from specifications on the rudder. But
they -- this current casualty is a new casualty that was not
part of those departures from specifications.
Ms. Jacobs. Got it. Okay. Thanks.
And then in terms of the sailors who are on the Boxer are
they going to stay on the ship through the duration of the
maintenance and will the current maintenance period add time to
their deployment schedule?
Admiral Franchetti. So the Pacific Fleet commander is the
one who will make all the decisions about the Boxer. In fact,
he is one that approved the maintenance repair plan right now.
The way that the current plan is, you know, we are optimistic
that the repair will be done in about four to six weeks. He has
several other branch courses of action if this one doesn't
work.
The intention, if it finishes on time, is to get the ship
back out on its deployment. Because we are, you know, a
teammate with the Marine Corps the Marine Corps also has a
deployment, you know, when their deployment ends. So we'll end
that deployment on time after the Boxer gets out there.
Ms. Jacobs. Great. Thank you.
And then I wanted to ask, you know, the Navy has made
tremendous strides in experimental and research regarding
uncrewed systems and the digital tools necessary to enable
their capabilities. I myself have been out to Bahrain to see
some of the amazing work. We're doing that in San Diego. We
have got some examples.
But I guess one of the things I'm wondering is why, given
all that research, we haven't procured those systems in
sufficient bulk for the fleet even though we have identified
them as a high priority and why it's dependent on an OSD
program -- the Replicator initiative -- to fund and procure
these systems rather than going through the actual naval
procurement process.
Secretary Del Toro. Thank you, Congressman. First and
foremost, we have been buying some of those unmanned vessels in
the numbers that we currently need to be able to experiment
with them.
As we continue to further operationalize them, so for
example, on Task Force 59, you know, we had a set number of
sail drones that we purchased from a saildrone company when we
actually move that to Fourth Fleet and conducting operations in
the streets between Haiti and Cuba.
Taking a look at drug runners, for example, we bought
additional sail drones as well, too, so we're purchasing them
in the numbers that we currently need them.
In the case of operationalizing them in the Pacific we have
four of them that we have been experimenting now with the good
part of a year. But I think what you will see in the next few
years is actually more of those coming to fruition as we
continue to bring more of them to work side by side our manned
vessels as we operationalize them in the Indo-Pacific as well.
So I think you'll see a significant growth in the numbers.
The XLUUV is a perfect example of that. Orca is in the final
stages of testing for its IOC, for example. We'll have
additional for those once they're fully manufactured and
deployed out to sea.
Ms. Jacobs. Great. Thank you. Well, I just want to make
sure that this approach outlives the current senior leadership
at the Pentagon. We have seen great programs fail when
leadership changes and that given the recent issues that have
come up with the Air Force and the F-35 that we make sure that
the Navy has control over the architecture and software of
these kinds of programs, not the contractor.
The Chairman. [Presiding.] The gentlelady's time has
expired.
Ms. Jacobs. Thank you.
The Chairman. The chair now recognizes the gentlelady from
South Carolina.
Ms. Mace. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank
Secretary Del Toro, Admiral Franchetti, and General Smith for
being with us here today.
My constituents have a great appreciation of the importance
of U.S. Navy and our Marine Corps. In the low country of South
Carolina we make Marines and we're really proud of that.
Beaufort County is home to the Paris -- to Parris Island
and the Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort. Our community is
deeply supportive of the important work being done to train the
next generation of Marines and to defend the homeland.
I would like to use my time today to highlight the
importance of these installations and their capacity to play an
even greater role in our national defense.
The Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort has the support of
the local community. It has excess capacity and room to grow.
The number of squadrons has shrunk from nine to five while the
infrastructure to support a larger number of squadrons remains.
From my understanding, Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort's
location also provides among the largest training areas
anywhere on the Eastern seaboard.
So, General, my first question for you this morning is do
we have plans to expand the mission set or number of squadrons
stationed there?
General Smith. Congressman, we don't have plans right now
to expand the number of squadrons there but we will modify the
number of aircraft and those aircraft will increase squadron
sizes from 10 to 12.
Ms. Mace. And then what's the timing of that
implementation?
General Smith. I'll get back to you on that, Congresswoman,
to give you the exact details and dates.
Ms. Mace. Okay. My understanding is it starts in a few
months delivery of some of the newer aircraft on that
installation. Currently, Parris Island lacks the on-base
medical facilities, personnel, and capabilities required to
efficiently treat recruits who are injured in training.
Under the current model the naval hospital in Beaufort
provides only ambulatory care and so many of the recruits are
required to secure outside treatment, and we know that if their
treatment is prolonged and off the installation they're more
apt to maybe not return back to training and we want to make
sure that they get the immediate care that they need.
Would building an on-base multipurpose medical facility at
Parris Island and a smaller clinic at Marine Corps Air Station
Beaufort help our Marines get appropriate medical care? What is
your sort of sense of medical care for our Marine recruits in
their training?
General Smith. Well, Congresswoman, I'm committed to making
sure that all of our recruits East Coast and West Coast have
adequate medical care and I defer to our Surgeon General --
Navy Surgeon General on the allocation of resources and medical
providers to ensure that our recruits have what they need
because right now there is a lack of medical readiness at
Parris Island and I acknowledge that.
Ms. Mace. And some of it are -- some of it might be related
to chronic staffing shortages like at the naval hospital. Have
you all had discussions about that and been aware of maybe some
of the high turnover as well?
General Smith. Congressman, we have -- I speak with Admiral
Miller, who's the Surgeon General for the Marine Corps, on a --
literally right now almost on a daily basis.
Ms. Mace. Is there -- are there plans to increase
recruitment of medical personnel to treat our service members
at this time?
General Smith. Ma'am, I'll defer to the Navy on recruiting
Navy personnel.
Ms. Mace. Okay. I appreciate that.
So Marine Corps -- I have a minute and a half left -- the
Marine Corps Air Station in Beaufort has experienced a housing
crisis.
We have a military population of around 12,000 in Beaufort
County. There were only 1,140 units -- housing units at Marine
Corps Air Station Beaufort and approximately 960 of those units
are occupied with the less -- the rest being unlivable or in
disrepair.
I'm sure you're well aware about these units. They were
built in the 1960s. They have not experienced significant
upgrades or increased volume since construction so, obviously,
this is an issue that I hear about day in and day out from
folks in the low country and in Beaufort.
What are we doing to ensure our Marines and their families
in Beaufort have access to safe, quality, and affordable
housing while they're stationed there?
General Smith. Well, ma'am, the on-base housing is in need
of refurbishment -- that there's no doubt about that. Our
budget calls for an update in our FSRM(Facilities Sustainment,
and Restoration and Modernization), which is our barracks --
facility sustainment restoration modernization -- and it calls
for ensuring that there's enough quality housing on base to
satisfy the needs, which right now it's not.
So the increased budget will assist us in improving the
housing that is there and then others will live out in town
based on cost of living allowance.
Ms. Mace. Okay. And is there any movement afoot to look at
the contractors and who we're using down there to improve the
quality of construction and maintenance?
General Smith. Yes, ma'am, there is.
Ms. Mace. Okay. All right. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman.
I yield back.
The Chairman. I thank the gentlelady.
The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts,
Mr. Moulton.
Mr. Moulton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
General Smith, the Marine Corps, has attracted a fair
number of critics for the speed of your modernization including
even some from our own ranks, retired generals and whatnot.
Why is the Marine Corps moving faster with modernization
than the other services?
General Smith. Congressman, there's a couple reasons. One,
we have a commandant and when the commandant says move Marines
move.
But it's not just based on my assessment. It's based on
deep research, deep wargaming, deep analysis, and it's in
compliance with the National Defense Strategy. So our
modernization efforts under the name of Force Design are
designed to make us the most lethal and most ready for the
fight that's coming, not for the fight that we just had.
Mr. Moulton. Well, some members of Congress got together
and wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal some months ago
when this debate was at its height and it was extremely
supportive, of course, of what you're trying to do.
But we did have one criticism, one criticism in the whole
article. We said, if anything the Marine Corps should be moving
faster. Now, your plan is to maintain momentum. That's the
title of your current plan.
But the chairman of the Joint Chiefs says we need to
accelerate, change, or lose. What can the Marine Corps do to
move even faster with modernization and what can Congress do to
help?
General Smith. Congressman, the steady reliable funding is
really important. Frankly, when we go into -- and this is not
to criticize but when we go into --
Secretary Del Toro. Continuing Resolutions.
General Smith. -- Continuing Resolutions -- thank you, Mr.
Secretary -- when we go into Continuing Resolutions we cannot
spend at that year's rate. We have to spend at last year's rate
and our -- all of our advancements are in the current year. So
it retards our process and it retards our progress and it slows
us down.
Mr. Moulton. Well, I would just say that if there are any
more specific things that you can come to us and say, you know,
if we do this we can move even faster. We can get rid of the
old stuff more quickly.
We can invest in the new things and field them to the
troops even more quickly than we are today. There's going to be
a lot of receptivity for that on this committee.
Admiral Franchetti, a lot of my colleagues talk about a
355-ship Navy. Do you think that's a reasonable goal?
Admiral Franchetti. I do. I think every study, really, that
we have done since 2016 shows that we do need a larger Navy
and, you know, we're committed, as we said, and through all of
our investments in the industrial base that it isn't just about
the numbers.
It is about having ready ships with the munitions, with the
right number of people, with the training, you know, that can
fight as part of that joint warfighting ecosystem that we need
to be able to do in the high end fight.
Mr. Moulton. I've heard nothing but good things about you
so it's not really fair to have my first question to you be a
bit of a trick question but I'm very concerned about a 355-ship
Navy because I think we should probably add a zero to that or
maybe two zeros because if we don't have a Navy that has
literally thousands of autonomous ships I don't know that we're
going to win the future fight.
Admiral Franchetti. I'm very focused on increasing our
abilities in the unmanned space. You know, I think that as you
look forward we really need to have that complementary force
that will be able to expand the reach and the lethality of our
conventionally manned platforms. That's what we need to do in
the future and I'm committed to focusing on that, growing that
as quickly as possible.
Mr. Moulton. General Smith, one core component of your
strategy with Marine littoral regiments is being able to put
these Marines on places like islands in the Philippines so
they're spread out, they're dispersed, they're autonomous. They
can do a lot to disrupt Chinese plans.
But, of course, that's dependent on having these agreements
with nations like the Philippines, perhaps Japan as well. What
are you doing to foster those agreements and actually get
Marines practicing what you preach?
General Smith. Congressman, we're exercising with our
Filipino allies on a regular basis. We just finished Balikatan,
the largest one ever, involving thousands of Marines. And so
our ability to exercise throughout the southern Ryukyus, the
Japanese home islands, and the Philippines is without question.
We have a very hospitable host in the Philippines.
Mr. Moulton. Finally, Mr. Secretary, you know how important
mental health of our service members is to me personally and
having worked with a fellow veteran to pass 988, can you just
tell me at this point is 988 dialable from -- without a prefix
without a postfix, from all unclassified DOD telephone systems
in the Navy and the Marine Corps?
Secretary Del Toro. Congressman, I can't confirm that it's
dialable for every single one but what I will tell you is that
the marketing campaign that we have put into effect to actually
have the 988 posters throughout every installation is
extraordinary and I have visited many --
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
The chair recognizes the gentlelady from Virginia, Mrs.
Kiggans.
Mrs. Kiggans. Thank you to our panel for being here. It's
certainly a privilege to be in the same room as the three of
you.
We have done a lot of talking today about the number of
ships and how this fiscal year '25 budget takes us down to 287
decommissioning ships prior to their expected service life,
decommissioning more than we're commissioning, slowing the
aircraft carrier builds, you know, having the submarine build.
So I'm just worried about the -- you know, that message
that's sending to our allies. We have got this great AUKUS
agreement in place. We're excited about it.
Also, to our shipbuilding partners -- we talked today about
the number of ship repair and I've got them in my district in
Virginia, too, that message that that sends to them. They can't
keep their people. I know Continuing Resolutions is part of it.
It's frustrating to me, too, and I know that defense budget is
always inadequate.
But what are we doing or what can we do to be more
reassuring to partners like -- allies like Australia or people
we need in the fight like our ship repair and shipbuilding
industry?
Secretary Del Toro. Thank you, Congresswoman.
I think the biggest thing we can do is actually reaffirm
the commitment just in this FYDP alone that we're investing $18
billion in the submarine industrial base to actually try to
increase the production rates to where they need to be so that
we could actually build more submarines well into the future.
Mrs. Kiggans. Along those same lines, just talking about
messaging and getting our message to our partners like allies
and ship repair shipbuilders, for the recruitment and retention
side I know we have talked about that today, too, and I had the
privilege of sitting on the recruitment and retention Quality
of Life Task Force. I hope you all have copies of the bound
book that we put together.
My ask yesterday to the Secretary of Defense was just to
get that word out to the American public. I need them to know
that Congress hears them, that we have emphasized things like
paying compensation in housing, child care, health care, spouse
employment.
I need that message to get to them. So whether that's a PR
campaign or -- and kudos to the buildsubmarines.com. I've had
multiple people in my district come up to me and say, hey, we
have reached out to -- we saw the ad. So I think those things
work so let's get that message out to the American people that
we heard them and we're taking care of our military men and
women.
Secretary Del Toro. Nine thousand new applications just
this past year, ma'am.
Mrs. Kiggans. Awesome.
Secretary Del Toro. And retention is as high as it's ever
been in the Navy and the Marine Corps thanks to your
investments in quality of life, quality of service.
Mrs. Kiggans. Always room for improvement, and we need to
keep down that track.
I want to switch gears to naval aviation, a subject near
and dear to my heart as a former Navy pilot. But, you know, I
look at programs like the A-12, like the F-22, and we can ask a
lot of questions about if we should have done some things
differently.
I'm looking at the F-35 right now and yesterday we talked a
lot about that expense and how it continues to grow. We have
quite a few that are still sitting in flight lines. They're not
-- we don't have pilots in cockpits yet.
I want to put in my plug for Naval Air Station Oceana in my
district and how -- and I know, Secretary, we have had
discussions too about considering them East Coast master jet
bass so that we can house the F-35s. The city of Virginia Beach
is very welcoming to the idea and I look forward to pursuing
further discussions about that.
Along those same lines, though, thinking of naval aviation
training and, again, my son is now in Corpus Christi. Very
proud of him. Started the pipeline, but that wait -- the wait
for those students is too long.
We have invested in them from assessment training. They're
sitting. They're waiting for starting primary. But now we're
looking at the T-45s. I know we had recent compressor stall
issues. This is the second time that we are now halting, you
know, training on the T-45.
So I need the Navy to have some foresight and to think
about what that replacement aircraft looks like for advanced
jet training because this isn't our first go round with this.
We have options out there. So I want to hear from you all what
is the time line for replacing that T-45.
Secretary Del Toro. So, ma'am, as you know, we're actually
several years from replacing the T-45 but we're accelerating
the necessary work to actually try to move that to the left so
that we can actually get the next generation of trainers out
there and have it be reliable.
Mrs. Kiggans. It can't happen fast enough because when
those guys are delayed then I got the Hornet RAG at Oceana
delayed and I got fleet pilots that are then being held up. So
as much as we can expedite that.
And then I also just wanted to close with a story. I had
the privilege of traveling to Israel about three weeks ago,
meeting with military intelligence officers, dining with just
everyday Israelis and families and listening to them thank me
as the representative from Hampton Roads, thanking me and all
of us for sending our aircraft carriers -- the Ford, the
Eisenhower, the Bataan -- over to sit off the coast of Israel
in our quick response after October 7th.
They truly believe, each and every Israeli I spoke to, that
because of our aircraft carrier presence that is why Hezbollah
did not invade Israel from the north. I had Israeli families
dining with their children skipping around the room saying, I
want to go on the aircraft carrier -- I want to go on a
aircraft carrier.
So I was the representative that received phone calls when
we extended those deployments, when they missed Christmas with
their families, when they missed the birth of their first
child.
But because of those service men and women, because of our
U.S. Navy, you know, we maintain some civility and some peace
in that region. I've shared that story with the ship repair
shipbuilders, with Navy leadership. But please take that story
back to your men and women. We know it's a sacrifice but we
appreciate their sacrifice and that's what keeps the peace in
the world.
So thank you so much for all that you do. I yield back.
Secretary Del Toro. Thank you, Congresswoman.
The Chairman. I thank the gentlelady.
The chair now recognizes another lady from Hawaii, Ms.
Tokuda.
Ms. Tokuda. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Secretary, thank you for your continued personal
attention to Red Hill and the significant work the department
is doing to get things right after the November 2021 fuel
spill.
As the Navy assumes responsibility for the closure of Red
Hill I respectfully request your focus as well on the necessary
work to remediate and restore the aquifer and ensure the long-
term safety of our water supply.
There's a lot of concern among our communities and
constituents that our department continues to view the Red Hill
problem set in sequential order, moving from defueling to
closure to remediation, when elements of closure and
remediation should be done concurrently.
Mr. Secretary, in the interest of time I won't ask you to
respond but would strongly encourage the department to urgently
prioritize aquifer restoration and remediation efforts for Red
Hill.
I will go on to say, though, that there continues to be
gaps in community trust and this is a broken trust, as we know,
in the department's ability to guarantee the health and safety
of their drinking water, especially given the uncertainty
created by the Navy's testing regime.
The Navy recently released its data supporting the
hypothesis that low-level detections of TPH at the Pearl Harbor
drinking water system were likely caused by issues with its
testing methods.
Mr. Secretary, would you please explain why would the Navy
use testing for wastewater and solid waste analysis for
drinking water and why did it take two years and over 8,000
samples to figure out that they were not doing the right test?
Secretary Del Toro. Well, ma'am, the conclusions that were
made with regards to testing procedures was a combined
conclusion with the president of the health department of
Hawaii, the EPA, and the Navy, and, collectively, they
determined that chlorine was actually impacting the actual test
results with regards to detection --
Ms. Tokuda. I think you're -- it's the first step to the
question.
Secretary Del Toro. -- of TPH
Ms. Tokuda. So did the department of health and EPA
(Environmental Protection Agency) tell you two years ago to use
a test on these 8,000 samples that were made for wastewater and
solid waste analysis, not drinking water?
Secretary Del Toro. Ma'am, the tests that were used at the
time were the only tests that were actually available at the
time to be able to use and they were actually off the -- they
were on the mainland, basically, so we had to actually send all
those tests back to the mainland.
Actually, just yesterday I signed a letter to the governor
actually saying that we're donating the necessary equipment for
Hawaii to actually have its own water testing laboratory in
Hawaii.
Ms. Tokuda. That's great. So you're telling me two years
ago when we were suffering from a situation where there was no
trust in the drinking water because jet fuel had been poured
into it we were using the only test available.
So there was no test available for drinking water. We were
using a test on these samples to determine if there was any
kind of contaminants in people's home that was for wastewater
and solid waste analysis. That was the only one available to
you in that two years?
Secretary Del Toro. Ma'am, I am not the subject matter
expert on this. But I will say that we were using the test that
was recommended to the Department of the Navy and to the
Department of Hawaii Health Resources and to the EPA to test
those water samples at the time.
Ms. Tokuda. So would you now say, based upon your --
Secretary Del Toro. Because if we had -- if we had known of
some better test we would have actually been using that test.
At the time I don't think we understood that the chlorine
in the water that's used to actually chlorinate all the water
across the United States would actually have an impact on TPH
detections in the test itself.
Ms. Tokuda. I'm sorry. If I may just continue my question.
I find it also hard to believe that we have the best minds in
science and defense sitting in the Navy, also sitting in the
EPA, part of our department of health, and they were unable to
determine or identify that two years ago when they started
these samplings because your men and women and their families
were seeing sheens in their drinking water, experiencing
massive health impacts, that maybe something wasn't right there
in that particular thing.
So I'd just ask you this hypothetical question. I'll flip
the switch on you a little bit. I'm assuming that suppliers of
ammunition to DOD are required to do regular testing to ensure
functionality and lethality.
What if a series of their tests found flaws and then they
later came back and said they've been testing the ammo in the
wrong way for two years and now everything is okay. Would you
trust putting ammo in a soldier's gun knowing it could be the
difference between life and death?
Secretary Del Toro. Ma'am, I'm not a subject matter expert
on testing fresh -- on testing drinking water. But what I do --
Ms. Tokuda. Well, I'm thinking you would want to make sure
that the bullets in a soldier's gun actually works. It should
be no different when the quality of the water is coming out of
a service member and their family's water pipe.
Secretary Del Toro. I'm quite confident --
Ms. Tokuda. You could do much more in terms of rebuilding
this trust and I will tell you that that was a big lethal blow
to the trust of the Navy a few weeks ago when the public got
this kind of response.
I'm running out of time here. But given these recent events
will the Navy consent to independent third party testing to
help track and verify the Navy's testing?
Secretary Del Toro. I believe we have had third water
testing going on different numerous occasions.
Ms. Tokuda. So you'd allow people to come in and drill
holes, collect samples, and do their own independent testing?
Secretary Del Toro. Those are decisions that have to be
made between the Department of the Navy and the Department of
Health in Hawaii and the EPA, moving forward.
Ms. Tokuda. So you're giving me consent that third party
independent drilling and testing can take place so that it can
be verified and reverified.
Secretary Del Toro. I believe we have had third party
testing in the past.
Ms. Tokuda. Okay. That is not the understanding I have but
I'm glad to hear that we have the consent of the Secretary to
go ahead and allow them to --
Secretary Del Toro. I said that we have had --
Ms. Tokuda. My time is up. I yield, Mr. Chair.
The Chairman. The gentlelady's time has expired.
The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Florida, Mr.
Gaetz.
Mr. Gaetz. Mr. Secretary, I want to personally thank you
for your involvement in Naval Air Station Pensacola to unlock
the great potential of our naval museum with some changes to
the gating system there.
This was a sticky wicket for us for years and because you
took the time to go there and really understand that mission we
were able to achieve greater success, and I think it's because
you get it.
I think you understand that unlocking the imagination in
the minds of young people when they interact with our museums
and with our demonstration teams that's a critical vector in
the recruiting crisis that we're all dealing with. So I'd love
you to share your perspective on that with the committee.
Secretary Del Toro. Thank you, Congressman. I always try my
very best to get to the core problems that we face and try to
fix those problems so we can make our Navy and Marine Corps a
stronger team and actually trying to gain greater access to all
of our museums but particularly that museum, which is so very
special to the community -- the aviation community and to the
entire Department of the Navy is critical so that young people
-- high school graduates, community college graduates, grammar
school students -- can actually go and see what the Navy is all
about.
It is important, and I'm glad that we have been able to
make progress in actually opening up the museum to a greater
number of people in the region.
Mr. Gaetz. And I must confess you may become a victim of
your own success here because I have a similar problem that I
think you'll see in a similar way.
The Blue Angels, as they travel around the country and
travel around the world, they ignite a sense of optimism about
the Navy and adventure, and we are so proud in Pensacola to be
the home of the Blue Angels.
But some of the conditions of our hangar systems have
fallen into some disrepair following Hurricane Sally and so
we're working right now with your office to try to get the
right alignment of PD&E funds to get a new hangar system for
the Blue Angels.
But I wanted to make sure that you saw the Blue Angels
similarly like you saw the naval -- the museum promoting all
that is good and right in the Navy to get more young people
excited about it. Is that something we can work on?
Secretary Del Toro. Absolutely, Congressman. I think the
CNO would agree that the Blue Angels bring tremendous value to
our recruiting mission.
Mr. Gaetz. Yes. Great. And, you know, we want to just make
sure, you know, that they've got the right digs. I think,
Admiral, I'd invite you to come down and spend some time with
us in Pensacola as the Secretary has, the cradle of naval
aviation.
But you would likely walk away from that experience deeply
concerned that there are buckets that are having to collect
rainfall, which we occasionally get in Florida, inside the
hangar system, not outside.
And so I would encourage you to come join us because we
certainly would want our greatest demonstration of naval
capability to be able to have the right accommodations to be
able to do the mission.
Admiral Franchetti. Thanks. I look forward to coming down
and visiting.
Mr. Gaetz. Yeah. Well, see, and I'm inviting you to a
beautiful place. You know, not all the people on this committee
are from beautiful places like northwest Florida. So I
certainly hope you'll take us up on that opportunity.
In my remaining moments I want to talk a little bit about
the LCS. The ranking member has sort of convinced me that the
littoral combat ship make sadly, tragically in some
circumstances, turn out be just an aquatic casket in a world in
which we are unable to have sufficient air defense for those
while China is shooting hypersonic missiles at them in the
event of a Taiwan scenario.
Is there a fight that we can imagine now in great
competition where the LCS (Littoral Combat Ship) will even get
in the fight, Mr. Secretary?
Secretary Del Toro. Very much, Congressman, and actually
we're taking the necessary steps. Right now we have added the
naval strike missile to six of the LCSes, for example. By '26
we hope to have them all on the Independence-class and then on
the Freedom-class by 2032 -- excuse me, I have those reversed,
right. But we plan on putting --
Mr. Gaetz. Would that provide hypersonic air defense?
Secretary Del Toro. The hypersonics you won't be able to
put it on an LCS.
Mr. Gaetz. Right. So that's my worry.
Secretary Del Toro. But you can put -- you actually can
fire SM-6 from mobile launchers off the decks and that's
something that we have already experimented with and have
proven out successfully. So the fact that we could actually be
able to fire an SM-6 from an LCS is actually very, very
positive.
Mr. Gaetz. We're doing that now?
Secretary Del Toro. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. We have already
expended --
Mr. Gaetz. And we're confident that that would be a
sufficient capability to defend against an offensive hypersonic
system from China?
Secretary Del Toro. Well, it'll make it that much more
defendable, that's for sure.
Mr. Gaetz. I don't know. I don't know. I hope that's right
but I really worry that we have adopted this theory that just
more is better on some of these platforms, and if they're not
relevant to the fight because they can't get into the fight I
worry about how many of them we should buy and how many of them
we should build.
Did you have a perspective on that, Admiral?
Admiral Franchetti. I mean, the LCS performs, you know, a
pretty critical mission for mine countermeasures, you know, and
we're moving forward with that package. I think, you know, that
is a very important mission that we do.
A lot of our allies and partners do that, too, so being
able to integrate that capability is critically important.
Again, there's a lot of different scenarios that we might
encounter so having multiple tools in the tool bag is very
important.
Mr. Gaetz. Okay. Well, demining is a far more constrained
concept than we'd originally had for the LCS. I don't know that
it's able to achieve all those goals.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
The chair now recognizes the gentlelady from Virginia, Ms.
McClellan.
Ms. McClellan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I wanted to follow up on your discussion with my landlocked
colleague Mr. Banks about climate change and I want to talk
about the impact that climate change has on readiness,
operations, infrastructure, our forces and their families.
Naval Station Norfolk is the largest naval installation in
the world and is located in a city that has the highest rate of
sea level rise on the East Coast.
Recent projections show that it will face one major flood a
year and a minor flood every week. Meanwhile, we are seeing
record-setting heat waves in the Pacific Northwest.
Can you discuss how sea level rise, recurring floods, more
frequent and destructive hurricanes, record-setting heat waves
-- discuss the impact that they all have and will continue to
have on readiness, operations, our naval infrastructure, our
service members and their families?
Secretary Del Toro. Yes, ma'am. First and foremost, climate
-- installation readiness is combat readiness. If we can't
deploy or if we can't house our ships safely in ports and
deploy them safely then we have a bigger problem, right, and so
mitigating -- making the investments in order to mitigate the
negative effects of climate change are extremely important in
all our ports across the entire United States and we're seeing
the dramatic challenges that that brings.
And so greater investments in moving the utilities to the
right places so that they're not negatively impacted by the
rising sea levels is incredibly important. How you construct
the piers themselves, for example, and where you put the
utilities on those piers is extremely important. And so, again,
installation readiness is combat readiness and perhaps the CNO
can comment more so on the operational side as well.
Admiral Franchetti. Yeah. I think, you know, one of the
things, you know, that we look for as we're designing our new
platforms is making sure from an operational readiness
perspective that they have the ability to operate wherever they
need to be able to operate. And so, again, having the right
facilities where we can pull them in is critically important.
Ms. McClellan. And corrosion has an impact on metal and an
impact on ships and ship readiness as well, and record-setting
heat waves have an effect on our sailors and our corpsmen,
correct, and their ability to do their job and the health and
their readiness?
Secretary Del Toro. Very much so, Congresswoman. It's
having an impact on unaccompanied housing as well, too. Look,
we for decades have made -- the Congress has made really
impressive investments in family housing but we haven't
invested in unaccompanied housing to the extent that we should.
We're correcting that now. We're doing that, moving
forward, and I think our sailors and our Marines appreciate
that, given the high retention rates that we have seen in the
Navy and Marine Corps.
But it's still a huge challenge in areas of high humidity.
So whether it's Key West, whether it's Parris Island, other
places like that, San Diego as well, too, you know, these are
the places we have to pay even more attention to, quite
frankly, to be able to get them up to the standards where they
could resist the humidity.
Ms. McClellan. And to put a finer point on that, increased
temperatures and increased flooding and increased moisture
leads to increased mold in our --
Secretary Del Toro. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. McClellan. Thank you. Now I want to focus on the
readiness of the Navy for a possible conflict in the Indo-
Pacific region and discuss our overseas repair capability.
My staff recently traveled to Japan to meet with security
partners there who expressed concerns that shipbuilding and
repair capabilities are located almost exclusively in the
United States and that in case of a war or a conflict this
would severely restrain our combat capability if we have to
send the ships all the way back to Hawaii or San Diego for
repairs.
What is your assessment of this risk and what are the
department and the administration doing to ensure robust repair
capabilities are available in the Pacific should a conflict
break out?
Secretary Del Toro. Well, thank you, Congresswoman, for
that question.
It is, indeed, a combat-related question. I mean, if we
find ourselves in conflict and we suffer damage, which is
inevitable, we will be able to have to send those ships back to
the closest depot necessary to be able to repair those ships.
So what we're asking of the Congress this year, basically,
is to authorize us up to six continuous maintenance
availabilities of less than 90 days so that we can then now go
and assess which foreign shipyards will be able to do this work
effectively during times of peace.
I hope we never have to go to war but if we should have to
go to war we will then have full knowledge of which shipyards
in what countries we could actually send these ships to be able
to do the damage repair that is going to be necessary.
Ms. McClellan. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield back.
The Chairman. I thank the lady.
The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Georgia, Mr.
McCormick.
Dr. McCormick. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The Chairman. I was out of line. I saw Mr. Fallon came in
ahead of you. I apologize.
The gentleman from Texas, Mr. Fallon, is recognized.
Mr. Fallon. Dr. McCormick denied.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Fallon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it.
Okay. So, Mr. Secretary, thank you, and General and
Admiral, thank you for being here.
The thing that I come back to, and we had a discussion
about this last year, is the recruiting crisis so -- and I
apologize because I was at my office and missed a little bit of
this testimony.
But, Mr. Secretary, do you believe that the recruiting
crisis is an existential threat to the republic?
Secretary Del Toro. I think it is, across the entire
nation. In fact, we need more blue collar workers. We need more
young men and women actually who are willing to come into our
armed services across the board and serve.
Mr. Fallon. No, I think it -- ironically and, oddly, it's
refreshing to hear that because we're not going to solve a
problem unless we really understand the gravity of it and thank
you for that.
And so I was looking at the statistics from all branches
but particularly I was going to talk about the Navy today --
that we missed their goals last year by 20 percent, about --
Secretary Del Toro. Yes, sir. We had a -- we actually fell
short. The beginning of the year we thought we'd be at 17,500.
We ended the year at 7,500. This year at the beginning of the
year we thought we'd be short about 16,500 and we'll probably
end, perhaps, at 6,400 or less.
But we actually increased our goal that year to 40,000,
which is important to note. You know, we want to make up for
the shortages from previous years so we can reduce the number
of gaps that we have at sea.
Mr. Fallon. Yeah, because this happens every once in a
while and where -- but it's an anomaly and it's just a year and
then the next year, and you can mitigate some of that, of
course, with retention as well.
But what I'm alarmed about is when it's year over year and
it's -- of course, at least with the Navy it's going to be two
years in a row. With the Army it's been three years. But, of
course, the Marine Corps always meets their recruiting goals.
They have the best commercials. What are you going to do?
But, you know, look at the Navy/Marine guy over here that
was -- the Air Force won this one, by the way.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Fallon. So what can we do? What new innovative ideas
can we use, Mr. Secretary, to mitigate this and really end it?
Because I think that's what we're after here is if it's been
three --
Secretary Del Toro. Yes, sir.
Mr. Fallon. -- three unsuccessful years with the Army and
two with the Navy we need to do something differently. What do
you think those things should be?
Secretary Del Toro. So please understand it's been an all
hands on deck effort across the board --
Mr. Fallon. Okay. Good. Good.
Secretary Del Toro. -- and the CNO can talk specifically to
some of the measures that we have taken. But it is all hands on
deck and we're actually putting a call out to the maritime
service across the board as well, too.
Admiral Franchetti. Thank you. And I agree, recruiting is
really an existential threat so we're kind of taking a two-
pronged approach. One is, first, to approve the recruiting
enterprise itself. So the Navy just put a two-star admiral in
charge of recruiting.
Mr. Fallon. Good.
Admiral Franchetti. We have also adopted a thing that we
use in aviation for aviation operations, maintenance,
understanding what's going on with each type model series.
We're looking at -- we have a recruiting operations center now
to look at what's going on with each one of our recruiting
centers, each recruiter, because it's really about throughput
per recruiter, and how do we need to improve their ability to
recruit.
The other thing, as the Secretary mentioned, you know, we
had taken a 60 percent manning cut to man at 60 percent in our
recruiting centers when we put more people at sea. So we
actually had reduced our recruiting force by the end of May. We
should have that fully restored so we'll be able to do that.
I think on the other side --
Mr. Fallon. Well, Admiral, I -- sorry, I don't make it a
habit to interrupt flag officers. I apologize for that.
But I really want to emphasize we need it to be measurable
as well. And also a question -- when we have excellent
recruiters are they allowed to stay within the recruiting
command?
Admiral Franchetti. Yeah. We have a career recruiter first,
yes.
Mr. Fallon. Okay. Good. Okay. So they can do it for --
because that's the thing I don't want is somebody highly
successful and then they leave, and I would gently suggest that
we build everything around recruiting right now. I mean, make
sure that they're manned and then build. That should be the
first thing. Again, just to --
Admiral Franchetti. Right. That's how we get our seed corn.
We really need to make those investments.
Mr. Fallon. Yeah. And, you know, I was thinking about as
far as the Navy you're on all the planes. You're under the
water. You're on the water. You're in the air. You're on the
ground. You're in space. I don't think any other branch can say
that.
Secretary Del Toro. And always forward.
Mr. Fallon. Right. But because of that I would imagine that
you would recruit the submariner differently than you're going
to attract somebody to, say, go into the Special Ops and SEALs
or somebody who's going to cyber or intel or service fleet, and
I just wanted to touch on that a little bit and ask you what
are -- what field or expertise has been most hit by recruiting
-- the recruiting crisis?
Secretary Del Toro. Actually, the medical profession. We're
having a really hard time in the medical profession and also
recruiting in the nuclear field as well, too, because we just
don't have enough students and colleges that actually go into
those studies.
And so we're having to work at a younger age in the case of
the nukes actually trying to encourage high schoolers to
actually go into the nuclear field, and you know the problems
that exist in recruiting health professionals across the board.
Mr. Fallon. Sure. And I'd just like to, again, gently ask
and politely ask maybe with the recruiting stuff, a quarterly
report given to this committee would be wonderful for us
because there's a role for us to play as well and we want to
give you the resources to succeed.
We just want a measurable and think outside the box because
we have got to take care of this. None of us want to go, dare I
say, to a draft and if we're going to --
[Simultaneous speaking.]
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
The chair now recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina,
Mr. Davis.
Mr. Davis. Thanks so much, Mr. Chair, and to the witnesses.
Good afternoon to you.
Mr. Secretary, we spoke last year about expediting toxic
water claims processing for those veterans as a result of the
Camp Lejeune situation.
Mr. Secretary, what's the estimated time line now that you
would forecast in getting claims heard, in particular with the
elective option then in place?
Secretary Del Toro. Yes, sir. It actually depends on how
quickly the claimants themselves actually completely fill the
paperwork online. We have made tremendous progress and
investments, because this is very important, to the Department
of the Navy, to the Department of Defense and to the president
of the United States, actually.
And so we have 190,000 claimants, basically, that have now
signed online but many of them actually haven't completed their
full regiment of paperwork necessary to be able to process
those claims.
But we are moving extremely fast once a claimant actually
submits all the necessary documentation, all the necessary
paperwork, to make them the offers that they so deserve.
Mr. Davis. From the time that a completed claim is
submitted what would you estimate --
Secretary Del Toro. I'd have to get back to you
specifically on the amount of time. We do the analysis on those
that have fully submitted their paperwork and I do know that
out of the ones that have fully submitted their paperwork, for
example, some have actually taken time to consider the offers
that have been made.
And so we can provide you all the specific statistics
associated with the --
Mr. Davis. There was a report that was due in January on
the 1st. When do you anticipate that report?
Secretary Del Toro. I'll have to get back to you on where
that report is, Congressman.
Mr. Davis. Okay. In eastern North Carolina there's a
growing need for employment opportunities that can provide
young people with careers. I've recently facilitated a meeting
between representatives from the Newport News Shipyard,
community colleges in North Carolina, and workforce development
officials from across our region to collaborate on these
opportunities in our part of the state.
Mr. Secretary, is there a pool -- I mean, we know there's a
pool of existing talent that's going to exit the Navy in
particular. They're separating for whatever reason.
How can we better assist in particular service members that
we know are exiting through the transition assistance program
in these certain critical areas that are important for our
national security still?
Secretary Del Toro. Congressman, first and foremost, my
goal is to keep them in, obviously --
Mr. Davis. Understood.
Secretary Del Toro. -- and so we're trying our very best
and actually retention has been the highest. It's been
historic, actually, for both the Navy and the Marine Corps. So
we're doing our job well and providing necessary quality of
life, quality of services, necessary to keep them in.
But I think you raised an important point and one of the
things that we have been talking about in this call for
maritime services for those individuals that do depart actually
how could we actually guide them to work in our shipyards is
one example.
You know, we have a very robust NavalX program in North
Carolina, for example, that helps private industry in North
Carolina work with the Department of Navy and that's part of
that as well, too.
Mr. Davis. Yeah. Mr. Secretary, obviously, we want to
continue to keep them in but, obviously, there's a point in
time where we know the separation is going to occur and that's
what I was really highlighting. You know, when we know it's
going to occur now we're -- it's a matter of transitioning.
So, you know, that's definitely something I think we have
to continue to think through, in particular our transition
assistance programs --
Secretary Del Toro. Yes, sir.
Mr. Davis. -- because that still can be the pipeline to
secure our national security. So I appreciate that.
Secretary Del Toro. Yes, sir.
Mr. Davis. Elizabeth City State University is an HBCU in my
district. There's a growing aviation program, the only four-
year aviation sciences program in North Carolina, that's on
track to growing and increasing this capacity.
They're looking to build additional aviation hubs, in
particular, Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point being one of
the locations. This program could provide a pipeline of pilots
to the military. So I'm trying to get them in, too, not just
concerned about the transition. We're trying to get them in as
well.
How can the Navy collaborate and leverage programs like
this at universities like Elizabeth City State University and
other HBCUs to alleviate pilot shortages?
General Smith. Well, Congressman, I don't -- I'm not
familiar with Elizabeth State University but I'm going to be by
tonight, and my commanding general of the Marine Corps
Recruiting Command is going to be by tomorrow morning.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Davis. Well, good.
General Smith. And we are -- because we are looking for
pilots. We are looking for pilots.
Mr. Davis. All right. Well, from this airman to the Devil
Dog I say hooah. I yield back, Mr. Chair.
The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
The chair now recognizes the doctor from Georgia, this time
for real.
Dr. McCormick. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate you.
It's interesting -- when you talked about recruiting just
recently I wasn't planning on talking about this but a couple
of things came to mind.
When we forgive student debt, for example, and we have
people who never went to college paying for people who did go
to college who then had their debt forgiven, where's the
incentive to give away scholarships for the military when we're
recruiting it their college is already paid for free? Where's
the incentive to motivate people to go into medicine or
anything else when they don't incur debt otherwise?
We have to remember that this is an incentive-driven
society and that we are a all-volunteer force and I think we
have to realize that in our recruiting force.
Secondly, I think when it comes to our enlisted folks when
we recruit we always have to go after the warriors, which means
we recruit on the right stations at the right places with the
right message.
The sergeant major of the Army -- the former sergeant major
still owes me a hundred pushups because I told him he was
barking up the wrong tree by going after the recruiting venues
that they were using.
I like the Marines -- I may be a little biased. I may have
been involved in something like that. But when you talk about
the few, the proud, the Marines, and it is about a warrior
ethos that's why we make our quota because we recruit the right
people for the right mission and that's what we should focus
on.
With that said, we do have a mission and it's all over the
globe right now. One of the things that we're having a hard
time delivering is our people to the right place at the right
time with our amphibious shipping, which we're obviously in a
shortfall right now.
I know we're trying to reallocate for a mission all over
the world, a diverse mission, which I understand we have
limited funds for. Do you think we're going to be able to fix
this?
Are we shifting away from this amphibious warfare model or
are we going to reinvest in expanding our amphibious fleet so
we can meet the needs of the Corps and the Navy?
Secretary Del Toro. By no means imaginable, Congressman. We
are fully dedicated to a strong and robust amphibious fleet.
Just in this budget alone we have reinserted three LPDs in '25,
'27, and '29.
We actually moved LHA(Landing helicopter assault) 10 to the
left by two years, and so we're fully committed and that
commitment has to continue well into the future as well, too,
with bringing on the LSMs that the commandant mentioned earlier
as well, too. Our Marines need to move around long distances in
the Indo-Pacific as well as island to island and we need to
give them the capabilities to do so.
Dr. McCormick. Do we think that we're on -- what kind of
time line before we start to catch up to that curve that we're
obviously behind on right now? We're struggling to meet our
needs.
Secretary Del Toro. I think as long as we remain steady on
LPD production, for example, we're going to be okay. The
production lines down in Pascagoula are not as challenged as
they are in the submarine community and up north as well either
and so they're being able to deliver these ships pretty much on
time and on budget a few months delayed but not, certainly,
years delayed.
Dr. McCormick. Great. I'm aware that the Marine Corps in
fiscal year 2024 has requested for -- to reinstate a couple 53
kilos, those beautiful magnificent birds that they are, near
and dear to my heart. It seems like just two helicopters. What
kind of impact does that have on the fleet when we talk about
two helicopters?
General Smith. Congressman, two helicopters is significant
for us and to answer your question it's about the CH-53K, which
is an incredible platform that can lift itself. It can
literally lift itself.
It is the only heavy lift -- true heavy lift helicopter in
the DOD inventory in-flight refuellable and can lift itself. It
can lift 48,000 pounds external, which is stunning.
So I'm committed to making sure that our fleet of CH-53Ks
is robust and is fully outfitted.
Dr. McCormick. Thank you. And I love the picture recently
of the 53 Kilo with a slung low F-35, aerial refueling
nonetheless. I hope to be on the next one of those ops.
Speaking of air, Osprey. Still very concerned about the
delays in getting them back up online. Obviously, we have seen
what's happened in AFRICOM (Africa Command)with the waiving,
you know, and I still think it's a safe aircraft. Incredible
safety profile, considering its new technologies.
But where are we at in getting them back to work at full
process, getting our pilots up to speed so they can be
proficient at what they do best?
General Smith. Congressman, the MV-22, as you note, is --
it's our workhorse. We're always looking to modernize this
asset. But we have been flying it in combat and in training
since 2007.
It's got a safety record consistent with all other
platforms and its return to flight has met the standard by
NAVAIR. So we are returning it to flight. We're going through
day check rides, night check rides, and getting it back in the
fight.
Dr. McCormick. Got you.
With that, I have five seconds to say Semper If. Welcome
back to the fight. Oorah.
General Smith. Oorah, sir.
The Chairman. I hank the gentleman.
The chair now recognizes the gentleman from New York, Mr.
LaLota.
Mr. LaLota. Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, good to be with you today, sir. Our Navy-
Marine Corps team is the most lethal fighting force for good
the world has ever known. Would you agree with that?
Secretary Del Toro. Yes, sir. Absolutely.
Mr. LaLota. When he was Secretary of Defense General Mattis
would say that the policy decisions made at the Pentagon and
made here should be made in contemplation of ensuring that we
have the most lethal fighting force the world has ever known in
general, would you agree with that?
I'm sorry. In general, Mr. Secretary.
Secretary Del Toro. Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you were
referring to the general, not in general.
Mr. LaLota. I'll watch my wording.
Secretary Del Toro. Absolutely, sir.
Mr. LaLota. And of all the things that make our Navy-Marine
Corps team the most lethal fighting force we have talked about
a few things today -- SM-2/3/6 shipbuilding, some other
equipment, amphibs and whatnot.
But our people -- do our people still remain the biggest
component to our success?
Secretary Del Toro. Without question, Congressman.
Mr. LaLota. And I'm frustrated because my questions aren't
going to be about some of the infrastructure, some of the
decisions about where our bases are, and some of the technology
we're acquiring, which are rightful endeavors to us -- for us
to discuss.
Admiral, do you remember meeting on the floor of the House
two months ago or so during the State of the Union? Do you
remember our conversation, Admiral?
I'll remind you. It was about status of forces agreements.
Do you remember who my guest was at the State of the Union?
Admiral Franchetti. Yes. I think it was Mrs. Alkonis.
Mr. LaLota. Lieutenant Ridge Alkonis and his spouse,
Brittany Alkonis, and I'm hoping that with the hundred years of
collective naval service that the three of you have -- combat
deployments, command at sea, command at sea even for you, Mr.
Secretary -- that you could help with this issue because I
think it does strongly relate to lethality.
Twenty-five years ago when I was a midshipman the top of
our class at the Naval Academy, of which I was not a part,
would select ships in the Seventh Fleet for the most part
because that was the most challenging tip of the spear
assignments, and our best and brightest and from ROTC and OCS
would pick this same because of the challenge of those
assignments and the specter that if we, as a Navy-Marine Corps
team, were in the biggest part of the fight it would likely be
in that part of the world, and that was in the year 2000.
Now, 24 years later, it's much more apparent that if our
Navy-Marine Corps team gets called into the biggest fight it's
likely to be in that part of the world, and because of the
weaknesses of our status of forces agreement specifically with
Japan less folks are seeking orders to Japan because they're
inferior -- our status of forces agreements.
In the case of Lieutenant Ridge Alkonis, real briefly,
while traveling down Mount Fuji with his family he innocently
because of mountain altitude sickness lost control of his
vehicle. No drinking or drugs involved. Lost control of his
vehicle which tragically resulted in the death of two Japanese
nationals.
The Japanese took custody of the lieutenant, denied him a
right to a translator, denied him any sort of attorney, sleep
deprived him and ultimately coerced him into a confession that
resulted in him serving 537 days in a Japanese prison.
That outcome would not have happened likely in Korea or
anyplace else where we have status of forces agreements. So my
question is this.
Mr. Secretary, I realize this is not in your jurisdiction.
I realize that status of force agreements are generally
negotiated between the Department of State and that friendly
foreign nation.
But, Mr. Secretary, you are in the business of ensuring
that we have the most lethal fighting force the world has ever
known and the specter of conflict in that part of the world is
more real than it's ever been.
Mr. Secretary, can you commit to working with the Secretary
of Defense, the Secretary of State and others to ensure that
our status of forces agreements in nations like Japan comport
with our values, contemplate lethality to ensure that if our
men and women are called in to fight in that battle that they
can have the confidence knowing that if they're out in town on
liberty and find themselves accused of a crime by a friendly
foreign nation that they have rights similar to what rights the
everyday American citizen have -- would have in America?
Secretary Del Toro. Absolutely, Congressman. The safety of
our personnel in the United States and serving overseas is
incredibly important to us and the SOFA agreements are also
incredibly important to protect their rights.
Mr. LaLota. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
And can you commit to following up in due course, three or
six months, to tell me what progress we have made as a Navy-
Marine Corps team to ensure that our sailors and Marines in the
Seventh Fleet in Japan have better protections, Mr. Secretary?
Secretary Del Toro. Absolutely, Congressman.
Mr. LaLota. Thank you. And with the remainder of my time,
on behalf of Mr. Waltz with unanimous consent, Mr. Chairman,
I'd like to enter into the record his letter to you, Mr.
Secretary, regarding his request that those service members at
Abbey Gate be posthumously promoted.
The Chairman. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. LaLota. Thank you. I yield, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields.
The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Colorado, Mr.
Lamborn.
Mr. Lamborn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Secretary Del Toro, the last time I saw you we were under
the ice up in the Arctic Ocean, IceX. We were on an attack sub
and that was quite an experience.
Secretary Del Toro. Yes, sir.
Mr. Lamborn. There's some amazing capability that we field
out there.
Admiral Franchetti, I'll ask my first question to you. Over
the past several years Congress has appropriated over $3
billion for the development of the Conventional Prompt Strike
CPS(Conventional Prompt Strike) hypersonic missile.
Yet, to date that program has yet to successfully test and
all-up RAMP. I understand these testing problems are driving a
program replan that aims to field the hypersonic capability on
USS Zumwalt by the end of 2025 and the Virginia-class SSN five
years later in 2030.
Given the recently reported shipbuilding delays are these
platforms on track to accommodate hypersonic capability on this
time line?
Admiral Franchetti. Well, thank you for the question. You
know, first, let me say how important the CPS capability is.
You know, it's extremely lethal, maneuverable, and it's
something that we need to have, going forward, and we're in
development of that program along with the Army. And so we're
committed to developing that, getting that out as quickly as
possible, and making sure that we are doing all the proper
testing to move that forward.
As far as our platforms go, the Zumwalt entered the
shipyard down in Pascagoula now and, you know, she -- I went
down to visit her just about maybe a month ago and they are
moving fast to get her ready for the CPS Alt and I'm looking
forward to getting her out.
And so when she's done that that would be coincident with
the missile being ready. The Virginia payload -- we have
certainly seen some of the delays in our submarines and, you
know, right now, we want to invest in the submarine industrial
base so we can increase the cadence and really set the
conditions to meet the cadence and delivery that we really
need, going forward, and that will be part of that capability.
Mr. Lamborn. Yeah, let's talk about that. I understand that
some critical flight tests for CPS are scheduled for later this
year and I'm hopeful that they'll be successful. But I think
we're not moving fast enough. Can you please tell us
specifically what we can do to increase the tempo or cadence of
the testing?
Admiral Franchetti. I think, you know, continuing to work
with our testing community, with Admiral Wolfe, with everyone
who's involved with this and the Army, you know, they are
moving with a sense of urgency and they feel that every single
day.
Mr. Lamborn. Secretary Del Toro, since the October 7th
attack on Israel we have seen a steadily deteriorating security
environment in the Middle East. One of the hallmarks of that
environment is the attacks by Iranian-backed militias
specifically using cheap attack drones.
I applaud the U.S. Navy's performance in defending against
this threat but it comes at a significant and unsustainable
cost long term.
You testified to the Senate Appropriations Committee that
the service required about a billion dollars to replenish
stocks of air defense missiles, and General Kurilla told this
committee that he encourages the Navy to deploy directed
energy, specifically shipborne lasers such as the Helios system
to get on the right side of the cost per shot equation.
So, Secretary, Under Secretary Shyu recently said the
department is working on a directed energy system for the Navy
with three times the power of existing systems. Can you update
us on what the Navy is doing to develop shipboard directed
energy capability?
Secretary Del Toro. Thank you, Congressman. You're
absolutely right that we need to make even greater investments
in the future. We should have been making them for a long, long
time.
But, nevertheless, we are continuing to make investments in
order to get Helios deployable. She will hopefully be
deployable here sometime in the next several months, certainly
by the end of the year, hopefully, on USS Preble.
But we have six other programs including some of the one
that Heidi Shyu is talking about us as well to make added
investments in more high power lasers as well as other directed
energy programs, many of which are also SAT programs that we
can't talk about openly.
Mr. Lamborn. And, General Smith, I know that part of the
Force Design 2030 has been to rethink the capabilities of the
Marine Corps and the needs in the INDOPACOM theater.
Can you talk about the importance of systems like the
medium-range intercept capability, which is a directed energy
capability, and what we're doing to speed up its delivery to
the Marines?
General Smith. Well, sir, I can. The MRIC -- medium-range
intercept capability -- is one of the backbones of our
strategy. It, paired with the TPS-80 G/ATOR Radar, can sense
targets -- very small diameter targets at great range and can
intercept them at -- again, at great range and at a different
classification level I can discuss the range with you.
But it is a critical part of our Force Design throughout
the First Island chain to disrupt a potential PRC attack.
Mr. Lamborn. Thank you, all, and I yield back.
The Chairman. I thank the gentleman and I thank the
witnesses. This testimony has been very helpful and we look
forward to taking what you shared with us today and folding it
into the National Defense Authorization Act later this month.
And with that, I will yield to the ranking member for any
closing comments he may have.
Mr. Smith. I am good, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
The Chairman. We're done. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 12:30 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]
?
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
May 1, 2024
=======================================================================
?
=======================================================================
PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
May 1, 2024
=======================================================================
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.001
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.002
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.003
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.004
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.005
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.006
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.007
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.008
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.009
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.010
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.011
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.012
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.013
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.014
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.015
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.016
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.017
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.018
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.019
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.020
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.021
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.022
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.023
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.024
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.025
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.026
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.027
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.028
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.029
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.030
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.031
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.032
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.033
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.034
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.035
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.036
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.037
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.038
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.039
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.040
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.041
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.042
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.043
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.044
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.045
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.046
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.047
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.048
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.049
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.050
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.051
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.052
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.053
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.054
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.055
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.056
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.057
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.058
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.059
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.060
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.061
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.062
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.063
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.064
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.065
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.066
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.067
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.068
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.069
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.070
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.071
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.072
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.073
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.074
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.075
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.076
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.077
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.078
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.079
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.080
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.081
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.082
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.083
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.084
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.085
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.086
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.087
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.088
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.089
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.090
.eps[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7569.091
.eps?
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING
May 1, 2024
=======================================================================
RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. LAMBORN
Mr. Lamborn. Secretary Del Toro - I'd like to just take a moment
and echo a few of my colleague on the poor state of the Submarine
industrial base despite unprecedented levels of funding from Congress,
which is directly jeopardizing our Sea Based Nuclear Deterrent. I
understand the Navy is investing $15 Billion dollars over the next five
years and, yet you testified to the Senate that many of the shipyards
are buying back upwards of $4 billion dollars in stock. This must stop.
Secretary Del Toro, at this level of investment the only metric
cannot be the number of submarines we are producing years into the
future. Can you tell the committee what the Navy is doing to develop
metrics that will indicate our investment in the industrial base is
bearing fruit?
Secretary Del Toro. The Navy appreciates the continuous support
Congress has provided to our nation's submarine industrial base (SIB).
The Navy understands the importance of metrics to prove the benefit of
the resources required to advance submarine construction and in-service
sustainment. To that end, the Navy has made significant progress in
implementing a performance to plan method to track and communicate
investment impacts, with a focus on those that are outcome-based and
tied to submarine schedules and performance.
This approach maps SIB investments - which serve as enablers of the
Columbia and Virginia production cadence - and traces metrics and
performance to targets for individual projects that have been
aggregated by common outcomes (e.g. number of workforce members placed
in the SIB against the 10K-12K required each year). This approach
enables traceability down to the lowest levels, with ties to "1+2"
production rate and in-service operational availability. It also
provides a fact-based framework to assess quantitative and qualitative
progress and make data-driven decisions on investments and priorities.
Mr. Lamborn. Hypersonic weapons are critically important to
expanding U.S. deterrence options against our adversaries. Fielding
Navy's Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) from ZUMWALT destroyers and
VIRGINIA submarines must stay a priority. Shortly thereafter, I hope to
see the Hypersonic Air Launched Offensive (HALO) weapon fielded.
However, fielding the initial capabilities must not be considered the
required end state; fielding is the starting point. The initial
capabilities already have vulnerabilities. Accelerating technology
development and flight test demonstrations is vital to mitigating those
vulnerabilities and restoring technological superiority over our
adversaries.
The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Test Resource
Management Center's (TRMC) Multi-Service Advanced Capability for
Hypersonics Test Bed (MACH-TB) located at Naval Surface Warfare Center,
Crane Division (NSWC Crane) is leading a pioneering effort to
dramatically reduce the cost and accelerate the pace of hypersonic
flight testing and demonstrations. I would like to get your perspective
on a few items:
1. What importance do you place on continuing hypersonic technology
development and demonstration for CPS after initial fielding? 2. What
impact do you believe MACH-TB will have in accelerating technology
development and transition in the Navy.
Secretary Del Toro. Fielding hypersonic weapons is one of DoD's
highest technical research and engineering priorities. The DoD's
strategic approach for hypersonic weapons is predicated on rapid
prototyping, which involves accepting, minimizing, and mitigating risks
to move through the design, build, test, and learn cycles faster than
traditional acquisition programs.
In order to rapidly maximize the warfighting capability delivered
to our Sailors, the Navy Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) Program has
implemented a program plan that includes a series of recurring
Technology Insertions, as required to keep pace with emerging threats.
This will allow the program to routinely iterate the weapon system
design to enhance its capability against evolving threats, integrate
affordability initiatives to reduce material costs, leverage additive
manufacturing and other new production processes, and perform
obsolescence management activities.
The Technology Insertion process ensures that the Army and Navy can
affordably deliver a capable hypersonic system to support the nation's
continued battlefield dominance. With Congress' support, the Multi-
Service Advanced Capability Hypersonic Test Bed (MACHTB) program was
initiated by the CPS Program and Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC),
Crane, Indiana in 2022 to accelerate hypersonic technology development
by increasing the capacity for hypersonic flight testing. In 2023, the
program the program transferred MACH-TB to OUSD(R&E) Test Resource
Management Center (TRMC) to expand support to all hypersonic and
strategic systems across the Department.
MACH-TB will accelerate U.S. hypersonic technology development and
transition by providing an affordable, rapid hypersonic flight test
capability for DoD programs, NASA, national labs, academia, and
industry. MACH-TB supports hypersonic programs by creating frequent,
low-cost opportunities to test technologies with robust, agile and
modular approaches prior to incorporation into a weapon system, like
CPS.
The CPS Program utilizes MACH-TB as a critical test and evaluation
partner in rapidly designing, developing, and fielding a hypersonic
capability to the warfighter. In Fiscal Year 2023 (FY23), CPS
participated in four flights with MACH-TB, which included more than 20
experiments and the first full-scale test that will enable future
testing of a low cost and modular experimental glide body. In
partnership with MACH-TB, the CPS Program tested a new navigation
technology that was developed, prototyped, and integrated and flown on
a sounding rocket in just 14 months.
Future MACH-TB testing will provide insight to the Navy on
technology improvement and capability validation, enabling more robust
and successful evolutions of our hypersonic weapon system. The CPS
program will continue to partner with the OUSD(R&E) TRMC to address the
current and future needs of the CPS program's developmental sub-scale
and full-scale testing using MACH-TB.
Mr. Lamborn. Undersecretary Shyu recently testified before this
committee that OSD R&Es program called "Accelerate the Procurement and
Fielding of Innovative Technologies Program", or APFIT, is an effective
catalyst for small and non-traditional companies. She specifically
mentioned accelerating production for a paint removal system that
greatly improved naval ship maintenance.
1.Can you highlight any other examples of ways your organization
works with both the APFIT program and Industry (such as Naval
Shipbuilding Research Program) to accelerate the development
technologies to improve existing industrial processes? Can you tell the
committee about any program internal to the Navy that also plays a
similar role?
2.We have heard from companies that work in spaces adjacent to the
ship maintenance industry who develop promising and innovative
solutions to improving shipyard industrial processes. How is the Navy
ship-maintenance enterprise encouraging large prime contractors, who
are hesitant to deviate from proven but expensive and antiquated
processes/equipment, to invest in novel technologies to drive down cost
and improve efficiencies within shipyards.
3.What role does SEA04X, SEA04T, and the Navy Seaport program play
in helping small business to bring advanced capabilities to bear in the
Ship Maintenance Enterprise, if any?
Secretary Del Toro. The Navy values innovative solutions and the
role small businesses play in moving technologies that benefit the Navy
forward. The Navy works closely with OSD R&E's APFIT program to help
engage the small business enterprise and acquire capabilities that
deliver technical advancement across multiple domains, including
communications, unmanned vehicles, sensing, and industrial
applications.Beyond the noted paint removal system, the Navy has had
additional successes with APFIT in the past and continues to work
closely with the APFIT office on additional key innovative technologies
that would be beneficial to the Navy.
Within the Navy, the Small Business Innovation Research program
resources small businesses to develop solutions for several topics,
including industrial processes. Additive manufacturing efforts within
the Navy are developing cutting edge solutions to issues within the
traditional industrial supply chain.
Additionally, the National Shipbuilding Research Program (NSRP) is
an industry-led, partially NAVSEA and Program Executive Office funded,
program that collaboratively develops improved products and processes
in ship design, construction, and repair, in order to maintain the
global competitiveness of the US shipbuilding and repair industry. The
NSRP strives for rapid, widespread implementation of R&D results on
Navy and commercial shipbuilding and repair programs.
It seeks implementation across shipyards, across tiers, and across
varied business operations and technology areas as soon as practicable,
before projects are complete. Coordination with the shipyards ensures
NSRP develops solutions for those closest to the problem. Specific to
the Navy's public shipyards, NAVSEA 04 works with the NAVSEA SBIR
office to provide opportunities for small businesses to develop
technologies that help to overcome a specific problem the shipyards are
dealing with while enabling these small businesses to grow.
The technologies are then made available government wide, as well
as commercially, to help grow the business, boost the economy, and
provide solutions to other industry leading partners.
Mr. Lamborn. The Zumwalt is only 1 ship and cannot be continuously
deployed, but INDOPACOM requires a persistent offensive hypersonic
capability. Can you update the committee on your plan to maximize
presence and deliver the USS Moonsoor and USS Johnson with the CPS
launcher system?
Does the Navy's decision to only procure 1 Virginia Class Block 6
submarine this year affect the Navy's ability to provide persistent CPS
presence after this weapons it is fielded by subsurface platforms (VA
Block 5) in 2030?
Admiral Franchetti. The Navy is leveraging the industrial capacity
of our new construction shipbuilders to modernize Zumwalt-class
Destroyers with Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) capability. DDG 1000
is undergoing the first modernization program. Follow-on availabilities
are scheduled for DDG 1001 and DDG 1002. Once complete, the Navy will
have three destroyers prepared to support a persistent hypersonic
capability. To maximize presence in the INDOPACOM region, ship
employment cycles will be phased to ensure continued operational
availability throughout the conduct of routine and depot maintenance
cycles. The current shipbuilding plan provides for persistent CPS
presence by 2030. CPS fielding on submarines will be accomplished with
Virginia Payload Module (VPM) capability starting with SSN 803, which
is expected to be available to the Fleet by FY30. SSN 804 and SSN 805
are also scheduled to be delivered by 2030 with CPS capability.
Mr. Lamborn. Undersecretary Shyu recently testified before this
committee that OSD R&Es program called "Accelerate the Procurement and
Fielding of Innovative Technologies Program", or APFIT, is an effective
catalyst for small and non-traditional companies. She specifically
mentioned accelerating production for a paint removal system that
greatly improved naval ship maintenance.
1.Can you highlight any other examples of ways your organization
works with both the APFIT program and Industry (such as Naval
Shipbuilding Research Program) to accelerate the development
technologies to improve existing industrial processes? Can you tell the
committee about any program internal to the Navy that also plays a
similar role?
2.We have heard from companies that work in spaces adjacent to the
ship maintenance industry who develop promising and innovative
solutions to improving shipyard industrial processes. How is the Navy
ship-maintenance enterprise encouraging large prime contractors, who
are hesitant to deviate from proven but expensive and antiquated
processes/equipment, to invest in novel technologies to drive down cost
and improve efficiencies within shipyards.
3.What role does SEA04X, SEA04T, and the Navy Seaport program play
in helping small business to bring advanced capabilities to bear in the
Ship Maintenance Enterprise, if any?
Admiral Franchetti. The Navy values innovative solutions and the
role small businesses play in moving technologies that benefit the Navy
forward. The Navy works closely with OSD R&E's APFIT program to help
engage the small business enterprise and acquire capabilities that
deliver technical advancement across multiple domains, including
communications, unmanned vehicles, sensing, and industrial
applications. Beyond the noted paint removal system, the Navy has had
additional successes with APFIT in the past and continues to work
closely with the APFIT office on additional key innovative technologies
that would be beneficial to the Navy.
Within the Navy, the Small Business Innovation Research program
resources small businesses to develop solutions for several topics,
including industrial processes. Additive manufacturing efforts within
the Navy are developing cutting edge solutions to issues within the
traditional industrial supply chain. Additionally, the National
Shipbuilding Research Program (NSRP) is an industry-led, partially
NAVSEA and Program Executive Office funded, program that
collaboratively develops improved products and processes in ship
design, construction, and repair, in order to maintain the global
competitiveness of the US shipbuilding and repair industry.
The NSRP strives for rapid, widespread implementation of R&D
results on Navy and commercial shipbuilding and repair programs. It
seeks implementation across shipyards, across tiers, and across varied
business operations and technology areas as soon as practicable, before
projects are complete. Coordination with the shipyards ensures NSRP
develops solutions for those closest to the problem.
Specific to the Navy's public shipyards, NAVSEA 04 works with the
NAVSEA SBIR office to provide opportunities for small businesses to
develop technologies that help to overcome a specific problem the
shipyards are dealing with while enabling these small businesses to
grow. The technologies are then made available government wide, as well
as commercially, to help grow the business, boost the economy, and
provide solutions to other industry leading partners.
______
RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. SCOTT
Mr. Scott. Can the U.S. Navy be able to count on the commercial
sector to transport damaged ships or support battle damage repair
(BDAR) near the fight?
Admiral Franchetti. The Navy has in the past and continues to
evaluate options to support BDAR in times of conflict and will conduct
exercises in the coming year to exercise the system. Commercial vessels
have provided such services in contested environments in previous wars
and have a recent, proven history of transporting and assisting
stricken USS vessels overseas outside of contested environments.
Immediate capacity is a challenge since there are no U.S. flagged
heavy-lift vessels capable of providing support to larger USS vessels,
and there are limited U.S. flagged towing vessels located worldwide to
ensure some are close to a potential fight. From a wartime readiness
perspective, the Navy is exploring additional forward maintenance
opportunities to "exercise the system" so that when conflict arises we
are prepared to respond in foreign friendly shipyards, that are already
qualified and certified in peacetime to US Navy standards with the
knowledge and experience to work with us.
______
RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. KEATING
Mr. Keating. Secretary Del Toro and Admiral Franchetti, can you
elaborate on the innovation occurring with our Australian and UK
partners with regards to AUKUS Pillar 2, specifically in regard to the
torpedo tube launch and recovery capabilities and small unmanned
underwater vehicles?
Secretary Del Toro. As a component of AUKUS Pillar II, the Undersea
Warfare Working Group is accelerating the development and delivery of
advanced military capabilities while bolstering industry and innovation
sector collaboration. The AUKUS partners are integrating the ability to
launch and recover undersea vehicles from torpedo tubes on US, UK, and
Australian SSNs to include SSNAUKUS, the purpose built AUKUS submarine.
Torpedo tube launched and recovery (TTL&R) makes the operation of
uncrewed undersea vehicles ubiquitous for the SSN force, increasing the
range and capability of our undersea forces to enable assured access
and deliver effects such as strike and intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance.
Mr. Keating. Secretary Del Toro and Admiral Franchetti, can you
elaborate on the innovation occurring with our Australian and UK
partners with regards to AUKUS Pillar 2, specifically in regard to the
torpedo tube launch and recovery capabilities and small unmanned
underwater vehicles?
Admiral Franchetti. As a component of AUKUS Pillar II, the Undersea
Warfare Working Group is accelerating the development and delivery of
advanced military capabilities while bolstering industry and innovation
sector collaboration. The AUKUS partners are integrating the ability to
launch and recover undersea vehicles from torpedo tubes on US, UK, and
Australian SSNs to include SSN-AUKUS, the purpose built AUKUS
submarine. Torpedo tube launched and recovery (TTL&R) makes the
operation of uncrewed undersea vehicles ubiquitous for the SSN force,
increasing the range and capability of our undersea forces to enable
assured access and deliver effects such as strike and intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance.
______
RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. WALTZ
Mr. Waltz. Last October, I sent you a letter requesting that the 11
Marines killed at Abbey Gate during the Afghanistan withdrawal be
posthumously promoted in accordance with 10 USC section 1563, which
authorizes Members of Congress to initiate a recommendation for an
honorary promotion. I'm grateful that less than 2 weeks after the Abbey
Gate bombing, you posthumously promoted Navy Corpsman Maxton Soviak to
Hospital Corpsman Third Class.
However, It's been nearly three years since these brave Marines
were killed, and more than 6 months since I made this request to you.
When will you do what is right by these Marines and their families?
Secretary Del Toro. As the Department has previously testified, it
is longstanding Marine Corps practice that only Marines selected for
promotion prior to being killed in action are considered for posthumous
or honorary promotion. None of the Marines killed at Abbey Gate were
under consideration for promotion at the time. This practice is
grounded in fairness and honor to all Marines who have been killed in
action throughout its history.
It is consistent with how the Marine Corps has recognized our
greatest examples of valor; as an example, the Vietnam War, 45 Marines
were awarded the Medal of Honor having gallantly given their lives,
none of whom were posthumously promoted. Many have had ships or
buildings named in their honor. This does not detract from the
sacrifices the Marines killed at Abbey Gate made. We sacredly honor
them and their families for the contributions they have made to the
Marine Corps and our Nation, and have recognized them through personal
awards and citations.
Mr. Waltz. The Navy recently completed and published the results of
a 45 day review of its shipbuilding portfolio.
Could these timelines improve if we had more shipyards? Do you
consider shipyards to be infrastructure? The Infrastructure Investment
and Jobs Act provided $1.2 trillion for infrastructure projects in the
United States. How much funding to build new shipyards was included?
Were you consulted at all while the White House drafted this proposal?
When we see China building up their shipyards - building more than
50% of the world's ships each year (up from 12% only 2 decades ago)
with PLAN 395 ships by 2025 and an expected 435 by 2030, how are we
accepting such abysmal performance from our American shipbuilding
infrastructure?
What are you doing to get us back on track while we are being
dwarfed by the Chinese shipbuilding arm?
Secretary Del Toro. The private shipyards that build ships for the
Navy are paramount to the larger shipbuilding industrial base, but are
not owned or operated by the U.S. Navy. While partnering with private
shipyards in infrastructure investments will help improve performance,
the 45 Day Shipbuilding Review found the largest challenges to
shipbuilding performance are driven by the lingering effects of COVID
on the supply chain and skilled workforce availability and proficiency.
The Navy is working major initiatives to drive improvement in these
areas. The Fiscal Year 2025 budget request continues investment in the
submarine industrial base. Further, the Navy is working initiatives
that focus on developing and retaining the highly skilled shipbuilding
workforces in both industry and the government, including utilizing
Section 122 workforce development legislation in the fiscal year 2023
National Defense Authorization Act.
Additionally, the Navy is promoting the shipbuilding industrial
base and supply chain through smart acquisition strategies, like multi-
year procurements, and efficient build profiles while also
appropriately balancing risk between the Navy and industry.
______
RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. FALLON
Mr. Fallon. Secretary Del Toro, you have recently told lawmakers
that "the service is out at least $1 billion in critical munitions in
recent operations in the Middle East. You said that the $2 billion
within the supplemental is direly critical to the Navy and Marine Corps
to be able to replenish those munitions and continue to provide the
types of defensive measures enacted in the last 6 months.
My fear is that if activity in the Middle East and elsewhere
increases much more funding will be required. We have estimates that
the Iranian strike costed Israel and allies approximately $550 million,
that is 2% of our entire Israeli supplemental spent within 6 hours.
We need current munitions and missile intercepts to ensure we our
defending our troops and allies but this solution alone is not
sustainable over the long term.
What efforts are you pursuing to ensure effective and sustainable
defensive solutions?
Secretary Del Toro. Through collaboration, the Navy is employing an
operationally informed mix of air, surface and ground-based
interceptors, as well as other defense systems. Expenditures are at
historic levels. While we acknowledge the cost inversion of kinetic
interception against these cheaper one-way attack unmanned vehicles, we
balance that cost against the safety of our Sailors and the billions of
dollars of forward-deployed surface fleet power projection that they
protect.
The Navy needs both increased capacity and enduring low-cost
solutions that match this emergent unmanned threat. On the capacity
front, both expansion of the munitions industry base and the
acquisition of long lead items, will help our replenishment rates.
Multi-Year Procurement (MYP) and Economic Order Quantity (EOQ)
contracts allow industry to bulk buy components and negotiate long-term
purchasing agreements with their suppliers.
This reduces our costs. On the other end of the spectrum, we are
currently experimenting with and maturing a host of lower cost kinetic
and non-kinetic technologies that promise to expand our layered defense
options.
Mr. Fallon. Secretary Del Toro, can you send the committee a
quarterly report on the recruiting results versus goals? We would like
to validate trends and actively continue the conversation on how
Congress can help Navy/ Marine Corp in ensuring readiness.
Secretary Del Toro. The Office of the Secretary of Defense
publishes monthly press releases which provide recruiting numbers for
each of the Military Services. They can be found at:https://
prhome.defense.gov/M-RA/Inside-M-RA/MPP/PR/
Mr. Fallon. A recent Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD)
paper highlighted some of the issues currently being felt by the DOD
cyber community. I asked in a cyber hearing last year, "who is
accountable for the growth, readiness, and capability development of
the cyber fleet". Nobody has given me a direct answer on this. DOD has
basically delegated this to the services, which is problematic.
I bring this up in this hearing because the article I just
referenced specially called out the Navy for not doing its part to
contribute to the 14 Cyber National Force teams, which are responsible
for defending our most critical assets.
The article specifically states, "the Navy will not be able to
deliver new teams for at least a few years because I needs to focus on
improving the readiness of its existing cyber personnel."
Secondly, I just reviewed some recruiting statistics released by
the Pentagon, and frankly the Navy's numbers for its entire force are
concerning.
What is the Navy doing right now to accelerate force readiness for
cyber?
Admiral Franchetti. I am committed to providing world class cyber
forces in support of National Defense priorities. To accelerate force
readiness, the Navy is focused on increasing manning, building capacity
through recruiting, retaining talent with retention incentives, and
enhancing training. In the last year, Cyber Mission Force (CMF) manning
has increased from 80% to 88% across 40 teams.
I will continue to focus on CMF manning until it is greater than
95% across all teams. To improve recruiting, we are leveraging a proven
initiative by assigning Information Warfare (IW) Senior Enlisted to six
locations to focus on IW recruiting.
In FY23, Cyber Warfare Technician (CWT) recruitment achieved 100%
of its goal, and we are incentivizing the rating through Selective
Reenlistment Bonuses (SRB) and Special Duty Assignment Pay (SDAP). The
Navy established Cyber Qualification Training Teams (CQTT) to improve
unit level training across the CMF and meet U.S. CYBERCOM required unit
level training requirements.
This effort will provide a regular and repeatable training process,
performance assessments, and support team certifications. Navy also
invested in a virtual training environment and acquired a U.S. CYBERCOM
Persistent Cyber Training Environment (PCTE) Enterprise Compute and
Store (ECS) node. This investment has tripled the annual training
throughput for CMF work roles in just two years. Navy has been
advocating to transform the cyber force generation system to a model
where government owned, service deliver individual training is provided
to service members prior to assignment to CMF teams.
Where authorized, Navy now delivers some of the required CMF
training, resulting in steep readiness improvements. Case in point,
Navy delivered Cyber Protection Team (CPT) training resulted in a 34%
increase in individual readiness in the past 14 months. Navy continues
to partner with U.S. CYBERCOM/NSA to gain authorization to deliver the
remainder of cyber training in this manner.
Mr. Fallon. General Smith an article published in January of this
year highlighted that Marines deployed on Rotational Forces Southeast
Asia and Darwin were relying on our partners for counter UAS because
they weren't equipped by their organic units with this capability.
I think it's safe to say every service has struggled to adapt to
this threat, but I'm particularly concerned that Marines, because of
how dispersed you operate, may be lacking this capability at the small
unit level. Are you concerned with these reports considering the
accelerated proliferation of drone use we are seeing with our
adversaries? What is the Marine Corps doing to get US made CUAS
solutions in the hands of our marines before they go into theater?
General Smith. The proliferation of drone use is a concern.
Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) are changing the character of war in
ways like the IED did twenty years ago. To combat the UAS threat, the
Marine Corps is investing in four key programs: Marine Air Defense
Integrated System (MADIS), Light-MADIS (L-MADIS), Medium Range
Intercept Capability (MRIC), and dismounted CUAS systems. MADIS, L-
MADIS, and MRIC were specifically designed for Low Altitude Air Defense
Battalions (LAAD Bn) conducting air defense in support of critical
assets and maneuver forces.
The dismounted CUAS system is intended to provide every element of
the Marine Corps a means of self-defense against Group 1 and 2 small
UAS. Each program organically, or through command-and-control
networking, will complete the entire CUAS kill chain (detect, track,
identify, and defeat).
Two prevailing challenges will be the balance between the size,
weight, and power (SWaP) versus system capability and lethality; and
the ability to provide at every echelon the notification of adversary
UASs for force protection and cueing, as well as notification of the
employment of friendly UASs to mitigate mis-identification. To advance
the Marine Corps capability in this area, we requested the following in
FY25 Budget:
MADIS o $132.2 million request to support the procurement of (13)
systems in PB25. o Employed on a pair of Joint Light Tactical Vehicles.
o Can lethally defeat manned aircraft and group 3-5 UAS with Stinger
missiles, and lethally and non-lethally defeat group 1-3 UAS. o AAO is
(190) MADIS systems comprised of (380) total vehicles. o IOC scheduled
for 1QFY25 with the delivery of (13) systems to III MEF.
L-MADIS o $33.2 million request to support procurement of (5)
systems in PB25. o Employed on a pair of Ultra-Light Tactical Vehicles
(ULTV). o Can lethally defeat manned aircraft and group 3-5 UAS with
Stinger missiles, and non-lethally defeat group 1-3 UAS. o AAO is (21)
systems consisting of (42) ULTVs. o IOC scheduled for 2QFY25 with the
delivery of (3) systems to III MEF.
MRIC o $111.4 million request to support the procurement of (12)
launchers and (242) missiles in PB25. o Designed to lethally defeat
sub-sonic and super-sonic cruise missiles, and capable of lethally
defeating manned aircraft and group 3-5 UAS. o The first complete
battery will be fielded in FY26, followed by an additional battery in
FY27 and FY28. o In February 2024, industry partners broke ground
establishing a U.S.-based production facility in Camden, AR which will
ensure continued access to a supply of domestically produced
interceptors.
Dismounted CUAS o Low SWaP body-worn or man-portable system that
provides Marines at the small unit level an ability to detect and
engage Group 1 and 2 sUAS with organic weapon systems. o Detect, track,
and identification phase of the kill chain completed through a handheld
graphic user interface to receive sensor data from external entities
with a redundant RF detection system. o Combination of directional/
omni-directional jammers and/or enhanced rifle optics to defeat sUAS. o
Urgent Needs and Program of Record Requirement Documents are currently
in draft.
______
RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. GIMENEZ
Mr. Gimenez. What is the current status of our littoral mobility in
the Pacific?
Secretary Del Toro. Combat Logistics Force (CLF) ships support
littoral mobility through employment of T-AOs (Fleet Replenishment
Oilers), T-AOE (Fast Combat Support) and T-AKE (Dry Cargo/Ammunition)
class ships that refuel, resupply, and rearm carrier strike groups and
expeditionary strike groups.
Navy is developing the Light Replenishment Oiler (TAOL), which will
strengthen Navy's ability to conduct power projection and sea control
by augmenting the current combat logistics force with smaller, intra-
theater ships that enhance the Navy's ability to conduct distributed
Maritime Operations (DMO), Littoral Operations in Contested
Environments (LOCE), and Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations (EABO).
TAOL will provide fuel, ammunition, and supplies to dispersed
surface action groups and will support expeditionary advanced base
requirements. TAOL will transfer fuel, ammunition, and supplies at-sea
to Medium Landing Ship (LSM), which will further transfer this material
to expeditionary forces ashore via its beaching and pier side offload
capabilities.
Mr. Gimenez. What is the current status of our littoral mobility in
the Pacific?
Admiral Franchetti. Combat Logistics Force (CLF) ships support
littoral mobility through employment of T-AOs (Fleet Replenishment
Oilers), T-AOE (Fast Combat Support) and T-AKE (Dry Cargo/Ammunition)
class ships that refuel, resupply, and rearm carrier strike groups and
expeditionary strike groups.
Navy is developing the Light Replenishment Oiler (TAOL), which will
strengthen Navy's ability to conduct power projection and sea control
by augmenting the current combat logistics force with smaller, intra-
theater ships that enhance the Navy's ability to conduct distributed
Maritime Operations (DMO), Littoral Operations in Contested
Environments (LOCE), and Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations (EABO).
TAOL will provide fuel, ammunition, and supplies to dispersed surface
action groups and will support expeditionary advanced base
requirements.
TAOL will transfer fuel, ammunition, and supplies at-sea to Medium
Landing Ship (LSM), which will further transfer this material to
expeditionary forces ashore via its beaching and pier side offload
capabilities.
Mr. Gimenez. Given known amphibious warship maintenance issues, are
(4), forward-deployed amphibious warships in Japan adequate to support
a three-ship amphibious ready group for the 31st Marine Expeditionary
Unit?
Admiral Franchetti. Yes. To meet the high readiness requirements of
the Forward Deployed Naval Force-Japan, four amphibious ships allows
for one ship to be in an extended maintenance period, while still
capable of supporting the three ship requirement.
Mr. Gimenez. General Smith, last year I traveled with my colleagues
to meet with our Marines and Sailors throughout the Indo Pacific, I saw
firsthand the malign acts of the Chinese Community Party in throughout
the region. I am fully supportive of the Force Design and modernization
efforts of the service, enabling the Marines to be that Stand in Force
we need to deter the CCP.
However, I am deeply concerned with the state of the Marines
littoral mobility as the Landing Ship Medium (LSM), has received for
the first time ever, funding in their year's budget request. Can you
please explain why the LSM is so important to the Marine Corps? What
does the Marine Corps plan on using as a bridging solution in the
Pacific until the LSM is operational?
General Smith. The Medium Landing Ship (LSM) is planned to fill the
capability gap that exists in the littoral environment between the
Navy's large, globally deployable, high endurance, multipurpose
Amphibious Warfare Ships (AWS) and smaller amphibious warfare type
craft that enable ship to shore employment.
The LSM's role is to provide the primary means of theater mobility-
littoral maneuver and sustainment for Marine elements of the Stand-in
Force (SIF). Marine SIF are task-organized, mobile and low-signature
formations designed to maneuver across all domains. They provide the
Joint Force the ability to sense and understand the battlefield, enable
combined kill webs, and apply all-domain combined arms. Marine SIF
formations primarily operate in the littoral environment that currently
has a critical gap in which the Navy and Marine Corps do not maintain a
platform that is suitable to maneuver and sustain forces operating
ashore.
The LSM will fill this void and be a vital platform for the SIF to
deploy personnel and equipment to maintain forward presence by
campaigning, responding to crisis, and enabling Joint Force power
projection during conflict. The Marine Corps requirement for LSMs is
35. In FY25, there are 8 LSMs planned within the FYDP, with a
procurement profile of 1-1-2-2-2 (one ship each in FY25 and FY26; and
two ships each in FY27, FY28, and FY29). The Marine Corps supports PB25
that initiates procurement of the first LSM in FY25 and eight total
over the FYDP, maintaining a procurement schedule of 1/1/2/2/2.
Maintaining the current procurement profile is critical for delivering
the late to need platform necessary to fill the void in current
littoral mobility.
Due to the urgency of this void, the Navy and Marine Corps have
developed a Littoral Maneuver Bridging Solution (LMBS) as a phased
approach to provide some limited operational mobility and tactical
maneuver capacity for elements of the SIF until LSM are available to
support one Marine Regiment in the early 2030s. The purpose of LMBS is
to provide forward capacity now in direct support to Stand-in Force
task organized units of action with limited intra-theater mobility,
tactical maneuver, and sustainment.
This effort is not to negate the late-to-need of the LSM; this
effort is to leverage what exists already, even if limited, and
experiment with chartered vessels to develop procedures for SIF
formations and future LSM employment as well as inform US Navy on
lessons learned from experimentation. The approved LMBS is four
expeditionary fast transports (T-EPF) and two landing craft utility
(LCU) and experimentation craft such as the four Marine Corps-funded
charters and the two planned Ancillary Surface Craft (ASC).
T-EPF will be used in support of intra-theater operational
mobility, and pierto-pier support of units conducting Expeditionary
Advanced Base Operations (EABO) in an archipelagic environment.
LCU will be used in exercises for tactical maneuver of smaller
units and sustainment.
Experimental chartered vessels will be used to support 21st century
beaching operations in support of exercises and experimentation, adding
needed littoral mobility capacity in the Indo-Pacific region. These
chartered vessels will also assist in the refinement of tactics,
techniques, and procedures (TTPs) in support of EABO. The TTP
development with these chartered vessels serving as surrogates for the
Medium Landing Ship (LSM) is needed now as the LSM program continues
along the procurement path and remains late-to-need.
ASC will be used for experimentation to provide enhanced maneuver,
littoral mobility, and sustainment to/from expeditionary advance bases
(EABs) and potentially Advanced Naval Bases (ANBs) within the
archipelagos. The capacity and capability of LMBS does not match or
fulfill the requirements and capability of the LSM program once all
vessels are delivered.
______
RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. PANETTA
Mr. Panetta. Secretary Del Toro, I appreciate your partnership
pushing forward the new Naval Innovation Center (NIC) at the Naval
Postgraduate School in my district in Monterey, CA as part of your
initiative to propel innovation by transforming how the DoD leverages
the private sector and other DoD hubs.
In your posture statement, you framed the NIC as "empowering our
next generation of warfighters by leveraging the talent at NPS to
inform future operational concepts and advanced technology
development."
Our adversaries understand that one of our greatest challenges is
our inability to invest in capabilities today so that we can rapidly
deploy them in tomorrow's battle.
You and I discussed how early investments in innovative technology
enabled successful operations in the Red Sea, while on the flip side,
Ukraine demonstrates the DoD's lack of flexibility to procure and
deploy new technology during crisis operations.
I want to be clear: our inability to bring innovative solutions
quickly is not just a threat to our national security, but makes the
U.S. a liability to our partner forces.
This is why we need a hub like the NIC that leverages private
sector investments and the unique experiences of our service members to
circumvent slow and outdated processes and bring solutions for both
long-term strategic planning, and immediate tactical-level challenges.
Having the NIC in Monterey surrounded by over a dozen Navy, Army,
and Coast Guard installations, and just down the way from Silicon
Valley, will bring together several components of the DoD, industries
that span the U.S., and some of our nation's most talented
servicemembers to experiment and collaborate on cutting-edge
technologies for strategic competition and irregular warfare.
Secretary Del Toro, thank you for securing the planning and design
funds for FY25 and FY26, prioritizing the completion of the 1391 form,
and accelerating the environmental assessment review.
My questions are: 1. Can you elaborate for the Committee on why we
need the Naval Innovation Center and how it will leverage DoD and
defense industries across the nation?
2. Can you confirm your MILCON timeline as FY26 and FY27 for the
committee? 3. What support do you need from Congress to see through the
MILCON request?
Secretary Del Toro. The Naval Postgraduate School (NPS) ensures the
technological leadership of our future force. By combining student
operational experience and graduate education with an applied research
curriculum and faculty expertise, NPS accelerates the adoption of naval
capabilities by educating the next generation of naval leaders needed
to employ them.
The Naval Innovation Center (NIC) at the NPS will develop a cadre
of warrior-scholars deeply versed in the technologies driving
revolutionary changes in modern warfighting. By fostering academic
collaboration with traditional and non-traditional partners within DoD
and industry, the NIC will serve as a premier military education
facility for Navy and Marine Corps that will enhance the education of
our postgraduate students through relevant, experiential, hands-on
applied research with cutting-edge technologies.
______
RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. ALFORD
Mr. Alford. Secretary Del Toro & ADM Franchetti, The committee
included a provision in the FY24 NDAA requiring the Navy to provide a
report on the industrialization efforts and investments it is making
into the Navy's next generation Nickel Zinc submarine battery. It is
the view of this committee and as testified by Navy leadership that the
submarine industrial base is only as strong as its weakest link, and
that we need to make investments at all supplier tiers in the submarine
production base to get readiness and production rates where they need
to be.
The recent supplemental appropriations request that was approved
asked for approximately $3 billion dollars for investments in the
submarine industrial base. And I want to commend the Navy for making it
smart investments in Nickel Zinc battery technology that it has
recognized will improve operational performance, safety and drastically
reduce maintenance delays.
Out of the recently approved AUKUS SIB funds and in the FY 25 Navy
Budget request, can you please tell the committee what the investments
are specifically planned for Nickel Zinc submarine battery
manufacturability to ensure the VA Class submarines are delivered on
time?
Secretary Del Toro. The Navy is committed to investment in Nickel
Zinc battery technology. There is funding allocated in the FY24
supplemental appropriations and in the FY25 budget request associated
with scaling up of the Nickel Zinc battery manufacturing
infrastructure. These investments will secure domestic sources, provide
a viable alternative to current power sources and offer an
environmentally friendly and safer energy storage solution.
Mr. Alford. Secretary Del Toro & ADM Franchetti, The committee
included a provision in the FY24 NDAA requiring the Navy to provide a
report on the industrialization efforts and investments it is making
into the Navy's next generation Nickel Zinc submarine battery. It is
the view of this committee and as testified by Navy leadership that the
submarine industrial base is only as strong as its weakest link, and
that we need to make investments at all supplier tiers in the submarine
production base to get readiness and production rates where they need
to be.
The recent supplemental appropriations request that was approved
asked for approximately $3 billion dollars for investments in the
submarine industrial base. And I want to commend the Navy for making it
smart investments in Nickel Zinc battery technology that it has
recognized will improve operational performance, safety and drastically
reduce maintenance delays.
Out of the recently approved AUKUS SIB funds and in the FY 25 Navy
Budget request, can you please tell the committee what the investments
are specifically planned for Nickel Zinc submarine battery
manufacturability to ensure the VA Class submarines are delivered on
time?
Admiral Franchetti. The Navy is committed to investment in Nickel
Zinc battery technology. There is funding allocated in the FY24
supplemental appropriations and in the FY25 budget request associated
with scaling up of the Nickel Zinc battery manufacturing
infrastructure. These investments will secure domestic sources, provide
a viable alternative to current power sources and offer an
environmentally friendly and safer energy storage solution.
[all]