[Senate Hearing 118-]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



 
       DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024

                              ----------                              


                         WEDNESDAY, MAY 2, 2023

                                       U.S. Senate,
           Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The subcommittee met at 10:01 a.m. in room SD-192, Dirksen 
Senate Office Building, Hon. Jon Tester (chairman) presiding.
    Present: Senators Tester, Murray, Schatz, Shaheen, Murphy, 
Murkowski, Moran, Hoeven, Boozman, and Capito.


                         DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

                         Department of the Army

                        Office of the Secretary

STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTINE WORMUTH, SECRETARY


                opening statement of senator jon tester


    Senator Tester. I call the subcommittee to order.
    I want to thank Secretary Wormuth and General McConville 
for being here. Welcome back to both of you. We appreciate your 
leadership of our Nation's Army and look forward to discussing 
the Army's budget priorities for fiscal year 2024.
    Before we begin, I'd like to express my condolences to the 
entire Army family following last week's tragic death of three 
soldiers in a helicopter accident in Alaska and that comes on 
the heels of the recent death of nine soldiers following a 
midair collision of two helicopters in Kentucky.
    Ensuring our brave men and women in uniform have access to 
the best training and equipment they need is the Number 1 
priority of this committee. I will want to hear more from you 
about your order for Army aviation units to complete a 24-hour 
safety stand-down and any corrective actions that you plan to 
take.
    The fiscal year 2024 budget request for the Department of 
Army is a $185.5 billion, which is $300 million below the 
amount enacted in fiscal year 2023 and nearly $11 billion more 
than enacted in fiscal year 2022.
    So let me repeat that. $185.5 is $300 million below last 
year's but $11 billion more than the year before that.
    Worldwide challenges and threats are constantly evolving. 
The Army's response to increasingly complex battlefield of the 
future is to transform the Army into the Army of 2030. This 
transformation includes investments of people, the 
reorganization of forces, the development of new equipment, and 
adoption of new concepts to defeat our adversaries.
    We can best help the Army on its path to transform to the 
Army of 2030 through the timely enactment of a defense 
appropriations bill for fiscal year 2024. On-time 
appropriations provide the resource predictability that enables 
the Army to execute training and operate plans effectively and 
efficiently for the entire fiscal year.
    Let me put it this way. In order for the Army to be all it 
can be, we, Congress, must do our jobs.
    I look forward to working with Senators Murray and Collins, 
the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Full Committee, for 
putting us in a position for success in getting the budget 
passed on time.
    The Army's biggest military advantage is its people but 
these are difficult times. We look forward to hearing more 
about how you're tackling recruiting challenges. Given the need 
to modernize in light of an ever-evolving threat, we also look 
forward to an update about the pace of modernization.
    You all have my full support to develop and field 
modernized capabilities, but I'm growing increasingly worried 
about repeated proposals by the Army to break production lines 
and destabilize industrial base when we need them most.
    Once again, I want to thank you for your service to the 
country. Senator Collins is not here, as you can see. She has a 
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee markup this 
morning. She may arrive later, but before we get to your 
opening statements, I have one quick statement. Then I want to 
turn it over to Senator Moran.
    We heard yesterday that the moment in time we default on 
our debt is coming up in 1 month, June 1. I talked about 
getting a budget out on time. I do not know what the people in 
this Senate, House are thinking. The truth is, is the deficit 
needs to be dealt with in a common sense way. What the House 
has done last week is not a common sense way and it makes us a 
weaker country.
    If we continue down this line, I'm very concerned about 
funding for the military, funding for Homeland Security, 
funding for every agency that we have within the government, 
and so hopefully, hopefully common sense will prevail here and 
we'll be able to continue on the path of getting a budget out, 
a defense budget in this case, by the end of September so that 
you guys have the certainties, not to waste a lot of taxpayer 
dollars, and the military industrial base has the certainty to 
know what we need and are able to deliver it on time.
    With that, I'll turn it over to Senator Moran.


                    statement of senator jerry moran


    Senator Moran. Chairman Tester, thank you.
    I would add my support for all of our efforts in this 
committee to make certain that we get our appropriations 
process completed and done on time and that we avoid a 
continuing resolution that would be very damaging to lots of 
aspects of government but particularly to our national 
security.
    As I begin my opening statement, I'd like to take a second 
to recognize the three Army aviators who lost their lives in a 
training accident over the weekend in Alaska. Another solemn 
reminder of the sacrifices servicemembers and their families 
make every day, whether deployed or at home.
    Thank you both for your service to our Nation and for being 
here today to discuss the United States Army's budget request 
for fiscal year 2024.
    General McConville, it's my understanding that this will be 
your last posture hearing. While that saddens me, it may be a 
pleasurable thought for you. This is your last posture hearing 
as Chief of Staff for the Army. I'd like to especially thank 
you for your decades of service in uniform to the defense of 
our Nation.
    I'm grateful for the relationship, the friendship that 
we've had, the conversations that you're willing to engage with 
me, and I'm especially grateful for your visits to Fort Riley 
and Fort Leavenworth last summer.
    Kansans take a lot of pride in the Army's presence in our 
State and in these installations' role in the defense of our 
Nation. Kansas communities are engaged and supportive of the 
soldiers and their families who call these posts home.
    Secretary Wormuth, as we discussed recently, in fact as 
recently as 5 minutes ago, I look forward to hosting you in 
Kansas in the near future to showcase the capabilities of 
Kansas military posts and the support of our Army's soldiers.
    The United States is in the midst of one of the most 
challenging national security situations of my lifetime and the 
Army is critical to the support of the security of our Nation. 
The Army is critical to the future of our country.
    This Administration's Army's budget request for fiscal year 
2024 does not adequately address these concerns. Assuming the 
best inflation estimates, the Army's fiscal year 2024 request 
represents a real growth rate of a negative, a negative 2.4 
percent.
    As Co-Chair of the Senate Army Caucus and a Member of this 
subcommittee, it is my priority that the Army have the 
resources necessary to fill the national security obligations.
    We continue to hear of the ongoing recruiting crisis within 
the Army. The force will look different from just 2 years ago, 
roughly 35,000 below its fiscal year 2022 authorized end 
strength of 485,000 soldiers.
    Congress should be informed of all the alternatives as the 
Army considers options to manage this significant reduction. 
Let's work with you, let's work together to find satisfactory 
solutions and help the Army in its recruitment efforts. We need 
to overcome this deficit of soldiers.
    No one, I think it's true in this room, wants to see the 
Army return to a tiered readiness model. I believe the 
retention of Army force structure is critical. While force 
structure reductions may be a quick fix solution, it will set 
the Army back at a time when the need for a ready Army is as 
essential as ever.
    Army senior leadership should keep Congress aware of any 
changes under consideration. I want to be your ally, not your 
critic. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has highlighted 
deficiencies in the U.S. industrial base, particularly as its 
ability to produce an adequate munitions stock and supply.
    American and Kansan workers stand ready to support the U.S. 
warfighter. I support the Army's recent investment into the 
munitions industrial base. I recently had a chance to visit the 
former Kansas Army Ammunition Plant, which will have a vital 
role now re-engaging and supporting the increased munitions 
production needs.
    I also want to applaud the Army's recent selection of the 
V-280 to be the Army's future long-range assault aircraft. This 
aircraft provides the needed speed and distance to support the 
Army 2030.
    I will continue to use my position on this committee to 
help support the modernization of the Army aviation fleet to 
keep pace with our challenges.
    The Army is the backbone of the Joint Force. If the United 
States is in conflict, our Army answers the call. While air and 
Marine superiority are essential, this is only possible with 
the Army's presence.
    The U.S. ability to project power, to hold critical ground 
relies upon the Army's ability to compete in the Pacific 
Theater.
    I highlight just at least from my own perspective that our 
country faces real and serious challenges. We need to do the 
things necessary to make sure we counter those circumstances. 
The Army has a significant role. This Congress has a 
significant role in supporting that effort.
    I look forward to your testimony and your responses to the 
questions.
    Thank you both.
    Senator Tester. Thank you, Senator Moran.
    We'll start with you, Secretary Wormuth. You have the 
floor.


              summary statement of hon. christine wormuth


    Secretary Wormuth. Thank you.
    Good morning, Chairman Tester, Senator Moran, and 
Distinguished Members of the Committee.
    Thank you for your ongoing support as we continue to build 
the Army of 2030 and thank you in particular for your 
condolences for our Army aviators. It has been a difficult 
several weeks for our aviation community and as soon as we got 
the word about the incident in Alaska, I asked the Chief to 
look into making sure that we were going to do a stand-down to 
make sure that we understand exactly what's going on here and 
that we can make sure that our aviators share lessons learned 
from these recent incidents.
    We're both very pleased to appear before you today. I want 
to thank General McConville for his decades of service and 
leadership in the Army. This is indeed his last hearing and it 
has been a pleasure to do three cycles of budget hearings with 
you, Chief. So congratulations.
    We've accomplished a lot in the last year but we still have 
a lot of work ahead of us. We remain focused on our three 
priorities: people, modernization, and readiness. The fiscal 
year 2024 budget enables us to support the National Defense 
Strategy, provide ready forces to our combatant commanders, and 
take care of our people.
    By investing over $39 billion in procurement and RDT&E 
(research, development, test, and evaluation), we are 
maintaining our momentum on our modernization programs and are 
largely on track to bring 24 systems across the finish line in 
2023.
    This is a big year for long-range precision fires. 
Prototypes of the precision strike missile, the mid-range 
capability, and the long-range hypersonic weapon will be in the 
hands of soldiers in this fiscal year.
    It's also a big year for next generation combat vehicles. 
Mobile protected firepower is in production and the AMPV 
(Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle) is also being fielded, and it's 
a big year for our Integrated Air and Missile Defense Programs 
and the Future Vertical Lift Program, as well.
    As we shift from two decades of counterinsurgency and 
counterterrorism operations to large-scale combat operations, 
we're also transforming our force structure. We are going to 
need to adapt our force structure to make room for things like 
the multi-domain task forces as well as other new units, like 
the indirect fire protection capability and our M-SHORAD 
battalions.
    We are a ready Army and we continue to emphasize readiness 
in everything we do. We're funding 22 combat training center 
rotations. We have a robust exercise program, and we're 
implementing our new readiness model which helps us balance 
modernization, training, and ongoing missions.
    We're also investing in preposition stocks which have 
served us very well in Europe and will continue to serve us 
well in other theaters.
    To assist Ukraine in fighting Russia, the Army has provided 
over $20 billion in lethal assistance, including a wide range 
of munitions, radars, and combat vehicles, just to name a few 
items.
    One of the most important lessons we've learned from the 
situation in Ukraine is the need for a more robust defense 
industrial base. So in our budget this year, we have $1.5 
billion to invest in arsenals, depots, and ammo plants.
    We're also working very closely with our Defense partners 
and industry to increase munitions production so that we can 
continue to help the Ukrainians but also very importantly to 
replenish our own stocks.
    Even as our soldiers provide lethal assistance and train 
the Ukrainian Armed Forces, we haven't taken our eye off of the 
pacing challenge of China. INDOPACOM (Indo-Pacific Command) may 
be a theater named after two oceans, but the Army does have an 
important role to play there.
    The best way to avoid fighting a war is to show that you 
could win any war you might have to fight. So the Army is 
contributing to strengthening the deterrence in INDOPACOM every 
day as we campaign in the region through our exercises and 
partnerships and if deterrence fails, the Army will be a key 
player on the Joint Force Team if there's a conflict.
    As important as it is to build new weapon systems and 
maintain our readiness, people are the strength of our Army. 
This budget includes a 5.2 percent pay raise and funds 
important quality of life improvements, like family housing, 
childcare initiatives, and new and renovated barracks.
    We also, of course, want to build cohesive teams of 
soldiers that are trained, disciplined, and fit. So the Army is 
committed to positive command climates across the force where 
our soldiers can be all they can be.
    We're also continuing to strive to prevent suicide in our 
ranks. Suicide is a national challenge, of course, but we have 
to do everything we can to reduce suicide in the Army.
    So we're pursuing a range of initiatives to help our 
soldiers be more resilience. One of the most important things 
we can do is make sure that we have engaged leaders at every 
level who know their soldiers and make sure that their soldiers 
are connected to their leaders, to their buddies, and to their 
families.
    Our Army is the greatest Army in the world but to keep it 
that way, we have to solve our recruiting challenge. The 
difficult recruiting landscape we face didn't happen in a year 
and it's going to take us more than a year to turn this around. 
We are laser focused on this challenge and we are not going to 
lower our standards to solve the problem.
    We are generating positive momentum from initiatives, like 
our Future Soldier Prep Course, our Soldier Referral Program, 
and our new advertising campaign Be All You Can Be.
    Our efforts are geared towards one thing: reintroducing the 
Army to the American public and inspiring a renewed call to 
service. We very much need your help to be successful in that 
effort.
    I'm proud of everything our soldiers do to protect our 
country and look forward to your questions this morning.
    Senator Tester. Thank you, Madam Secretary.
    Next up we have General McConville.
STATEMENT OF GENERAL JAMES C. McCONVILLE, CHIEF OF 
            STAFF OF THE ARMY
    General McConville. Secretary, thank you for your 
leadership.
    Chairman Tester, Senator Moran, and Distinguished Members 
of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to be here 
today and for your continued support. We appreciate your 
condolences and certainly, our condolences go out to the 
families of our fallen aviators in Alaska.
    The United States Army exists for one purpose, that is, 
protect the Nation by being ready to fight and win our Nation's 
wars as a Member of the Joint Force. To do this, the Army has 
set three clear priorities: people, readiness, and 
modernization or, in other words, future readiness.
    We have remained aggressively committed to these priorities 
while answering the Nation's call during every crisis and every 
challenge.
    This year the Army continues to undergo its greatest 
transformation in almost 50 years and we are delivering on 
modernization because we have been consistent and we have been 
persistent on our modernization priorities.
    Last year we officially updated our capstone warfighting 
doctrine to Multi-Domain Operations, which incorporates 
emerging lessons from Ukraine. We continue to stand up new 
organizations to support our new doctrine.
    Last June we reactivated the historic 11th Airborne 
Division in Alaska. In September, we stood up the third of our 
five multi-domain task forces. As the Secretary noted, we are 
on track to field 24 signature weapon systems in fiscal year 
2023.
    But at the end of the day, we must get the right people in 
the right place in order for any of these initiatives to be 
successful. This is why people remain the Army's Number 1 
priority.
    We want every young person and every parent to know that 
service in the Army is a pathway to success both in and out of 
uniform. Whether you serve for 4 years or you serve for over 40 
years, the Army offers endless possibilities. We are not only a 
profession of arms but we are a profession of professions. You 
can be whatever you want to be in the United States Army. In 
fact, you can be all you can be.
    I'm often asked how people can help us and my answer is 
inspire young men and women to serve because when we get the 
call, we go with the Army we have. The Army we have is the 
world's greatest fighting force because we serve with the 
world's greatest soldiers. With your continued support, we're 
going to keep it that way.
    Thank you and I look forward to your questions.
    [The statement follows:]
            Prepared Statement of Christine E. Wormuth and 
                      General James C. McConville
                        enduring army priorities
    For nearly 248 years, the United States Army has dedicated itself 
to fighting and winning the Nation's wars. As old threats evolve and 
new ones emerge, the Army is making decisions and prioritizing 
investments that not only contribute to current readiness but will also 
pay dividends on the battlefields of 2030 and beyond. That is why we 
are especially grateful to Congress for providing the funding necessary 
to produce highly trained and lethal forces ready to meet an array of 
challenges at home and abroad. Our ability to maintain continuity 
through crisis is a testament to our solemn commitment to the Army's 
three enduring priorities: people, readiness, and modernization. The 
Army's Budget Request for Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 of $185.5 billion 
supports these priorities and will enable us to deliver the Army of 
2030 in support of the National Defense Strategy.
                         ready to fight and win
    America's Army exists to protect the Nation by fighting and winning 
our wars as a member of the Joint Force. There is nothing more 
reassuring, and no greater deterrent, than American soldiers on the 
ground, standing shoulder-to-shoulder with our Allies and partners.
    Linchpin of the Joint Force in the Indo-Pacific. From Washington 
and Alaska, to Hawai`i and Guam, to Japan and South Korea, there are 
currently 71,000 soldiers serving in the Indo-Pacific theater. The 
Indo-Pacific is not just an air and maritime theater, but a joint 
theater with joint problems that require joint solutions. The Army is 
the linchpin Service, enabling and sustaining our joint and Allied 
partners. Our fundamental goal is to deter conflict in the region. 
Thus, the best way to avoid fighting a war is to make it very clear 
that the Joint Force, in concert with our Allies and partners, can and 
will win such a war. To that strategic end, the Army contributes to 
deterrence by campaigning, which plays three important functions in the 
Indo-Pacific: complicating Chinese decisionmaking; enhancing U.S. 
access to the region; and placing combat-credible and interoperable 
land forces forward to create interior lines for the Joint Force.
    This year is going to be one of historic modernization for our 
force posture in the Indo-Pacific. We are working closely with our 
regional Allies and partners to secure greater operational access and 
basing arrangements in strategic locations to enable adversary-focused 
training and exercises. In terms of logistics, the 8th Theater 
Sustainment Command in Hawai`i will oversee the delivery of supplies, 
fuel, munitions, and activity sets for U.S. Army Pacific's (USARPAC) 
joint and multinational training and exercises. Strengthening our 
ability to operate across the theater requires not only logistics at 
scale, but also the resiliency to operate in contested environments.
    It has been a consequential year for the Army in the Indo-Pacific. 
USARPAC completed its inaugural iteration of Operation Pathways, 
representing the Theater Army's new posture paradigm to build and 
thicken Joint Force interior lines. This gives USARPAC the operational 
endurance to see, sense, and understand regional threats; sustain, 
protect, and command and control (C2) large-scale operations; and 
conduct maneuver and fires. USARPAC demonstrated those capabilities by 
offloading APS afloat in support of exercise Salaknib in the 
Philippines. USARPAC, alongside our Indonesian partners, expanded 
exercise Super Garuda Shield from a modest bilateral venture to a major 
regional undertaking with 14 partner nations and 4,000 combined forces. 
Next, we established the Joint Pacific Multinational Readiness Center, 
bringing the first combat training center to the Indo-Pacific with 
inaugural rotations at our Hawai`i and Alaska campuses, along with an 
exportable capability we employed in Indonesia.
    Capitalizing on that momentum, the 5th Security Forces Assistance 
Brigade (SFAB) persistently trained and advised 12 of our Allies and 
partners across the region. The Army also activated the 11th Airborne 
Division in Alaska--a unit with an historic Indo-Pacific lineage that 
provides our soldiers with a clear purpose, identity, and mission. As 
part of our Arctic Strategy, the 11th Airborne Division is being 
tailored as a rapidly deployable operational command headquarters. 
Finally, USARPAC initiated the Unified Pacific Wargame Series, offering 
key insights on Army capabilities, posture, and contested logistics for 
a protracted conflict in the Indo-Pacific. In October 2022, America's 
First Corps certified as a Joint Task Force as part of the Mission 
Command Training Program Warfighter Series, with participants from 
Washington, Hawai`i, Colorado, and Kansas. I Corps' experimentation 
with distributed C2 will enable commanders to present multiple dilemmas 
to a potential adversary. We also activated the third of five planned 
Multi-Domain Task Forces (MDTF), task-organized to provide anti-access, 
area-denial capabilities through long-range precision fires and 
effects. The 3rd MDTF at Fort Shafter, Hawai`i joins the 1st MDTF at 
Joint Base Lewis McChord, Washington as the second MDTF supporting U.S. 
Indo-Pacific Command.
    Tip of the Joint Spear in Europe. Since Russia's unjust and 
unprovoked invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the U.S. Army's 
tactical readiness and strategic readiness have been on full display 
across continental Europe. The 43,000 American soldiers in Europe 
underscore our ongoing commitment to the region, further bolstered by 
President Biden's force posture announcement at the NATO Summit last 
June. In Germany, we are forward stationing an air defense artillery 
brigade headquarters, a short-range air defense battalion, a combat 
sustainment support battalion headquarters, and an engineer brigade 
headquarters. In Italy, we are forward stationing a short-range air 
defense battery. In Poland, the Army has forward-stationed the V Corps 
Headquarters Forward Command Post--the first permanent U.S. forces on 
NATO's eastern flank. We are maintaining a substantial rotational force 
in Poland, including an Armored Brigade Combat Team (ABCT), combat 
aviation brigade, and a division headquarters. In Romania, we have 
headquartered a rotational brigade combat team, supporting an 
additional maneuver force on the eastern flank. In the Baltics, we have 
enhanced our rotational deployments--which include armored, aviation, 
air defense, and special operations forces--to reinforce Baltic 
security, enhance interoperability, and demonstrate the flexibility and 
combat readiness of U.S. forces.
    We have been able to demonstrate our steadfast support to NATO 
thanks to years of investments in setting the European theater, where 
we continue to invest in and modernize a robust set of Army 
Prepositioned Stocks (APS). Importantly, we are moving some of our APS 
into Poland this year to reinforce NATO's eastern flank. We are also 
leveraging NATO Common Funding to build a new equipment complex in 
Poland to house, maintain, and issue an ABCT equipment set. The XVIII 
Airborne Corps--America's Strategic Response Force--similarly 
highlighted the Army's investments in rapid power-projection 
capabilities. The XVIII Airborne Corps' nine-month deployment to 
Wiesbaden, Germany built upon years of cooperation with the Ukrainian 
military, providing the training and support required to aid the heroic 
defense of their homeland. These investments in strategic readiness 
would not have been possible without congressional foresight and 
support. This is especially true for the European Deterrence Initiative 
(EDI). Total EDI funding for the Army in FY 2023 is $2.8 billion to 
support 9,800 rotational Army forces in Europe, and enhance our forward 
posture, training, and interoperability.
    The United States remains committed to supporting Ukraine's near-
term combat needs and its long-term defense requirements against future 
Russian aggression. The Department of Defense (DoD) has established 
Security Assistance Group--Ukraine (SAG-U), commanded by an Army three-
star general under U.S. European Command, in Wiesbaden, Germany. SAG-U 
is purpose-built to execute the full range of our security assistance 
activities in a more efficient and sustainable manner. SAG-U will reach 
full operational capability in Q3 FY 2023. The lessons we observe in 
Ukraine underscore our Army's greatest strengths: combined arms 
maneuver at scale; the importance of empowered leadership through 
mission command; and the immeasurable value of a professionalized Non-
Commissioned Officer corps.
    The Army continues to supply critical weapon systems, equipment, 
and munitions to Ukraine, including Stinger anti-aircraft systems, 
Javelin anti-armor systems, 155mm artillery rounds, and other items. We 
have provided billions of dollars of Army materiel to Ukraine through 
the Presidential Drawdown Authority. We are also working to execute 
billions in procurements for Ukraine through the Ukraine Security 
Assistance Initiative.
    The Army will initiate multi-year procurement contracts for 
artillery rounds and artillery charges in FY 2023. For FY 2024, the 
Army will work with Congress to explore additional multi-year 
procurement contract opportunities for critical munitions. In addition 
to these potential multi-year contract efforts, the request includes 
additional funding for a range of munitions, including Javelin and 
Stinger missiles, and artillery, combat-vehicle, and small-arms 
ammunition.
    We were able to fill critical gaps in Ukraine's defense thanks to 
our comprehensive modernization initiatives, but we must be able to 
replenish these stocks. Russia's war in Ukraine is further highlighting 
lessons from the pandemic that military readiness depends upon a robust 
and modern Organic and Defense Industrial Base. The Army is working 
closely with the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and our 
industry partners to rapidly increase production capacity and transform 
our processes from vulnerable supply chains to a more resilient supply 
fabric.
    Readiness is our most effective form of deterrence. The best way to 
win without fighting is by demonstrating our ability to win decisively 
by fighting. Forward deployed combat capability, prepositioned stocks, 
and a resilient sustainment infrastructure will be key to future 
deterrence. One of the many ways we showcase our combat-credible forces 
in Europe is through DEFENDER-Europe, the Army's annual joint and 
multinational exercise series. Last year, concurrent with our support 
to Ukraine, and alongside our NATO Allies, DEFENDER-Europe 22 stretched 
across nine European countries, featuring 3,450 American troops and 
5,200 multinational service members from eleven Allied nations. 
DEFENDER-Europe 23 will include over 7,800 U.S. troops, training 
alongside 15,000 multinational forces from 26 Allied and partner 
nations. National Guard units from 10 U.S. states will also 
participate, marking the 30th anniversary of the National Guard State 
Partnership Program.
                      delivering the army of 2030
    The Army continues to progress through our greatest transformation 
in almost half a century. Fifty years ago, Army senior leaders closely 
observed the 1973 Arab-Israeli War and incorporated its lessons into 
the emerging AirLand Battle doctrine, the creation of new Army 
organizations, and the development of the ``Big 5'' weapons systems. 
Today, we are not only supporting Ukraine but paying close attention to 
the characteristics of modern warfare as they unfold, and incorporating 
those lessons into new doctrine, organizations, training, and materiel. 
Last October, the Army officially adopted Multi-Domain Operations (MDO) 
as our official capstone doctrine, the most significant shift in 
warfighting doctrine since AirLand Battle. MDO acknowledges that the 
Army of 2030 will be contested in every domain--air, land, sea, space, 
and cyberspace. Our soldiers must be ready to fight and win in multiple 
domains simultaneously to get from fort to foxhole in a contested 
environment.
    The Army has been consistent and persistent in pursuing our 
modernization initiatives as we work to deliver the Army of 2030 and 
design the Army of 2040. We remain aggressively committed to our six 
modernization portfolios--long-range precision fires, next generation 
combat vehicle, future vertical lift, the network, air and missile 
defense, and solider lethality--and are on track to deliver 24 new 
systems into the hands of soldiers by the end of FY 2023. That includes 
eight fielded systems, six systems issued for testing, and ten systems 
undergoing soldier touchpoints. Our annual Army Futures Command-hosted 
experiment, Project Convergence, continues to evolve and expand from 
the Army-centric inaugural event in 2020 to last fall's combined, joint 
series of experiments with the entire Joint Force, the United Kingdom, 
and Australia.
    To succeed on the future battlefield and continue to dominate the 
land domain, there are six operational imperatives the Army of 2030 
must do. First, we need to see and sense more, farther, and more 
persistently at every echelon than our enemies. That is why we are 
modernizing our aerial intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance 
capabilities, to include the Multi-Domain Sensing System, Terrestrial 
Layer System, and the Tactical Intelligence Targeting Access Node, or 
TITAN.
    Second, we have to concentrate highly lethal, low signature combat 
forces rapidly from dispersed locations to overwhelm adversaries at a 
time and place of our choosing. To do this, we are investing in a 
faster, more survivable armored fist. Upgraded tanks and Bradleys will 
be joined by Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicles, or AMPVs, which are 
already in production. The Mobile Protective Firepower System, which 
was just awarded for production, will provide greater protection to 
infantry forces without sacrificing speed or mobility.
    Third, we must win the fires fight by delivering precise, longer-
range fires as part of the Joint Force to strike deep targets and 
massing enemy forces. Since 2016, the Army has invested significantly 
in fire support systems, and we have made long-range precision fires a 
top modernization priority. We are working tirelessly to ensure that we 
have multiple options to service targets at ranges from 40 miles 
(Extended Range Cannon Artillery) to over 1,700 miles (Long-Range 
Hypersonic Weapon).
    Fourth, we need to protect our forces from air, missile, and drone 
attacks. We are continuing to field Maneuver Short-Range Air Defense, 
or M-SHORAD, to protect our maneuver forces against a wide range of air 
threats. The Army is also developing an enduring Indirect Fire 
Protection Capability, or IFPC, that will work together with the Army's 
Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command System to provide an 
unparalleled ability to identify, track, and defeat aerial threats. 
Current events also highlight the proliferation and significance of 
enemy Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS). To address this threat, we are 
investing in counter-UAS division sets that place fixed, semi-fixed, 
mobile, and portable counter-UAS capabilities in the hands of our 
maneuver forces.
    Fifth, we must rapidly and reliably communicate and share data not 
just with ourselves, but with our Sister Services, and Allies and 
partners. The Army has demonstrated how to rapidly combine targeting 
data from our joint teammates and pass that information to the correct 
Army fires element--reducing the targeting cycle to mere minutes. The 
Integrated Tactical Network architecture, in fielding now, enhances 
classified data transfer with both better network bandwidth efficiency 
and resilient relay links to ensure persistent connectivity for our 
warfighters.
    Finally, we must sustain the fight across contested terrain for 
both short, sharp operations as well as for protracted conflict. This 
will require not only standard equipment, like field kitchens, fuelers, 
and trucks, but also the niche, often overlooked capabilities like Army 
watercraft and Joint Logistics Over-the-Shore, or JLOTS. Sustainment 
must be at the forefront of our planning, preparation, and training--
not something that we can assume will always be readily available. Army 
logisticians are the best in the world, and they are up to the task.
          people are our greatest strength and first priority
    Recruiting Initiatives. We are experiencing the most challenging 
recruiting landscape in a generation. There is no one-size-fits-all 
solution. Nevertheless, we are committed to tackling these problems 
head on by recruiting a force that looks like the Nation it serves. All 
our recruiting initiatives will be informed by first principles: (1) we 
will not sacrifice quality for quantity; (2) we will not lower our 
standards; and (3) we will invest in America's young people so they can 
meet our standards. The Regular Army Accessions Mission for FY 2023 is 
65,500. While we are singularly focused on meeting this mission, we 
need help from community leaders, parents, educators, coaches, and 
influencers to inspire young people to serve.
    The Army is implementing several important changes to improve 
organizational understanding, recruiter management, regional awareness, 
marketing, and applicant eligibility. First, we established the Army 
Recruiting Task Force, under the direction of a two-star general, to 
examine the current state of the Army's recruiting enterprise and to 
make recommendations to Army senior leaders for action. Second, we are 
overhauling how the Army recruits by selecting recruiters differently, 
improving recruiter training, increasing recruiter resources, and 
creating new incentives for high-performing recruiters. For instance, 
the Army recently launched a ``Recruiting Scholars'' program to 
identify, incentivize, and send top-notch captains to graduate school 
after completing a recruiting-company command. There are 21 talented 
captains in the first cohort.
    Next, the Army designated 15 major cities as priority markets for 
FY 2023. With help from community partners, including Veterans Service 
Organizations, Military Support Organizations, and our Soldiers for 
Life, we are saturating these markets with activities and initiatives 
to maximize awareness regarding the benefits of Army service. Fourth, 
we established the Future Soldier Preparatory Course (FSPC) pilot 
program in July 2022 at Fort Jackson, South Carolina to support the 
accession of recruits who are inclined to serve but might need help 
improving their test scores or physical fitness. As of March 22, 2023, 
4,219 FSPC recruits have graduated and moved on to Basic Combat 
Training (BCT). This represents a 98 percent success rate. FSPC 
recruits improved their Armed Forces Qualification Test score by an 
average of 18.5 points. Similarly, 97.6 percent of FSPC recruits 
achieved the Army's accessions body composition standards. Most 
importantly, FSPC graduates are performing very well in BCT with just a 
4.8 percent attrition rate, as compared to the average BCT attrition 
rate of 6.1 percent in 2022.
    Be All You Can Be. On March 8, 2023, the Army officially 
reintroduced ``Be All You Can Be'' as our marketing slogan. ``Be All 
You Can Be'' featured prominently in Army advertisements and marketing 
materials from 1981 to 2001. After a two-decade hiatus, we are excited 
to introduce ``Be All You Can Be'' to a new generation of young people. 
The Army Enterprise Marketing Office hosted numerous in-person focus 
groups and tested ``Be All You Can Be'' against 18 other taglines, 
eventually surveying 20,000 people across five target audiences: 
prospects, soldiers, veterans, influencers, and engaged citizens. Our 
extensive market research revealed that the ``Be All You Can Be'' 
slogan, once popular with Generation X, resonates with Generation Z by 
signaling a sense of purpose, passion, possibility, community, and 
connection unique to the Army. With support from Congress, the Army 
will spend $116.7 million in FY 2023 to launch this rebranding campaign 
across multiple media platforms. Additionally, we believe that the ``Be 
All You Can Be'' narrative will help veterans and retirees tell their 
Army stories and inspire a new generation of young people toward 
military service.
    Quality of Life. Recruiting and retaining the next generation of 
the All-Volunteer Force requires sustained investment and quality-of-
life improvements in Army housing, barracks, child care, spouse 
employment, healthcare, and the exceptional family member program.
    High-quality housing and barracks are key to ensuring overall 
health and wellness, thereby contributing to readiness and critical for 
retaining Army soldiers and their families. First, the Army supports 
DoD's continuous assessment of Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) rates, 
ensuring military paychecks keep pace with market conditions across the 
country. Average BAH rates have increased 12.1 percent since 2022. 
Personnel in 291 of 300 military housing areas received a BAH rate 
increase. Second, privatized housing companies began a six-year, $3-
billion investment plan in 2020 to improve the Army's housing 
inventory, to include new builds and major or medium renovations 
through 2026. The Army has programmed $1.6 billion for FY 2024-2028 to 
improve the government-owned Army Family Housing inventory. Third, the 
Army historically invests an average of $1 billion per year in barracks 
for construction, restoration, and modernization across all three Army 
components. In FY 2024, the Army is requesting support for permanent-
party barracks in Fort Wainwright, Alaska; Joint Base Lewis McChord, 
Washington; Fort Bragg, North Carolina; and Natick Soldier Systems 
Center, Massachusetts. Importantly, Army senior leaders remain vigilant 
in their housing and barracks oversight responsibilities.
    With congressional support, the Army has expanded on- and off-post 
child-care options by increasing staff compensation and benefits, 
investing in facilities, growing family child care, and extending care 
hours. Entry level salaries are now $17.39 per hour. We are offering 
recruiting and retention bonuses for child-care staff and providing 
them with a 50 percent child-care discount for the first child and a 15 
percent multiple-child discount for additional children. In terms of 
off-post care options, we continue to provide Army Fee Assistance to 
approximately 10,000 children of the active and reserve component per 
month, all while exploring new initiatives and partnerships. We also 
increased the provider rate cap to $1,700 per month, thereby reducing 
out-of-pocket expenses for hard-working Army families. Since FY 2021, 
Congress has funded seven new Child Development Centers (CDCs) in 
Alaska, Hawai`i (2), Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, and Louisiana. The Army 
is planning to fund more CDCs in the out years.
    Army spouses--over 431,000 across all three components--play an 
important role in soldier and family readiness and soldier retention. 
Leveraging both Army and DoD programs, and partnerships with other 
Federal and non-governmental organizations, we remain committed to 
improving spouse employment and career opportunities. When spouses are 
satisfied with their careers, employment options, access to services, 
and overall quality-of-life, they are far more likely to support their 
soldier's continued service.
    There are 46,000 active-component soldiers--nine percent of the 
force--with family members enrolled in the Exceptional Family Member 
Program (EFMP), totaling 55,000 family members. We are committed to 
reforming the EFMP and to providing comprehensive and all-inclusive 
support to Army families with a family member with a qualifying 
condition. In August 2022, we launched the Enterprise EFMP system to 
improve enrollment, transparency, assignment coordination, and access 
to support. We have also created a centralized EFMP office within the 
Headquarters, Department of the Army to coordinate healthcare services, 
reassignment processes, and education support services. Taken together, 
these initiatives will help reduce the bureaucratic burden on Army 
families. Moreover, the Army continues its close partnership with the 
Defense Health Agency to ensure access to high-quality healthcare for 
our soldiers and their families.
    Reducing Harmful Behaviors. People are the Army's number one 
priority. We take care of our people by building cohesive teams that 
are highly trained, disciplined, and fit, that are ready to fight and 
win, and where each person is treated with dignity and respect. Leaders 
across the Total Army are steadfastly committed to reducing the harmful 
behaviors that break trust with our soldiers and the American people--
including sexual assault and harassment, acts of extremism, and racism, 
among others. To reduce harmful behaviors, we are shifting the paradigm 
from focusing on intervention and response to prioritizing integrated 
prevention activities. Integrated prevention activities address the 
conditions that lead to harm by reducing risk factors and increasing 
protective measures to preclude harmful behaviors. To that end, we are 
aggressively implementing the FY 2022 Independent Review Commission's 
recommendations to counter sexual assault and sexual harassment within 
our formations, to include realigning Sexual Assault Response 
Coordinators (SARCs) and Victim Advocates from the operational chain of 
command to the Lead SARC at each installation. This independent 
reporting structure will enable Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and 
Prevention, or SHARP, professionals to advocate for victims more 
effectively.
    The Army is committed to working with Congress and the OSD to 
effectively implement the military justice reforms directed by the FY 
2022 and FY 2023 National Defense Authorization Acts. In July 2022, the 
Army issued a General Order establishing the Office of the Special 
Trial Counsel (OSTC) as a field operating agency. The Senate confirmed 
our nominee for Lead Special Trial Counsel in November 2022 and set his 
subsequent promotion to brigadier general in January 2023. The Army 
expects the OSTC to reach full operational capability by December 27, 
2023, as required by law.
    Every single suicide is one tragedy too many. Exposure to harmful 
behaviors, such as sexual assault, harassment, or other acts of 
violence, may increase the risk of suicide. The Army is committed to 
supporting those exposed to harmful behaviors and doing everything we 
can to address this critical issue. Fortunately, we saw significant 
decreases in suicide across all Army components in 2022. The Army is 
leveraging a new public health approach to prevent and respond to 
suicide at the individual and community levels. We will publish a 
comprehensive suicide prevention regulation to define this new approach 
for the force by the end of Q3 FY 2023. Army leaders continue to employ 
the Health Readiness and Suicide Risk Reduction Tool across our 
formations. Last year, we introduced the ``Stories of Hope'' podcast to 
raise awareness, reduce stigmas, and increase help-seeking behaviors.
                  50 years of the all-volunteer force
    As we commemorate 50 years of the All-Volunteer Force, it has never 
been more important to recruit and retain the talented individuals who 
make our Army the world's greatest fighting force. We win through our 
people--our active duty, Guard, and Reserve soldiers; our families; 
Army civilians; and our veterans and retired Soldiers for Life. We need 
every American to know that the U.S. Army is an organization of endless 
possibilities that provides a pathway to success both in and out of 
uniform. Our message is clear: if you want to serve something greater 
than yourself, if you want to belong to the world's greatest team, if 
you want to BE ALL YOU CAN BE, then join us. With the limitless talent 
our Nation has to offer and continued support from Congress, we will 
remain ready to fight and win, against any adversary, anywhere in the 
world.

    Senator Tester. Thank you each for your testimony.
    Last week, as I said in my opening statement, the three 
soldiers were tragically killed when the helicopters collided 
during a training mission in Alaska, and as I also pointed out, 
this is on the heels of another fatal helicopter accident in 
Kentucky that cost nine lives on February 2. Two soldiers lost 
their lives in a helicopter accident also in a training mission 
this time in Alabama.
    So, General McConville, you issued a stand-down order to 
the Army Aviation Units last week and directed additional 
safety training.
    Would you please give us an update on what you will be 
reviewing specifically?
    General McConville. Thank you, Chairman, and, you know, 
last year for Army Aviation was the safest we've had in the 
history, but we're only as good as our last flight and as you 
mentioned, we've had two tragic flights in the last month and 
as a result, the Secretary and I directed a safety stand-down.
    That's an opportunity for all our aviation commanders and 
senior commanders to bring their aviators together to take a 
look at the procedures that they're using, to take a look at 
crew mix, to understand the type of training they're doing, and 
making sure that we have the right crews in place, that we're 
taking the proper steps, crawl, walk, run, to get after some of 
the maneuvers we're going after, and to realize that this is a 
very dangerous business.
    Unlike maybe operating a vehicle close to a curb, with 
aviation if you make a mistake or something happens it can be 
very catastrophic and we need to bring that safety philosophy 
we've had for the last couple of years back into the cockpits 
and make sure we're able to do that.
    Senator Tester. So assuming that the stand-down will result 
in some solutions to the problem, whether it's in safety or 
whether it's in crew training, how long do you think it'll take 
to implement anything that comes out of this stand-down?
    General McConville. Well, I think it's going to be over the 
next couple of days. So they'll bring it back and we're 
expecting immediate results.
    Senator Tester. All right. Secretary Wormuth, in addition 
to the lives that were lost, those accidents also cost--
aviation accidents since 2020 have cost the Army about $600 
million in equipment.
    Are you appropriately funding for some of the training the 
General just talked about for spares, for simulators?
    Secretary Wormuth. Yes, we have been fully funding our 
flying hours for the last two budgets that we've submitted, for 
example, and so, you know, we have put investments into making 
sure that we have sufficient resources for our simulators, for 
our flying hours for all of our pilots.
    You know, there are challenges, of course, in terms of 
looking at spare parts and maintenance on all of that. So I 
think one of the things that we need to look at is are our 
pilots actually getting enough flying hours but to do that, 
we've got to make sure that the aircraft are ready to fly and 
so there's sort of a lot of pieces that fit together in that, 
but we are definitely investing fully in that in my view.
    Senator Tester. Any of the money in this budget to be able 
to continue to invest fully in that?
    Secretary Wormuth. Yes.
    General McConville. Yes.
    Senator Tester. Thank you.
    A little over a year ago you informed this committee of the 
decision to reduce end strength from 485,000 to 476,000 in 
order to maintain what you talked about in your opening 
statement, a high quality Army.
    Now based on the latest recruiting data that number looks 
to be further reduced to about 452,000 which, by the way, we 
should have an exact number on that, but around 452,000 for 
this fiscal year, and we understand that that goal may not be 
reached.
    So where do things stand with Army recruitment? Are you 
seeing a positive connection between additional advertising and 
recruitment bonuses resulting in more men and women signing up 
for the Army?
    Secretary Wormuth. Chairman, we are seeing improvements in 
our recruiting situation. We are in a better position, for 
example, at this time last year than we were in the previous 
year.
    At the same time, the Chief and I set a very ambitious goal 
of 65,000 new recruits this year and we are not going to make 
that goal. We are doing everything we can to get as close to it 
as possible but we are going to fall short of that, and as I 
said in my opening statement, you know, we didn't get into this 
situation in a year and I think it's going to take us more than 
a year to increase recruiting and we are going to have to look 
at, as I also mentioned in my opening statement, that for our 
(audio glitch.)
    Senator Tester. This is not a good thing and it's not a 
good thing for a couple reasons.
    First of all, this is information that a new system should 
be able to do without a lot of screwing around and, quite 
frankly, it's not giving you the numbers to be able to track 
and have solid data on recruitment. You get soldiers that are 
booted off of Tricare because of a glitch in a damn program. 
That's a problem.
    How are you able to track needs without solid data?
    Secretary Wormuth. It took us 6 years to build IPPS-A and 
it brought together 40 different systems. So it was very 
complicated and that's why we had glitches, for example, like 
the soldiers with Tricare, but we have worked through that. We 
have a Tiger Team that is working all of the specific, you 
know, problem areas that have emerged as we've gone live with 
IPPS-A (Integrated Personnel and Pay System--Army).
    The challenge with our recruiting numbers, frankly, is more 
that our models don't incorporate some of these new initiatives 
that we've undertaken, like the Future Soldier Prep Course, but 
we know how important it is to this subcommittee to get that 
data and we will work with you to get it to you as soon as 
possible.
    Senator Tester. I appreciate that. I would just tell you 
that Senator Moran and I serve on the VA Committee as the 
Chairman and Ranking Member, too, and if I have one major main 
in my behind it's computer systems and it doesn't matter if 
it's military, it doesn't matter if it's VA, it doesn't matter 
if it's Montana State Tax System. There's always something 
wrong, and, I mean, it's just not something that can make the 
Army all it can be or the VA all it can be either.
    So with that, I'll turn it over to Senator Moran.
    Senator Moran. Chairman Tester, thank you for concluding 
that conversation by indicating that pain was the computer 
system. The way you started I wasn't certain where you were 
going to go.
    Let me start with really both of you. So if we're not going 
to meet our recruitment goals that means consequences in a 
practical way to how the Army operates.
    What can you tell me first as someone who's interested in 
the overall well-being of the Army what you are thinking, what 
are your plans that will alter the structure of our Army across 
the country and around the globe and then as a Senator from 
Kansas tell me what concerns, if any, I should have about what 
those changes mean to installations and the assignment of 
soldiers to places, to bases, to forts, to posts across the 
country?
    Is this a consequence that will have a modest impact across 
the board or a consequence in which you will be making 
decisions about who stays the same, who gains, and who loses?
    Secretary Wormuth. Thank you, Senator Moran. Let me try to 
answer that concisely.
    We do not want a hollow Army, as you indicated. You know, 
we do not want to have tiered readiness. So part of the hard 
work of the Army in the next couple of years is going to be 
bringing down that over-structure, you know, what we call the 
spaces, to be closer to the actual amount of spaces, soldiers 
that we have.
    We are--and, frankly, we have to undertake that 
transformation in any case because we have to make room for 
some of the new types of structure we need for the Army of 
2030.
    So what we're trying to do is basically spread out some of 
those changes really and so, for example, we did sort of what I 
would call a people night court where we basically went and 
looked at all the different types of soldiers in units and said 
do we need to have 60, you know, cooks or can we use 40 cooks? 
So we're doing that.
    We have looked at what we call unit priority and we've 
looked over the years at the units that we have used very 
heavily as opposed to those that we may have used much less 
frequently and those are areas where we can probably do some 
thinning out.
    So the reality is, you know, our end strength right now is 
about 455,000. So at most large installations around the 
country right now the number of actual soldiers is fewer than 
the authorizations that are there. So I think, you know, we'll 
be able to make many of these changes without it having large 
impacts to any of the major installations.
    But if we don't turn our recruiting situation around, I 
can't guarantee you that the Army won't have to make some more 
substantial potential force structure reductions because we've 
got to make sure that our units, for example, that are on the 
immediate response force are manned adequately so that they're 
ready to go.
    Senator Moran. Your planning and your conversations, have 
they gone to that point in which you are discussing about what 
significant changes might take place if recruiting doesn't turn 
around?
    Secretary Wormuth. We are looking at that right now, 
Senator, but we haven't come to any firm conclusions. I think, 
you know, we would very much obviously like to avoid making any 
large force structure changes because it can be hard sometimes 
to reverse that.
    Senator Moran. It can be very hard to reverse that. What 
kind of timeframe--when could this committee have a view as to 
what your thinking is in a more formal way?
    Secretary Wormuth. I think, Senator, we will probably be 
able to come to you in the next few months and talk with you 
about how all of that is looking for us.
    Senator Moran. And that would be before a decision is made?
    Secretary Wormuth. Well, we have a document called The 
ARSTRUC (Army Structure Memorandum) which essentially does look 
at finalizing the changes and I think we would want to come and 
talk to your staffs, for example, about how that's looking.
    Senator Moran. And when does the decision have to be made 
in order for this to really live up to the consequences of the 
less end strength?
    Secretary Wormuth. Well, the ARSTRUC looks 5 years out and 
we do one every year. You know, I think major--we won't have to 
make final decisions probably about any significant changes 
until 2025, but we need to start thinking about that because 
again we want to make sure that our brigades are adequately 
manned.
    Senator Moran. Madam Secretary, you understand why this is 
such a significant topic of conversation for the country, for 
this committee, for you.
    Secretary Wormuth. Of course.
    Senator Moran. I appreciate that.
    General McConville, anything you would want to add to that 
response?
    General McConville. I think, you know, one of the concerns 
why we really need to increase recruiting is because I think as 
we take a look at, you know, getting ready for the next fight 
that we see is we're moving from counterinsurgency, 
counterterrorism, irregular warfare. So those type systems that 
would be more valuable in large kill combat operations, like 
some of the systems that you have at Fort Riley and other 
places are going to be more important, but we're also 
developing long-range precision fires, air and missile defense, 
counter UAS (Unmanned Aircraft Systems) systems, and we're 
going to do this on pretty much a flat budget and flat end 
strength. So there will be some decisions eventually what that 
looks like.
    The concern we have right now is on end strength is, you 
know, it may not be a structure change, but if we can't fill 
the actual units, you know, they may be at 70 percent strength 
and so, you know, the structure still there but you don't have 
the soldiers filling those ranks and that's what we're 
concerned about.
    Senator Moran. Let us know how we can help recruit.Thank 
you.
    Senator Tester. Senator Schatz.
    Senator Schatz. Thank you, Chairman.
    Thank you both for being here. I want to start with the 
status of the lease negotiations with the State of Hawaii.
    In 1964 the United States military was awarded a 65-year 
lease for 23,000 acres of Hawaii State lands for $1. We are now 
coming up on the potential renewal of that lease and I think 
we're all in agreement that the people of the State of Hawaii 
are entitled to a fair deal on all leasing moving forward.
    Many of these leases do expire in 2029. That includes 
Pohakuloa Training Area, Kakaaho Training Area, Makua Valley, 
and I think where we are all landing is that promoting our 
national security and treating the citizens of the State of 
Hawaii with fairness and respect are not mutually exclusive. In 
fact, at this point they're completely intertwined.
    So, Secretary, could you just give me an update on the 
status of the negotiations?
    Secretary Wormuth. Certainly, Senator Schatz. As you know, 
we have two environmental impact statements that are underway 
right now that are relevant to looking at the lease agreements 
and those I believe will be completed at the end of this year 
and then the next step would be for, you know, the Army to be 
looking at what we would come forward with as a proposal for 
what the final agreement would look like and that record of 
decision won't come forward until 2025.
    So we have some time to be talking with--you know, when I 
was last in Hawaii I met with Governor Green, had a very 
productive discussion with him. I met with leaders from the 
Native Hawaiian community, and we are very much now trying to 
engage--you know, as the environmental impact statements work 
their way through the process, we are trying to engage with all 
of the different stakeholders in Hawaii to understand, to help 
us understand what the shape of an arrangement might look like.
    Senator Schatz. Thank you.
    General McConville, we all agree Hawaii is entitled to the 
same guarantee of homeland defense as every other State.
    Army's IBCS (Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle 
Command System) expands the line of sight for defensive 
launchers to better our odds of intercepting missile threats.
    Are there considerations for how the IBCS Program could 
apply to the defense of Hawaii?
    General McConville. Well, right now it just is a potential 
consideration. I'm not aware of anything right now that put 
IBCS, but as you said, it's a game-changing technology that 
allows us to integrate sensors and shooters for air missile 
defense and that does give us that capability and if we lay out 
that requirement, then we can take a look at it.
    Senator Schatz. There's a lot of talk about Guam and the 
defense of Guam. I completely support that. I want to just 
remind everybody that Hawaii is the homeland. Hawaii is not an 
insular area. It is the 50th State. It is the home of 
INDOPACOM. It is the home of U.S. Army Pacific. It is the home 
of Marine Forces Pacific, and even if it's difficult, even if 
it's expensive, we still need to have--and I get that HDRH 
(Homeland Defense Radar-Hawaii), you know, was abandoned and 
perhaps for legitimate reasons, but I just want to flag for you 
that as we're gaming out our scenarios that we are focusing 
right now on the kind of Central and Western Pacific and then 
the Continent and Hawaii deserves protection, too.
    On recruiting, just following up, Secretary, on what 
Senator Moran talked about, you know, you're going to fall 
short and I think you are doing what is necessary to try not to 
fall short, but I think it's fair to say that the Pacific is 
the priority area and although I know you're kind of pre-
decisional here, I'd like you to kind of talk at least in 
conceptual terms about how you're going to absorb some 
reduction in the number of Army soldiers in a way that is 
consistent with our Indo-Pacific strategy.
    Secretary Wormuth. Certainly. And I'll maybe draw again a 
little bit on what I said before.
    One, I think it's important to realize that the actual 
number of soldiers that are at places like, you know, 25th ID 
at Fort Riley, for example, at Fort Bragg, at Fort Hood,----
    Senator Schatz. Fort Humphreys.
    Secretary Wormuth. Exactly. Is below the number of 
authorizations that are on the books. So, you know, we have the 
soldiers that we already have.
    What we're trying to do is look at--you know, as we think 
about the new kinds of force structure that we need to build, 
as the Chief mentioned, the multi-domain task forces, the 
indirect fire protection capabilities, a lot of the integrated 
air and missile defenses, for example, we are looking at where 
can we shed maybe some types of structure that was very useful 
for COIN and counter-terrorism but we don't need as much of 
right now to make room for new structure and the way we've gone 
about that, among other things, is we've looked at, as I said, 
what we're calling people optimization.
    So there's places where we can just kind of thin out across 
the whole force structure and then we're also looking at the 
types of units that are maybe under-utilized. Those are 
obviously candidates for elimination, for example.
    So, you know, I think all of this will be spread around our 
major installations and, you know, National Defense Strategy 
requirements are primary. We've got to be able to have the 
readiness levels and the structure that we need to execute the 
strategy and certainly paying attention to the Indo-Pacific is 
core to that.
    Senator Schatz. Thank you.
    Senator Tester. Senator Murphy.
    Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank 
you both for being here today.
    Mr. Chairman, I wanted to take my time to ask a few 
questions about the Future Vertical Lift Program.
    First of all, this is the first opportunity to talk about 
this in this subcommittee. Mr. Chairman, as you know, I made, 
along with Senator Blumenthal, a series of requests of the Army 
to get a briefing on a Flora Award and was denied that briefing 
by the Army multiple times.
    I think this subcommittee and more broadly the 
Appropriations Subcommittee has to pretty rigorously guard our 
equities when it comes to getting information from the Army and 
from the Administration when it comes to contract awards.
    In fact, the regulations governing the awarding of 
contracts carves out a very specific role for Congress to be 
briefed on these matters even while the award is pending, and I 
hope this committee will continue to work on what I think is a 
misaligned equilibrium right now between the Administration, 
the Department of Defense, and this committee when it comes to 
how much information is shared.
    Ms. Wormuth, I wanted to talk to you about this specific 
award. I understand I have parochial interests, right? This was 
a contest between Bell, Textron, and Sikorsky, and the award 
went to the Bell Program, but I guess I want to talk to you a 
little bit about my concerns regarding Tilt Rotor Aircraft.
    My understanding is that past performance did not factor in 
to the contract award and this committee is going to be charged 
with picking up the full cost of this new program. Tilt Rotor 
Aircraft, like the V-22 Osprey, have a pretty miserable 
performance, reliability, and safety record over the last 30 
years.
    The V-22 is supposed to have a mission readiness of 82 
percent but over the last 5 years the Osprey has been at 56 
percent. The procurement cost went from $33 million to almost a 
hundred million. Today, the cost per flight of the V-22 is 
$10,000 an hour which is double the initial estimate.
    You know, what was interesting about this particular 
contract award is that the bid that came in from Textron was 
twice, twice the amount of the bid that came in from Sikorsky. 
Layered on top of that, this history suggesting that the Tilt 
Rotor is going to end up costing our taxpayers inordinately 
more than even the initial bids and I worry that we're going to 
have a hard time being able to fund the full cost of this 
award.
    So I guess my question is do you have any information as to 
why the Army did not take past performance of Tilt Rotor 
Aircraft into account when awarding the Flora contract, and 
what do you say about my concerns that if the cost curve on 
this new helicopter, which is obviously a foundational program 
for the Army is anything like what we saw for the Osprey, then 
we're in for some pretty big unexpected costs that we're going 
to have to bear on this subcommittee?
    Secretary Wormuth. Senator Murphy, first of all, I want to 
say, you know, of course, I completely support and value the 
important oversight role of Congress in these matters. So we 
want to be good partners with you in terms of being transparent 
and if you have not already, you know, received a detailed 
briefing now that the GAO (Government Accountability Office) 
has issued its decision, if you will, on the competition, I 
certainly will make sure that Mr. Doug Bush and their team get 
up to talk with you about that.
    My understanding is that the things that were valued or 
emphasized, if you will, in the selection process did include 
looking at lower technical risk precisely because of the fact 
that in the past if the technical risk is higher, a lot of 
times that means the costs in the out years are higher. The 
sustainment costs can be higher because they're not 
appropriately baked into the competitive process.
    So one of the reasons, as I understand it, that we selected 
the Bell-Textron aircraft was because it was assessed to have 
lower technical risk, even though the bid that came in from 
Sikorsky from an overall dollar amount was lower. You know, it 
was a best value competition. It wasn't strictly based on 
price, and we in the Army had some considerable concerns about 
our visibility into the design process that came from Sikorsky.
    So I can get back to you in more detail in terms of how 
exactly we incorporated past performance of the Osprey into the 
calculations, but we absolutely emphasized the importance of 
having lower technical risk in the program.
    Senator Murphy. Mr. Chairman, I will just note that our 
subcommittee has a GAO report on this very specific question of 
whether risk is being properly calculated when awarding 
programs within the Future Vertical Lift Aircraft process and 
what this GAO report comes to the conclusion is that right now 
the Army is not properly identifying sort of long-term risk on 
these programs and so look forward to being in a dialogue about 
some of the recommendations in this GAO report and getting a 
better holistic sense of how much this is going to cost the 
taxpayer in the long run.
    Thank you very much.
    Senator Tester. Very quickly, Senator Murphy, have you been 
briefed by the Defense Department?
    Senator Murphy. And I have, I have, and I thank you for 
arranging for that.
    Senator Tester. Senator Hoeven, would you yield to the 
Chairman of the Full Appropriations Committee?
    Senator Hoeven. Absolutely.
    Senator Tester. Thank you.
    Senator Murray.
    Senator Murray. Thank you so much, and I do have to get 
back to a markup. So I really do appreciate that.
    But, first of all, let me just say, Chairman Tester and 
Vice Chair Collins, who is being filled in by Senator Moran 
today, I'm really glad to join both of you to keep talking 
about the investments that we've got to make to support our 
troops and keep our country safe.
    These hearings that we're having are so important to remind 
us that we need to return to regular order and pass our 
Nation's funding bills in a timely bipartisan way and I will 
keep saying that till we get back to regular order.
    Now if we are going to stay ahead of our competitors, like 
China and others, that means that our investments have to keep 
up, not fall behind or fall into uncertainty because of 
partisan gridlock.
    So I'm really glad we have this opportunity today to hear 
from our witnesses about what that means for the Army and, of 
course, how we support our servicemembers and their families, 
like the troops at Joint Base Lewis McCord and Yakima Training 
Center in my home State of Washington.
    It's really important to me that this conversation also 
focuses on getting our military families the support they need, 
like childcare and mental healthcare and good housing and 
schools, and we also have to make sure we're keeping men and 
women in uniform safe. My heart goes out to the families of the 
soldiers we lost in the recent helicopter crashes. I expect to 
hear more following the Army's review of the safety procedures 
about how we are preventing future tragedies because at the end 
of the day the heart of our military isn't our weapons or our 
equipment, it is the brave and talented men and women who are 
willing to put their lives on the line to keep our country 
safe.
    So before I ask my questions, I just want to thank each of 
you for your service to this country. This committee has a deep 
appreciation for everything our servicemembers do to keep their 
members safe.
    With that, let me just ask a few questions. Secretary 
Wormuth, in my home State of Washington we are still seeing 
issues with the availability of suitable and affordable 
housing, especially at JBLM (Joint Base Lewis-McChord), and I'm 
hearing that as many as 250 servicemembers and their families 
spend from three to 4 months in hotels or other accommodations 
while they wait for a home on base to become available. These 
servicemembers and their families have to have a safe and 
reliable and affordable place to live, period.
    I wanted to ask you what you were doing to make sure that 
housing needs are being met both on and off base.
    Secretary Wormuth. Thank you, Chair Murray.
    Availability of housing is a challenge around JBLM and in a 
number of other locations around the country. We're doing a few 
things to try to work on that.
    First of all, this budget has $690 million in it for family 
housing and then we also obviously have our privatized housing 
that we work with the five different companies that provide 
that housing. So we are constantly looking at how can we invest 
more, how can we encourage those companies to invest more so 
that we're able to generate more inventory at places like JBLM.
    Another thing that we're doing, I think, is we are really 
pushing OSD (Office of the Secretary of Defense) to reopen how 
they calculate the basic housing allowance and this goes to 
obviously being able for our soldiers and families to afford 
housing off post and I think the way that we have calculated--I 
personally am not fully comfortable with how we're doing BAH 
(Basic Allowance for Housing) and I think we're going to look 
at that, open it up, look at the anchor points that we use, 
look at the utilities, the cost factors that we're using 
because in some cases I think we may need to raise the BAH 
rates to allow our soldiers and families to be able to afford 
housing off post. So that's some of what we're trying to do.
    Senator Murray. Good. I look forward to hearing more about 
that. Thank you.
    A Department of Defense review that was finished last year 
found that the drinking water supplying 24 installations 
exposes about a 175,000 servicemembers a year to dangerous 
levels of chemicals linked to cancer and other illnesses.
    The presence of these environmental contaminants, including 
PFAS (Army Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances), on 
installations and their surrounding communities continues to be 
a huge concern of mine and I know many others here in the 
Senate, especially with some of the worst contamination levels 
at JBLM and Yakima Training Center.
    Are there barriers you have identified in cleaning up these 
contaminants on active installations?
    Secretary Wormuth. Chair Murray, to my knowledge, there are 
not barriers to cleaning that up. I mean, you know, if there 
are cases where drinking water is not found to be safe, we will 
immediately work with the affected areas to get, you know, 
access to safe drinking water, whether that's by looking at, 
you know, new wells or other ways to solve that problem.
    I am aware that I think the EPA (Environmental Protection 
Agency) is contemplating making some changes to how it assesses 
what is a safe level of PFAS and I think that will have 
potentially very substantial----
    Senator Murray. So are you coordinating with the EPA to 
make sure the Army is testing at the most recent recommended 
lifetime drinking water health advisory levels?
    Secretary Wormuth. I'm sure that we're coordinating with 
the EPA. If the EPA changes what they determine to be a safe 
standard that will have implications for us that I think will 
be significant financially.
    Senator Murray. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. 
Chairman, and thank you, Senator Hoeven. I appreciate it.
    Senator Tester. Senator Hoeven.
    Senator Hoeven. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
    First, thanks to both of you for your service. Secretary 
Wormuth, are you aware that the Administration has released a 
draft regulation that would require contractors to report--
defense contractors to report--on their greenhouse gas 
emissions for the weapon systems they make and also set 
emission reduction targets? Are you aware of that regulation?
    Secretary Wormuth. Senator, I don't think that I'm aware of 
that specific proposal at this time. It hasn't come to my 
attention.
    Senator Hoeven. It's a draft proposal, but essentially if 
we're going to make contractors track their emissions on the 
weapon systems they make as well as from their suppliers, 
aren't we starting to prioritize, I guess, emission standards 
over weapons performance?
    Secretary Wormuth. Well, Senator, without seeing the 
specifics of the draft, I can't really speak to the 
implications of it. I mean, for example, if contractors are 
being asked to just track their emissions and maybe report 
them, that's different from having some sort of a consequence 
if their levels are deemed to be, you know, not acceptable. So 
I think I would just need to know a little more about the 
proposal.
    Senator Hoeven. So the tracking the emissions and setting 
standards for things like munitions and bombs and things like 
that, we're going to now make that a factor in deciding which 
ones that the military procures? And won't that affect both the 
effectiveness of those weapon systems for our warriors as well 
as the cost?
    Secretary Wormuth. Well, Senator, again I haven't seen the 
proposal, so I hesitate to comment on it. What I will say is 
obviously our soldiers need to have the best possible equipment 
to defend this country and I would want to make sure that 
that's what we would put our emphasis on.
    Senator Hoeven. Thank you. Thank you.
    And then, General, so I was just in South Korea and Taiwan. 
Taiwan's ordered and is paying for I think on the order of 
$19.5 billion worth of military hardware that they want to use 
obviously to counter aggression by the PRC (People's Republic 
of China), China, in the Taiwan Strait and obviously we're 
working with other allies in the Indo-Pacific, Japan, 
Philippines, the South Korean President is here now and so 
forth, to deter China's aggressive behavior.
    One of the issues is getting those munitions. So it's not 
just about modernizing our forces, which we must do and 
obviously this committee funds that effort and is working with 
you to do it, it's also providing those enhanced armaments to 
our friends, our allies, partners and friends--that should 
sound familiar to you--in the Indo-Pacific.
    By the same token, we need to and are providing assistance 
to Ukraine but they're needing to procure these weapon systems, 
as well, and we're modernizing our forces. That puts a real 
strain on the supply chain.
    What are we doing, what can we do to expedite that which is 
crucially important in Ukraine right now, it's crucially 
important in the Indo-Pacific right now, and it's crucially 
important to our own forces and making sure they have the very 
best armaments?
    General McConville. Well, Senator, I think it's really 
important that we invest in our organic industrial base and, 
you know, as we talk about--and for the long term, and as we--
--
    Senator Hoeven. Sir, I agree with the investment, but my 
question is we need to expedite the production now. That's--
what can we do to expedite the production now with the 
investment we're making is my question, sir.
    General McConville. Yes. I guess, you know, my response, 
having watched this, is, you know, the defense industry doesn't 
operate on enthusiasm. They want contracts. They want long-term 
contracts they can invest in their systems and when they see 
that, you know, we're starting to ramp up. We're doing 155 
rounds. We're doing it on some of the systems that we're doing 
right now and I think it's very, very important that we project 
outwards in some cases with multiyear contracts. That helps. 
They know that when they invest this year, they're going to 
have a 3- or 4- or 5-year funding stream that's going to allow 
them to invest and ramp up these capabilities.
    We also need to work with our allies and partners to make 
sure they're doing the same thing in their organic industrial 
base because these countries need to have the capabilities with 
the weapon systems. They need to have the capacity, which is 
enough of them. They need to have the confidence in those 
weapon systems and their soldiers need to have the will to 
fight if they're going to defend their country.
    Senator Hoeven. For both of you, are we providing the 
assistance in terms of the weapon systems requested by Ukraine 
to end the conflict so they can be successful rather than 
stalemate? I would ask first you, Secretary, and then you, 
General.
    Secretary Wormuth. Senator, I believe that we are providing 
the Ukrainians with what they need to fight against the 
Russians. So, you know, we are giving them systems and 
certainly the Army is giving them systems----
    Senator Hoeven. Win versus stalemate now.
    Secretary Wormuth. I think we----
    Senator Hoeven. Win versus stalemate.
    Secretary Wormuth [continuing]. Want to see the Ukrainians 
prevail obviously. I think that is in the national interests of 
the United States to do more than achieve a stalemate. You 
know, we can't let the--there can't be a precedence of being 
able to just declare that a country doesn't exist.
    So we need to give them the equipment they need to defeat 
the Russians and I think that we are doing that.
    Senator Hoeven. General?
    General McConville. I would add it's not just the 
equipment, it's the training, and we're seeing and there's a 
lot of higher level combined arms training up to the brigade 
level and, you know, in another venue we can give you the exact 
numbers, but we have significantly increased their capability 
to do combined arms operations at the brigade level and above.
    Senator Hoeven. Again, thanks to both of you. Thank you, 
Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Tester. Senator Shaheen, 20 minutes ago you were 
one minute away from asking questions. It's your turn.
    Senator Shaheen. Finally. Well, it was worth waiting for.
    Secretary Wormuth, I'm sorry Senator Murray isn't here 
because your response on the testing of our servicemembers I 
think was not totally accurate. I've been trying to get that 
done through the MBAA for several years now and in fact what 
we're being told by DOD (Department of Defense) is that we 
don't have the lab capacity to do that and there's been 
opposition from the Department of Defense to actually get that 
done.
    So, Mr. Chairman, I intend to share that with Senator 
Murray so that she knows that in fact we are not doing that.
    Secretary Wormuth. Well, I'm happy, Senator Shaheen, to 
look into that and do what I can.
    Senator Shaheen. That would be great. Your advocacy would 
be very much appreciated.
    For both of you, when you appeared before the Armed 
Services Committee earlier this year, I asked why the Army had 
once again failed to include full funding for the enhanced 
night vision goggles binoculars, ENVGB. Congress stepped in 
last year to restore the full $300 million.
    Senator Murphy talked about the GAO report on the Vertical 
Lift. There's also a GAO report on the potential impact of what 
will happen if an IVAS (Integrated Visual Augmentation System) 
System gets fielded before it's ready and the potential for men 
and women in the military not to actually make use of that 
because there's so much concern about it.
    So again how do we explain the fact that you haven't 
requested funding for the ENVGB? We've seen just last week 
another 2-year delay in terms of fielding the IVAS System. So 
do we not think the ENVGB is working well, and as we're talking 
about Senator Hoeven's question about the defense industrial 
base and as you replied, General McConville, very 
appropriately, they're concerned about contracts.
    Well, when we say to companies we want you to produce 
these, they gear up to do that and then the contracts aren't 
forthcoming. It sends a message that we can't be counted on and 
we don't really need what's being proposed.
    So tell me again because I don't feel like I've gotten an 
adequate answer on why you're not requesting funding for the 
ENVGB Program in this year's budget.
    Secretary Wormuth. Okay. Senator Shaheen, I will try again. 
First of all, I want to emphasize that the ENVGB is a great 
system. This may surprise you, but the Pentagon had take your 
child to work day last week and in our courtyard the Army had 
many of our systems that kids could look at and the ENVGB was 
one of them.
    Senator Shaheen. Doesn't surprise me at all because I think 
it is a great system----
    Secretary Wormuth. It is.
    Senator Shaheen [continuing]. And that's what we've heard 
from you.
    Secretary Wormuth. It is a very good system. Our soldiers 
like it and they're very comfortable with it.
    I think (1), you know, we have a finite amount of resources 
that we can apply to modernization. So we are having to make 
choices and that is, you know, relevant whether it's about JLTV 
(Joint Light Tactical Vehicle) and other kinds of vehicles or 
whether it's about, you know, what I would call wearable tech 
for our soldiers.
    What we're trying to do with ENVGB and IVAS is strike a 
balance. IVAS, as I know you know, does more than what the 
goggles do. It is a system that allows our soldiers to train, 
rehearse, and then fight in a synthetic training environment.
    Senator Shaheen. But it's not ready yet. Our soldiers----
    Secretary Wormuth. We are working on it. You are absolutely 
right. We are still working on it and I think if Congress gives 
us the money that we've requested for IVAS in this year's 
budget, we are going to use that to work with Microsoft to get 
the system to a place where our soldiers will want to use it 
and if Microsoft isn't able to do that, we will not develop the 
program further.
    You know, we are not--I know the GAO report, you know, 
talks about $22 billion. That assumes fully----
    Senator Shaheen. And the IG report. I mean,----
    Secretary Wormuth. Right.
    Senator Shaheen [continuing]. It's not the only report, and 
the Army's own report all said the same thing.
    Secretary Wormuth. We're not going to spend $22 billion on 
a system if it doesn't work, but I think the Chief and I both 
believe that this is important wearable technology for our 
soldiers. We want to see if we can get it to a place where it 
is going to be desirable for our soldiers. We think it can be, 
but I think Microsoft knows that this is it. They either get it 
done and get it to a place where our soldiers want to use it or 
we will move on and I don't know, Chief, if you want to add to 
that.
    General McConville. I think, you know, first of all, the 
enhanced night vision goggles bravo (ENVG-B) is a cutting edge 
technology.
    Where we are today, I would say that is--you know, if you 
go back when we first started flying goggles with PVS-5s, they 
were big clunky things you wore on your head and how far we've 
taken the technology is great, but to me IVAS is 
transformational. It's going to fundamentally change the way 
our soldiers operate in the battlefield and when we take a look 
at where we are with resources is we want to give the next 3 to 
5 years to get that edge that's going to transform how our 
soldiers are going to fight and that's the trade-off that we're 
trying to make right now.
    Senator Shaheen. And I understand that aspiration, but it's 
not working yet and until it works, it seems to me that we are 
short changing those people who need the current system that 
does work in a way that is not acceptable as we're looking at 
warfighting.
    So thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Tester. Senator Murkowski.
    Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you both for being before the committee here. I join 
other colleagues in expressing sadness and condolences at the 
loss of life with the helicopter crash in Alaska this week. 
Families are grieving, the community is grieving, and I know 
for Army all are grieving, and there is a great deal of review 
that will come forward as a consequence of this.
    General McConville, I'm looking forward to being with you 
in Alaska on Friday, hopefully the opportunity to be up there 
at Fort Wainwright.
    Secretary Wormuth, I know we have in place now this stand-
down for a period of time. I am hoping that this stand-down 
will achieve the desired outcome which is really to really 
determine the safety there and not just a messaging tool that 
we're kind of looking at this, but I think we recognize that 
not only this horrible tragic incident but that this follows 
others that we have seen unfortunately.
    So if you care to comment very quickly on that?
    Secretary Wormuth. Yes, Senator. The safety stand-down, as 
the Chief and you have discussed, will, you know, allow all of 
our aviators to focus on safety, to review their procedures, 
you know, make sure that they are doing everything that they 
should be doing and that absolutely will involve more than just 
messaging.
    And then, of course, you know, there will be 
investigations. There's already an investigation underway at 
the crash that we had at Fort Campbell, and we will probably 
learn additional insights from those investigations that we 
will also make sure the aviation community has and can make any 
changes that are needed.
    Senator Murkowski. Thank you for that.
    Let me ask a couple questions about provisions within the 
2023 NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) and this is 
under Section 603. We authorized some policies that we're 
hoping will improve the quality of life for the soldiers that 
are stationed in Alaska.
    I have been told that right now there has been no guidance 
released for how and when these new policies are going to be 
implemented and my concern is, is that we have servicemembers 
that are missing out on some of these time-limited incentives 
that are again designed to help alleviate some of the hardships 
that are just inherent with being in the North.
    One is the provision that allows for cold weather special 
duty pay and the second is the requirement that the Secretary 
reimburse eligible servicemembers for the cost of airfare to 
travel to their home of record when they're assigned to Alaska 
as a duty station.
    Can you give me any information in terms of when soldiers 
can expect to receive either the cold weather pay or again 
receiving the reimbursement for eligible travel?
    Secretary Wormuth. Yes, on the cold weather pay, the Army 
has actually been providing cold weather pay to soldiers since 
2020 through our Remote and Austere Location Incentive Pay. I 
don't quite have the acronym off the top of my head, but 
basically if you're above 63 degrees North, so if you're at 
Fort Greeley, for example, or Fort Wainwright, single soldiers 
get $2,000 and soldiers with dependents get $4,000. So we have 
been paying that since 2020.
    Senator Murkowski. Right. But this provision in NDAA was 
additional to that.
    Secretary Wormuth. My understanding, and I'm not an expert 
on this, Senator, so I may have to get back to you for the 
record, I think there's concern with OSD that somehow we will 
be double counting. So, you know, I would be happy to work with 
you and your office if you think that the amount of the current 
incentive isn't sufficient, but I think there's concern from 
OSD about creating a second incentive.
    Senator Murkowski. Okay. Well, then we need to talk about 
this and do so quickly because this is not about double dip. 
This is truly about addressing some of the realities that come 
when you are in these cold weather environments and the ability 
to take care of yourself and your family with that.
    How about on the travel piece of it?
    Secretary Wormuth. The travel piece is in draft right now 
and, frankly, when I learned that it's in draft because I'd 
heard personally from soldiers how important it is to be able 
to fly home sometimes and I know how expensive those are.
    So I will commit to you to sort of look to see if we can 
speed that up. There's no issue with it. It's just sort of 
going through the staffing process.
    Senator Murkowski. Okay. I know that when I'm up there this 
weekend, these will be questions that I will be asked and I'm 
sure, General McConville, you will, as well. So the more 
information we have on that the better.
    Thank you.
    Senator Moran [presiding]. Senator Murkowski, thank you 
very much.
    Senator Capito.
    Senator Capito. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you all 
both for being here, very much appreciate not just being here 
but your service and appreciate all the men and women that 
serve with you.
    I would just add my voice of concern to the accidents that 
we've seen. Obviously you're working very affirmatively, too. 
I'm sure it hurts everybody's heart and the hearts of the folks 
that you serve with probably more than others with the 
families.
    I wanted to ask about munitions, General McConville. How 
has the observing the Ukraine conflict helped the Army assess 
the performance of existing Army munitions and assumptions 
about our requirements for the future fight?
    General McConville. Yes, Senator. First of all, you know, 
as far as our performance, I think it's showing. You know, 
things like HIMARS (High Mobility Artillery Rocket System) 
become game changes. We look at the amount of 155 rounds that 
are being utilized. They're very, very effective and, quite 
frankly, you know, U.S. weapon systems across the board have 
been in great demand and are working extremely well, but the 
usage rates have gone beyond what we, you know, historically 
have used.
    So we have been at war, you know, 20 years. We've never 
used the amount of, you know, 155 rounds doing that. So, you 
know, at the Secretary's directive we are doing that right now 
but really standing up our organic industrial base so we can 
manufacture and have the capability to do it in a timely manner 
to get our stockage rates up to what we think we may have to 
use in large-scale combat operations.
    Senator Capito. Madam Secretary, would you say in terms of 
what our capacity is now--let's just say we were to be 
engaged--I know hypotheticals are terrible, but be engaged in 
something where we would need those munitions for our own 
purposes, are we ready to do that? I mean, I know we're not 
bleeding ourselves down to a point where we would not be ready, 
but we need to replenish. Is that the case?
    Secretary Wormuth. As we've looked at the Ukrainian request 
for support, we've weighed that very carefully. So we are not, 
you know, giving away more than we can afford to, if you will, 
although I think we've been very creative at finding ways to be 
able to give them as much as we possibly can without going too 
low in our own stockpiles.
    But we have a lot of work to do, I would say, Senator, in 
regenerating our industrial base and that's why we're investing 
$1.5 billion in this budget to invest in our own organic 
industrial base. You know, we've made, I think, very good use 
of the resources Congress has given us through the 
supplementals to get that on contract quickly and get our 
partners in industry, like Lockheed-Martin and Raytheon, to 
increase their production, and I think we are rebuilding that 
capacity now and that will, I think, serve us quite well in the 
future.
    Senator Capito. Good, good. In West Virginia, we have some 
good resources that can help with that.
    Let me switch gears and talk about recruitment. I 
understand that in August you stood up a pilot program, the 
Future Soldier Prep Course, to help those individuals, in other 
words, improve up to the standards rather than lower your 
standards.
    So, General, how is that working? Are you getting a lot of 
uptake on it? Is it making improvements? I know you're having 
recruiting issues. How do you see that program?
    General McConville. Yes. I think it's transformational, 
Senator. You know, I think the one thing the Secretary and I've 
done is made a blood oath. We're not going to lower standards 
and I think this is really important.
    Senator Capito. Right.
    General McConville. So we're going to invest in young men 
and women and as we talked, recruiters, they said they were 
having challenges passing what we call our Armed Forces 
Vocational Aptitude Battery Test, which is like an SAT for the 
military and also having challenges meeting the physical 
requirements because of body weight.
    So we've stood up the program and with that a little over 
8,000 actually go through the program right now. We've seen a 
95 percent success rate. I think there's something there. I 
think it's the future and it's amazing. Not only are they 
meeting the standards, in many cases they're exceeding and 
they're going on to do really good things in the Army.
    So I think this is something we really need to take a hard 
look at and is a potential for expansion.
    Senator Capito. So when you're looking at, say, a high 
school graduating class that's interested in pursuing the Army 
as a next step, how does somebody find that? I mean, do you 
have to be in a recruiting program to be able to access that? 
Is it generally accessible?
    General McConville. Well, the best way--it's very 
accessible, you know. You can go on the Internet and contact a 
recruiter. You can go to a local recruiting station and then 
what happens, you start taking the tests and if you're having 
challenges, we can help you get into the program.
    Senator Capito. So the best way to access that is through a 
recruiter, an actual recruiter?
    General McConville. Sure. On the Internet or through a 
recruiter.
    Senator Capito. Yes. Okay. A couple weeks ago, hundreds of 
soldiers for the 101st Airborne and the 82nd Airborne came to 
Rural West Virginia for a unique training experience. They were 
able to get their hands on developmental technology, use it in 
a realistic training environment and provide real feedback that 
will impact the final product.
    I don't know if you're aware of that training exercise and 
if you'd have any comment on what that looks like in the 
future.
    General McConville. Well, you know, firstly, I'm a little 
privy to 101st Airborne. It has a special place in my heart. 
But having units go out in places like West Virginia and work 
with people is really important for the work they're doing but 
also for the exposure.
    One of the things that we need to work on is making sure 
that people get exposed to our soldiers so they know what the 
military is about and that type of training.
    Senator Capito. I think one of the values in this 
particular exercise is for the soldiers to get ahold of some of 
the newer technology or the breaking technology so that it's 
not stuck in this developmental phase and you can actually see 
what's in a simulated real situation, see what's going to work 
and what isn't so we can get them into the actual production 
phase.
    Thank you very much.
    General McConville. Thank you, Senator.
    Senator Tester [presiding]. Senator Boozman.
    Senator Boozman. Thank you, Chairman Tester, very, very 
much for having this important hearing, and it's good to be 
with you all. We appreciate all of your hard work.
    I understand, General, that you're retiring and we 
appreciate you, appreciate your service. You've had more than 
an outstanding career and we also appreciate your family. These 
are certainly family affairs and the sacrifices that they've 
made through the years.
    It's always good to talk about the budget, talking about 
the fiscal year 2024 budget, trying to figure out what your 
priorities are, and then again how we can help you, Madam 
Secretary and General, as you work through this.
    General, you've been focused on maintaining readiness and 
modernizing the Army to ensure it has the tools needed in 
future conflict in the Pacific. After recently visiting with 
Army leaders in the Pacific and visiting with Army personnel in 
Singapore, I learned the importance the Army plays in 
supporting the Joint Force in the Pacific.
    Can you highlight the importance of the Army's future role 
in a Joint Fight in the Pacific?
    General McConville. Yes, Senator. I think the Army has a 
critical role in the Indo-Pacific along with our joint 
partners. Some of the things that we do, the long-range 
precision fires, air and missile defense, contested logistics, 
and then certainly providing ground troops and, more 
importantly, working with our allies and partners on the ground 
to increase their capabilities, capacities, and competence so 
they can defend their countries. That is very, very important 
and where the American soldier goes it really reassures those 
armies that we deal with and they have the confidence to fight. 
So I think it's very, very important.
    Senator Boozman. What in the budget specifically supports 
the Army's role in Joint Force and where does it assume risk 
regarding the Indo-Pacific?
    Secretary Wormuth. Senator, I'm happy to speak to that a 
little bit. We are making a lot of investments in this year's 
budget aimed at the Indo-Pacific.
    So, for example, the Chief talked about contested 
logistics. We have over $850 million in this year's budget for 
Army pre-positioned equipment. Also, for contested logistics, 
we are investing in new composite watercraft that will allow us 
to take supplies and move it around, you know, that very large 
theater, and then, of course, in terms of our RDT&E Programs, 
we are investing in the long-range precision fighter support 
portfolios, so things like the precision strike missile, the 
mid-range capability, the long-range hypersonic weapon.
    We are investing over $550 million in integrated air and 
missile defense programs, things like Patriot, the indirect 
fighter protection capability which will be able to intercept 
advanced cruise missiles, and then we're also looking at deep 
sensing capabilities, things like HADES (High Accuracy 
Detection and Exploitation System), which is our airborne ISR, 
(Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance) sensing and then 
the Titan network and so that's another about $300 million for 
deep sensing in that theater.
    Senator Boozman. Very good. I want to touch on something I 
think Senator Moran touched on earlier, but the Army's fiscal 
year 2024 budget request is a $185.5 billion short of the 2018 
National Defense Strategy's recommendation of three to 5 
percent real growth. When adjusted for inflation, the Army's 
fiscal year 2024 budget is actually a rate of negative 2 
percent growth over fiscal year 2023.
    Madam Secretary, moving forward, how can we help you? Can 
the Army afford to continue its 2030 modernization strategy 
without increased top lines or reducing force structure?
    Secretary Wormuth. Senator, I feel that our budget of a 
$185 billion, as I said in my opening statement, allows us to 
do our part in the National Defense Strategy. It allows us to 
keep our momentum on modernization, keep investing in 
readiness, and to take care of our people.
    I think the challenge for us is going to be as we look to 
the out years, frankly. You know, the Future Vertical Lift 
Programs, for example, are very, very expensive. You know, the 
Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle Program is very expensive, 
and as we look at, you know, trying to--as those become 
programs of record and the Army needs to start fielding them at 
scale, that is going to get very expensive and so where I worry 
under the current budget is how are we going to manage all of 
this in the out years and still take care of our people.
    We have a lot of infrastructure bills, frankly, not just 
associated with our housing for soldiers and families but also 
power projection. If Senator Schatz were here, he knows all 
about the infrastructure situation in Hawaii.
    So it's looking more to 2030 and beyond where I think it 
gets challenging.
    Senator Boozman. Thank you all very much. Thank you, Mr. 
Chairman.
    Senator Tester. I will turn it over to Senator Moran for 
his close.
    Senator Moran. Chairman, thank you.
    I'll submit for the record this question to both the 
General and the Secretary. The unfunded priorities list 
includes $530 million to bring the total procurement of Abrams 
Tanks to a full brigade level.
    I'd like to hear why that's not included or why it's 
important and see if we can be of assistance in that regard.
    And then so much of what we've talked about and so much of 
the capabilities of the Army is dependent upon this issue of 
recruitment. It strikes me as at least interesting and maybe 
there's a good explanation why is recruitment so difficult when 
retention is so favorable.
    One would think that those who are serving, who are making 
the decisions to re-enlist have encountered a good experience 
but it's not translating into people who have not yet served.
    Is there some analysis or a way to take advantage of the 
circumstance in which people are reupping to get people to up 
for the first time?
    Secretary Wormuth. Senator, I would say that's part of what 
our Soldier Referral Program is aimed at is you're right. We've 
got really good retention, historically good retention. So 
people who are in the Army, you know, many of them are having 
good experiences. So we're asking our soldiers then to turn 
around and take that good news story to their communities and 
then if they're able to, you know, bring forward people who 
sign up and go to basic, they get points towards promotion.
    So, you know, I think some of it is again about re-
introducing the Army to the American public and really, you 
know, addressing legitimate concerns that parents have 
sometimes about what kind of housing their kid is going to be 
in or concerns about sexual harassment. I think there's some 
misperceptions sometimes about the Army, that it's somehow 
slowing people down, when in fact I would argue it can 
accelerate kids towards college degrees, but we need to do a 
better job of telling our story and we'd welcome your help with 
that.
    Senator Moran. Thank you. Thank you both.
    General McConville, thank you for your service to the 
country.
    Senator Tester. I've got to ask a real quick question, too. 
This is on modernization programs and the transition.
    The Army is going to invest in six modernization portfolios 
to build the Army of 2030. This requires sufficient funding for 
research, technology, maturation, prototype development, and 
experimentation of advanced military systems to meet future 
operational force requirements. However, the Army also is 
slashing enduring programs and hot production lines while 
undergoing this modernization. The impact on the defense 
industrial base and suppliers and workforce is significant and 
I would tell you after all we've heard in this committee about 
our industrial base and predictability, it is somewhat contrary 
to that and that's being kind.
    So what are you hearing from the defense--this is for you, 
Secretary Wormuth. What are you hearing from the defense 
industrial base and our critical suppliers in response to 
repeated proposals to terminate hot production lines of 
enduring programs?
    I don't mean that to be a pointed question. I mean that to 
be a question that I'm very concerned about our supply chains, 
very concerned, and I think one of the questions we've tried to 
do on this committee and all branches of the military and the 
defense budget overall is to make sure there is predictability 
in purchasing.
    That being said, there are antiquated programs that need to 
go away and that's perfectly acceptable and good business, but 
the question is, is I don't want this to impact critical supply 
chain bases. So tell me what you're doing.
    Secretary Wormuth. Certainly, Chairman. First of all, it's 
very much in the Army's interests to have a robust and healthy 
defense industrial base.
    Senator Tester. Agreed.
    Secretary Wormuth. So we share that. With finite resources, 
we are constantly, the Chief and I, having to strike a balance 
between putting resources towards the new systems that we're 
developing in those six modernization portfolios that you 
mentioned but also trying to maintain our enduring programs, 
things like Abrams, things like PIM (Paladin Integrated 
Management), things like Striker, for example, and we, in 
making those choices and in setting that balance, do weigh the 
health of our industrial base.
    So my view is we've tried carefully to not make any 
decisions that severely damage our industrial base and we are 
also--you know, the supply chain, that goes well beyond 
obviously the Army's organic industrial base and what we're 
trying to do there is work with our partners in industry, the 
big primes, to help them rebuild their supply chains.
    Senator Tester. Senator Shaheen for one question.
    Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I'm sorry I didn't realize things were going to move so 
fast, but I wanted--because so much of the hearing has focused 
on recruitment and the challenges with recruitment, I wanted to 
raise a question that was presented to me last week. I had a 
chance to meet with members, former members of the Afghan 
female tactical platoon who are here and as you know, there are 
a number of Afghan former servicemembers who worked with us 
during that conflict.
    I was interested to hear them say they would very much like 
the opportunity to continue to serve the United States. So as 
you think about recruitment challenges, are there ways in which 
we can enable people like these women who have honorable 
service who want to continue to support this country to serve?
    Secretary Wormuth. Yes, Senator. I actually met with those 
women, as well. They were incredibly inspiring and a number of 
them, when asked, held up their hand and said they'd like to 
join the United States Army.
    We are looking--we do have pathways for folks who do not 
have U.S. citizenship to join the Army. You know, we have green 
card holder pathways, lawful permanent residents. My 
understanding is that the current immigration status that those 
women have, you know, may not be high enough, if you will, to 
allow them to join the Army at this time, but I offered, for 
example, to write a letter to Secretary Mayorkas at DHS 
(Department of Homeland Security) to try to help with their 
political asylum proceedings, but if they're able to, you know, 
be granted asylum, for example, assuming they meet our 
requirements and I think they will, these women are very 
skilled, if anything, the biggest issue for them will be the 
language requirement, but we are ready and able to receive them 
as soon as they're able to come through the process.
    Senator Shaheen. Well, Mr. Chairman, I would urge the 
committee to think about what we can do to help advance that 
because we have a number of committed people who want to serve 
this country and we should give them the opportunity.
    Senator Tester. I appreciate you bringing up that point, 
Senator, and I think it's certainly worth considering and 
finding out how we can add to making the Army all it can be or 
all it wants to be or all it will be or all it is. Okay.
    General McConville, I, too, want to add my voice to the 
folks saying thank you for your service. Thank you for what 
you've done. Thank you for being very professional in front of 
this committee. I might add I think your testimony took about 3 
minutes. We like that. Get to the point.
    I would also say that you may not be able to retire this 
summer. There is a hold on all flag officers right now, you 
know. So your placement is not confirmed and may not be 
confirmed unless we get a level of common sense around here to 
allow you to be able to go to Montana and retire like I'm sure 
you're going to do.
    But we do appreciate what you've done and what you'll 
continue to do even in retirement.
    We appreciate both of your testimonies. Secretary, thank 
you. General, thank you.

                     ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

    Senators may submit additional written questions and we 
would ask that you respond to those questions as soon as 
possible within a reasonable time.
    [The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but 
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the 
hearing:]
                Questions Submitted to Christine Wormuth
               Questions Submitted by Senator Jon Tester
    Question. Last year, Congress accelerated investments in weapons so 
that our weapons magazines are loaded up for future contingencies.
    In this year's budget, the Department is proposing to lock-in 
procurement quantities for 9 different weapons programs over the next 
3-5 years to provide a predictable demand signal to industry.
    This proposal includes two Army programs: the Guided Multiple 
Launch Rocket System, and Patriot missiles.
    However, it is not yet clear what the private sector will invest in 
return for this predictability from the Government, nor is it clear 
that industry can actually ramp up and build the weapons at a rate that 
Army desires.
    Secretary Wormuth, what industry investments are you expecting in 
return for this multi-year predictability? Have you directly engaged 
with the defense industrial base to ensure they can get you what you 
need when you need it?
    Answer. The Army is confident industry can meet the demands of both 
the Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System and PATRIOT Advanced 
Capability-3 multiyear contracts if they are approved by Congress. 
Prior to requesting them, the Army did extensive reviews of both 
programs to ensure the targets required under the proposed contracts 
are achievable.
    With regards to industry investments, Army acquisition leaders have 
been in discussions with the related companies concerning their 
intended investments related to the proposed multiyear contracts. 
However, the information about industry investments is proprietary in 
nature. The Army can provide information in a separate briefing to you 
facilitated by the committee.
    Question. For several years, this Subcommittee has criticized the 
Department for not having a robust plan to defend Guam against high-end 
air defense threats. So I am pleased that this year's budget includes a 
total of $1.5 billion to accelerate this capability.
    However, we need people and infrastructure to get this done right, 
and these efforts need to be coordinated across all the military 
services and with the Missile Defense Agency.
    Secretary Wormuth, the Army has a growing presence on Guam, but our 
understanding is that you have not yet signed a Memorandum of Agreement 
with your sister services regarding the use of resources. Why are the 
obstacles here?
    Answer. The Army is developing elements to incorporate into the 
Joint Memorandum of Agreement (JMOA) with sister services for support 
of Guam. The process to develop, review, and evaluate the JMOA will 
involve stakeholders throughout DoD and could take several months to 
finalize. The JMOA lists how 44 distinct services will be delivered. 
Army support requirements for people, facilities, and sites where Army 
assets will reside are among the elements the Army is assessing. As 
part of this process, the Army will carefully assess the personnel 
requirements and phasing timeline for arrival of units in Guam. The 
requirements assessment will be informed by whether tours will be 
accompanied or not. If tours are accompanied, myriad support facilities 
will be required, such as schools, child development centers, 
healthcare facilities, family housing, etc. Existing support facilities 
are undersized for the current population, so even if tours are 
unaccompanied, support facilities will need to be expanded. Finally, 
Joint Region Marianas anticipates it will take 10 months to a year 
before the Secretary of the Navy conveys permanent basing/stationing 
decisions.
    Question. When Congress provided authorities and funding for rapid 
prototyping, the intent was to rapidly develop, try out, and field 
initial capabilities that would inform future requirements before 
committing to large-scale programs.
    We have supported this approach in the past in order to accelerate 
fielding decisions, and will continue supporting funding for prototypes 
where it makes sense, so we can see what works and want doesn't.
    However, it appears the Army now wants to just continue buying 
prototypes well after initial prototypes have been fielded instead 
making substantial acquisition commitments.
    This is concerning: it circumvents the spirit of the law; fails to 
field capabilities at scale; and does not provide a predictable and 
stable path for industry with respect to the Army's needs.
    Secretary Wormuth, what steps are you taking to comply with the 
law, which prohibits funding excess prototype quantities that aren't 
specifically needed?
    Answer. Middle Tier of Acquisition (MTA) Rapid Prototyping (RP) 
programs are required to create test strategies or plans that clearly 
identify the number of developmental items needed to support 
developmental testing or operational assessments and must seek written 
approval to purchase quantities that exceed those needed. This 
direction will be formally documented in the upcoming update to the 
Army's MTA policy. The Army Acquisition Executive (AAE) personally 
approves any effort seeking entry into MTA RP. This authority is not 
delegated below the AAE. Quantities required to fulfill the MTA RP are 
included as part of the program initiation decisions.
                                 ______
                                 
              Questions Submitted by Senator Tammy Baldwin
Tactical Wheeled Vehicles and the Defense Industrial Base
    Question. Wisconsin is home to Oshkosh Defense, a company that is a 
global leader in the design, production, and sustainment of military 
vehicles. In particular, Oshkosh specializes in manufacturing the Joint 
Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV), the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles 
(FMTV), and the Family of Heavy Tactical Vehicles (FHTV).
    Army recently awarded the JTLV contract to AM General, after years 
of procuring that vehicle from Oshkosh.
    Additionally, year after year the budget request includes 
procurement amounts for the FMTV and FHTV that are well below the 
minimum sustaining rate necessary to keep the production line running 
and skilled workers in place.
    What is the Army's plan for managing the health of the defense 
industrial base for tactical wheeled vehicles?
    Answer. A healthy and competitive tactical wheeled vehicle 
industrial base is key to controlling costs, enhancing innovation, and 
improving quality. The Army exercises frequent and deliberate 
engagements with industry to identify and address risks and issues that 
affect the industrial base with a focus on, minimum sustaining rates, 
potential production breaks, and supply chain impacts. The Army is 
balancing Tactical Wheeled Vehicle modernization by prioritizing Light 
Tactical Vehicles investments, by maintaining warm Heavy and Medium 
Tactical Vehicles production bases, and by increasing competition 
across the industrial base for programs such as the Common Tactical 
Truck (CTT) and electric Light Reconnaissance Vehicle (eLRV).
    Question. I am concerned that when work for tactical wheeled 
vehicles is divided between two manufacturers, the budget request will 
not provide enough work for both companies to sustain their workforce 
and supplier networks. As such, how does Army plan to sustain the 
workforce and supplier networks?
    Answer. The Army continues to assess the health of the industrial 
base to understand its ability to support military demands. In the case 
of the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV), the Army planned for a 
multi-year transition phase. As the Army ramps-down the JLTVA1 
production with Oshkosh through Fiscal Year (FY) 2025, the Army will 
ramp-up production of the JLTVA2 with AM General. The Army plans to 
award split procurements in FY 2023 and FY 2024 between Oshkosh and AM 
General and in FY 2025, all JLTV procurements are scheduled to be 
through AM General.
    Additionally, Oshkosh will continue to produce Heavy and Medium 
Tactical Vehicles and AM General will continue to produce High Mobility 
Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles.
Tactical Wheeled Vehicles and the future of logistics
    Question. Tactical wheeled vehicle modernization programs--like 
FHTV, FMTV, and JLTV--with the latest advancements in payload, safety, 
and mobility are essential to supplying combat vehicles with fuel, 
ammo, and spare parts to take and control ground. In other words, 
tactical wheeled vehicles are a critical backbone of the logistics 
needed to sustain and win a fight.
    Would you agree with this statement?
    Answer. As the Army looks toward the future, multi-modal 
distribution is essential as is reduction in supply requirements within 
the tactical force. No single domain of transport will meet the 
distribution requirements of the Joint Force. Another key to this 
problem is human-machine integration that may allow for reduced manning 
in multi-modal transport systems providing reduced risk and higher 
efficiency to meet the Army and Joint Force supply requirements.
    Question. With the Army developing a new Cross Functional Team 
focused on Contested Logistics, will Tactical Wheeled Vehicles be a 
focus area of the CFT?
    Answer. The Contested Logistics (CL) Cross Functional Team (CFT) is 
still finalizing an approved portfolio. AFC will assign three to five 
modernization efforts to the CL CFT, focused on tactical level 
logistics. Multi-capable or multi-modal distribution platforms, which 
includes tactical wheeled vehicles, is one area that is being 
considered as an area of focus for the CL CFT.
    Question. Will future Army budgets start to reflect Tactical 
Wheeled Vehicles' role as critical and primary enabling warfighting 
capabilities?
    Answer. The Army is updating the Tactical Wheeled Vehicle (TWV) 
strategy with expected completion next year. In FY 2024, the Army is 
investing $1.31B in the TWV fleet including FMTV, FHTV, JLTV, High 
Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV), Palletized Load System 
(PLS), and the development of the Common Tactical Truck. The Army will 
continue to invest in a mix of vehicles within the TWV fleet in future 
budget submissions as we build the Army of 2030 and design the Army of 
2040.
    Future Army budgets will continue to take a fiscally responsible 
approach to procurement that minimizes risk while providing balanced 
modernization to our units. The Army recognizes the challenges of a 
contested logistics environment, and the Army addresses that challenge 
in the FY 2024 budget submission by continuing investment in Army 
watercraft, modernized fuel and water storage and distribution systems, 
and enhancing our aerial delivery capabilities.
                                 ______
                                 
             Questions Submitted by Senator Lindsey Graham
    Question. The Scales Child Development Center (CDC) at Fort Jackson 
is the installation's largest CDC and supports 313 children ranging 
from 0 to 5 years of age. This 34-year old facility is in poor 
condition and experiences frequent failures of the air conditioning and 
sewer systems. These failures result in extreme heat and sewage backup 
within the building. Additionally, the facility has multiple line of 
sight issues that make it challenging for staff to properly supervise 
the children. Given this:
    Can you provide an update regarding the Army's plans to replace 
this structure?
    Answer. There is a 338-child capacity replacement Child Development 
Center (CDC) for Fort Jackson in the FY 2024-2028 Future Year Defense 
Program (FYDP) for construction in FY 2025.
    Question. What is the current design percentage of the new 
structure?
    Answer. The project is at 35% design.
    Question. Will this project be eligible for authorization and 
funding in FY25?
    Answer. Yes.
    Question. How has inflation impacted the projected cost of the 
project?
    Answer. The current estimate for the total project cost is now 
$41M. There has been an increase due to inflation and cost escalation.
                                 ______
                                 
               Questions Submitted by Senator Jerry Moran
    Question. You mentioned a challenge for the Army in the coming 
years is to reduce structure to better align with manning. You also 
answered that the Army is currently considering options but has yet to 
make any conclusions on the best path forward.
    When should we expect implementation to begin on these changes? You 
mentioned the Committee can expect a formal briefing within the next 
few months. Please specify a target date.
    Answer. The Army continues to conduct analysis on the 
transformation to the Army of 2030 and will formally brief the 
committee at the earliest possible opportunity.
    Question. You stated the Army must make force structure changes 
regardless of the end strength deficit to make room for the new 
structure needed for Army 2030. Some of this structure is already 
established or will be soon. This analysis should have included 
reductions to offset the new structure.
    What changes is the Army considering to establish this new force 
structure?
    Answer. The Army is moving to a Multi-Domain organizational design, 
this requires re-orienting from Brigade Combat Team (BCT) centric 
operations tailored for counterinsurgency (COIN) to division centric 
operations tailored for Large Scale Combat Operations (LSCO) against 
peer/near-peer adversaries operating in a multi-domain environment, 
naturally resulting in smaller, but more mobile, lethal, and agile 
formations to account for the pace of future warfare. Additionally, the 
Army seeks to grow capabilities that enable it to see and sense 
farther, mass highly lethal forces, win the first fight, protect the 
force, communicate, and sustain the fight in LSCO.
    Question. Are any decisions final on force structure changes to 
manage the additions of new units?
    Answer. The Army is still developing the plan for how these changes 
will be implemented by looking carefully at our operational 
requirements as well as military and community value analysis. Certain 
force structure changes will be needed to shed capabilities no longer 
needed for large scale combat operations and to make room for new 
capabilities, while other reductions due to decreasing end strength 
could be avoided if recruiting improves.
    Question. Please provide a complete assessment of specific units 
and MOSs impacted by reductions if the end strength deficit is 
unresolved.
    Answer. The Army must transform its force structure to make room 
for new capabilities relevant to current and future threats. The Army 
is in the process of determining how and where to make these changes. 
To make room for the new capabilities and shed over-structure at the 
same time, the Army will thin out various Military Occupational 
Specialties, reduce numbers of lower priority unit types, and divest 
some structure optimized for COIN and counter-terrorism missions. This 
will ensure Army units are modernized and sufficiently manned so they 
are ready to fight.
    Question. To spread out these changes, you highlighted the Army's 
``people night court'' and evaluation of ``unit priority.''
    What were the findings of this night court?
    Answer. These sessions sought to adapt branches and functional 
areas to support Army 2030 based on the National Defense Strategy and 
Defense Planning Guidance. This included creating new capabilities in 
some branches, while reducing or reallocating capabilities in other 
branches. These sessions were a component of how the Army is 
transforming from a COIN fight to support LSCO and the Army continues 
to conduct analysis on the transformation to the Army of 2030. The Army 
looks forward to briefing Congress on force structure changes later 
this summer.
    Question. What were MOSs identified by the Army as ones who could 
handle reduced structure?
    Answer. The Army continues to conduct analysis on the 
Transformation to the Army of 2030 and will brief the committee at the 
earliest possible opportunity.
    Question. When evaluating ``unit priority,'' which units were 
identified as low-usage units whose force structure could handle 
reductions?
    Answer. The Army utilized an extensive modeling process to 
determine the most highly used and needed units relative to total Army 
inventory in Large Scale Combat Operations examining 8 years of recent 
deployment data. However, this is a component of the Army's 
Transformation to Army 2030 and the Army is still developing the plan 
for how these changes will be implemented. It is too early to make 
commitments on changes. The Army looks forward to briefing Congress on 
force structure changes later this summer.
    Question. Please provide a complete list of assessed units and the 
Army's recent and projected usage determination.
    Answer. This is a component of the Army's Transformation to 2030 
and the Army is still developing the plan for how these changes will 
implemented. The Army looks forward to briefing Congress on force 
structure changes later this summer.
    Question. It has been several years since the Army signed a new 
ARSTRUC.
    Why has the Army not signed an Army structure document in recent 
years?
    Answer. The Army signed Army Structure Memorandum 2024-2028 on 12 
January 2022. The Army is currently conducting analysis for Army 
Structure Memorandum 2025-2029.
    Question. Force structure reductions will impact the quantity and 
types of equipment procured each year. As was mentioned at the hearing, 
the Army is managing the transition to Army 2030 amidst a flat budget--
the Army must effectively prioritize the acquisition and fielding of 
equipment based on the future structure of the service.
    Is a reduced force structure a consideration when scheduling 
modernization priorities and Army procurement?
    Answer. The Army must transform its force structure to make room 
for new capabilities relevant to current and future threats. Guided by 
the National Defense Strategy, the Army is in the process of 
determining how and where to make these changes. Once analysis is 
complete, the Army will assess impacts to modernization priorities and 
Army procurement.
    Question. Are these assumptions already built into Army MTOEs?
    Answer. The Army is still developing the plan to transform to Army 
2030. Once finalized, those decisions will be built into an Army MTOE.
    Question. Can the industrial base adapt to a potentially lower Army 
demand quantity?
    Answer. The industrial base has the flexibility to accommodate the 
demand profile based on the level of funding. Communicating with the 
organic and commercial partners early and often is critical to managing 
the industrial base to ensure balance between requirements and 
capacity.
    Question. The Army communicated to our office last June there is no 
operational need for a Multi-Domain Task Force to support a Division 
HQ.
    Has this changed?
    Answer. The Army does not have an operational need for MDTFs to 
support Army Divisions. The Army 2030 concept does make the Division 
the tactical unit of action and through our annual Total Army Analysis 
process we are reviewing options that build multi-domain capabilities 
to enable the division to fight and win in Army 2030.
    However, over the past 12 months, the Army's considerations for 
MDTF locations have evolved to allow for options to make efficient use 
of CONUS facilities while providing combatant commanders flexibility to 
employ all or part of MDTFs from CONUS locations.
    Question. What criteria is the Army considering for each of the 
remaining MDTF pending basing decisions?
    Answer. MDTF stationing is a decision reserved for the Secretary of 
the Army. The Headquarters Department of the Army HQDA develops options 
to station our limited resources based on operational requirements 
found in the National Defense Strategy (NDS) and the Defense Planning 
Guidance (DPG). The Army Staff is currently assessing those 
requirements in our annual Total Army Analysis (TAA) that will be 
approved by the Secretary of the Army.
    The Army makes stationing decisions for new formations under Army 
Regulation 5-10. The Army's primary consideration for stationing is 
operational need informed by guidance from the NDS and DPG. The Army 
assesses installations that satisfy operational needs using Military 
Value Analysis (MVA) and Community Support Value Analysis (CSVA). 
Lastly, no decision is final until the Army completes assessments in 
accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act.
    The following is a summary of the MVA attributes the Army considers 
for stationing.
    a. Training
      (1) Total Maneuver Land: total acres of maneuver land.
      (2) Accessible Maneuver Land: the amount of usable maneuver land 
        with a factor applied for soil resiliency
      (3) Training Facilities: ranges, battle command centers, and 
        training support centers
      (4) Airspace: area of largest single restricted airspace and 
        total of all restricted airspaces
      (5) Dudded Impact Area: size and number of impact areas
    b. Power Projection
      (1) Surface Deployment Infrastructure: rail loading and 
        classification tracks, rail marshaling area, truck loading 
        ramps, unit cargo stationing, and truck loading area
      (2) Air Deployment Infrastructure: Aerial Port of Embarkation 
        (APOE) runway length, Max Aircraft on Ground, and hot cargo 
        pads
      (3) Deployment Support Infrastructure: container transfer pad, 
        inspection lanes, vehicle scales, and inspection staging area
    c. Well Being
      (1) Access to Medical Care: assessment of the Medical Treatment 
        Facility based on bed capability, out-of-area capability, case 
        mix index, market share, and supported population.
      (2) Soldier and Family Support Facilities: Army Community 
        Service, Child Development Service, Fitness Center, Chapels, 
        Youth Service.
      (3) Family Housing: number of houses and the quality of those 
        houses based on age and recent renovations
      (4) Brigade Complex: quantity, quality, and functional assessment 
        of facilities for a brigade headquarters
    d. Expansibility
      (1) Developable Area: total of all the buildable acreage on the 
        installation not counting training land.
      (2) Population Impact: density of people in a 10-mile zone 
        outside the installation, plus a growth factor.
      (3) Connectivity: long haul network, computing capacity, and 
        critical infrastructure.
    The following is a summary of the CSVA attributes the Army 
considers for stationing.
    e. Professional License: This attribute assesses spouse license 
reciprocity using a weighted sum of three metrics: state policy, 
implementation, and interstate compacts.
    f. Housing: This attribute assesses the private sector shortfall, 
which gives the number of families likely to be unable to find suitable 
off-post housing.
    g. Schools: This attribute incorporates data from public sources 
that assess schools at more local levels using a weighted sum of high 
school graduation rates, 3rd-8th grade learning rate (the change in 
test scores among a cohort of students from 3rd grade through 8th 
grade), and student to teacher ratios.
    h. Medical: A measure, for each of a list of weighted specialties, 
of the percent of patients seen in under 28 days.
    i. Intergovernmental Support Agreements (IGSAs): This attribute 
considers efficiencies in Joint Basing through the number Common Levels 
of Support (CLS) services at an installation under an IGSA.
                                 ______
                                 
               Question Submitted by Senator John Hoeven
    Question. The Army's unfunded priority list includes a number of 
cost-to-complete projects. These projects have already been authorized 
and appropriated for, but additional funding is needed in order to 
account for inflation, which has increased the cost of materials, and 
supply chain disruptions. Many of these projects are Army National 
Guard readiness centers, which play an integral role in ensuring the 
joint readiness of the Total Force.
    Why didn't the Department prioritize these projects in its fiscal 
year 2024 budget request?
    Answer. These cost increases emerged too late in the budget 
submission process. To the extent possible, the Army will program 
future existing project funding shortfalls in its base budget. Waiting 
for the next budget cycle to program these projects would delay the 
construction of the critical infrastructure, as well as cause further 
cost increases.
                                 ______
                                 
              Questions Submitted by Senator John Boozman
    Question. I anticipate the demand for munitions to remain high due 
to the war in Ukraine having no end in sight. Manufacturers in places 
like Camden, AR, are rapidly expanding and increasing their 
capabilities to meet demand. I saw in this year's budget it 
substantially expands investments in critical munitions through taking 
advantage of multi-year procurement authorities.
    What concerns you most about the industrial bases capacity to meet 
increased demands for production?
    Answer. A significant concern the Army has is that historically the 
Department of Defense (DoD)'s policy has been to operate effectively 
and efficiently and utilize competition to drive cost-effective 
solutions which necessitated lean manufacturing and lean capacities. 
Now, the Army is pivoting to rapidly expand capacities at orders of 
magnitude not seen in decades. This rapid expansion requires acquiring 
unique manufacturing equipment that can have long lead times of up to 
one to 2 years and the manufacturing locations are sometimes in remote 
locations that present significant workforce hiring challenges to meet 
the second and third shifts necessary to meet maximum production 
quantities.
    In the area of artillery, a very large consumption item in Ukraine, 
the required volume of projectiles, propellants, explosives and the 
Load, Assemble and Pack (LAP) function are of concern. With the 
assistance of Congress, the resourcing being provided is enabling us to 
ramp up production as quickly as possible; however, required quantities 
of propellants and explosives are commodities to which the Army still 
needs to pay close attention. Global capacity for propelling charges 
and their associated supply chains have been taxed given the Ukraine 
demand signal and associated Army replenishment efforts. To that end, 
Multi-Year Procurement authority is being implemented in Fiscal Year 
2023 that will help provide the Modular Artillery Charge System (MACS) 
LAP and MACS Metal Containers contracts with predictable and stable 
requirements.
    Question. What measures does the Army propose to expand the supply 
and industrial base to support increased production of critical 
munitions?
    Answer. The Army has three key lines of effort to increase 
production and deliveries of critical 155mm munitions. They are: (1) 
modernize the Organic Industrial Base; (2) expand and accelerate the 
commercial industrial base production capacity; and (3) leverage our 
foreign partners' capabilities and manufacturing capacities. Also 
included in these lines of efforts is the on-shoring of select critical 
precursor energetic material that is currently only obtained through 
foreign sources.
                                 ______
                                 
          Questions Submitted by Senator Shelley Moore Capito
    Question. What is the Army's plan to field hard-kill active 
protection systems (APS)?
    Answer. The Army has fielded four Brigade Combat Team (BCT) sets of 
Trophy hard kill Active Protection Systems (APS) (Israeli, Rafael 
Systems) for Abrams platforms. The Army is also continuing with the 
platform integration and testing of the Iron Fist Light Decoupled (IF-
LD) hard kill system (Israeli, Elbit Systems) for Bradley to support 
fielding one BCT set and are completing characterization of two other 
hard-kill APS solutions (Trophy MV, Rafael-ISR; and Strikeshield, 
Rheinmetall(GE)/UBT (US, Michigan)) on test rigs to determine 
suitability for future ground combat vehicles. Further development of 
advanced active protection is continuing in the Science & Technology 
arena under the Combat Capabilities Development Command, which is the 
appropriate place for development, given the maturity levels of the 
technologies involved.
    Question. Did the Army hold a competition for Abrams and Bradley 
APS capabilities, or was this a sole source award? If sole source, what 
was the rationale?
    Answer. In 2016, a Department of Army memorandum provided a 
directed requirement to procure, and rapidly field Non-Developmental 
APS. To execute this, the Army leveraged existing competitive Science 
and Technology Other Transaction Authority APS proposals that had 
already been competed and selected under the National Advanced Mobility 
Consortium to begin characterization work of three systems for Abrams, 
Bradley, and Stryker. Additionally, a market survey was posted on 
FedBizOpps in 2017 to determine if other sources capable of satisfying 
an APS requirement on the Abrams and Bradley existed. Platform 
integration of the systems was subsequently performed either by 
government integration, or by the platform's Original Equipment 
Manufacturer on a sole source basis where insufficient technical data 
was available for competitive integration. The only system to enter 
production, Trophy, was awarded via a sole source contract to DRS SSI 
(St Louis, MO) based upon the sole responsible source exemption to the 
Federal Acquisition Regulation (6.302-1).
    Question. Has the Army only proceeded with testing of foreign-made 
hard-kill APS solutions? If so, has this potential reliance on foreign 
sources raised concerns?
    Answer. No, the Army has performed testing of numerous U.S. and 
foreign (industry and government) developed systems. Recent interim 
efforts associated with the Expedited Active Protection Systems (ExAPS) 
effort were informed by an extensive Office of the Secretary of Defense 
live fire evaluation of all available systems foreign (Trophy, Iron 
Fist) and domestic (Iron Curtain) that concluded in 2012. Subsequent 
development of hard-kill active protection systems under the Combat 
Capabilities Development Command's Ground Vehicle System Center is 
using U.S. sources where available.
    Question. Is the Army open to further testing of a U.S. industry-
developed hard-kill APS capability?
    Answer. The Army has completed its assessment of available mature 
off-the-shelf active protection systems for Abrams and Bradley, having 
qualified installations for two systems and procured one (Trophy). The 
Army has yet to identify a system that is both suitable and mature 
enough to support Stryker. Continued development of advanced active 
protection is continuing in the Science & Technology arena under the 
Combat Capabilities Development Command. The Army is interested in 
industry solutions and test results; however, it is not currently 
resourced to test and verify every industry-claimed APS capability.
    Question. Has observing the war in Ukraine raised any concerns 
about the vulnerability of U.S. armor to top attacks?
    Answer. The Army Vehicle Protection community regularly 
collaborates with the Intelligence community to understand the threats 
observed in the Ukraine War (and elsewhere). Ongoing efforts exist 
within the development and acquisition communities to address a wide 
variety of top attack threats and those efforts continued to be 
informed by current world events.
    Question. Does the Army plan to halt testing and development of 
hard-kill APS with industry partners in favor of a government-developed 
solution?
    Answer. The Army remains committed to the development and testing 
of a Hard- Kill APS system, run by Combat Capabilities Development 
Command's Ground Vehicle System Center, in partnership with several 
companies from across the U.S. industrial base. Additionally, the 
Government continually evaluates available APS technologies based upon 
their maturity, capability, and ability to support platform 
requirements in the full relevant environment.
                                 ______
                                 
           Questions Submitted to General James C. McConville
               Questions Submitted by Senator Jon Tester
    Question. For several years, this Subcommittee has criticized the 
Department for not having a robust plan to defend Guam against high-end 
air defense threats. So I am pleased that this year's budget includes a 
total of $1.5 billion to accelerate this capability.
    However, we need people and infrastructure to get this done right, 
and these efforts need to be coordinated across all the military 
services and with the Missile Defense Agency.
    General McConville, The Army is requesting well over $600 million 
this year for its portion of air defenses for Guam. Has the Army 
budgeted for the personnel to operate these systems as they arrive on 
the island? How is the Army coordinating its efforts with the Missile 
Defense Agency? How is the Army coordinating its efforts with the 
Missile Defense Agency?
    Answer. Yes, the Army has incorporated the personnel requirements 
into our Total Army Analysis planning and will man and operate the 
Defense of Guam systems.
    The Army and the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) have been 
coordinating the Defense of Guam efforts every step of the way since 
the 2022 National Defense Authorization Act. The Army and MDA co-led 
last year's Office of the Secretary of Defense, Defense of Guam 
Operational Planning Team that helped formulate Presidential Budget 24 
and have continued to meet on a regular basis. The MDA participates in 
the biweekly program.
    Executive Office (Missiles and Space) Defense of Guam Integrated 
Planning Team and the weekly U.S. Army Pacific (USARPAC)-led All Things 
Guam Operational Planning Team. The Army Staff and USARPAC Senior 
Leaders participate in MDA-led Senior Executive Review Group and MDA 
planning charrettes. The Army Staff also provides input to MDA's 
quarterly report to Congress and its in constant communication at the 
action officer and Senior Executive level.
                                 ______
                                 
               Questions Submitted by Senator Jerry Moran
    Question. The Army's Unfunded Priorities list accompanying the FY24 
budget request includes a compelling argument for adding $530M to bring 
the total procurement of tanks to the full brigade level while lowering 
the unit cost of each tank greater than $4.3M.
    Please explain why the Army didn't include such funding in its 
budget request for this enduring platform.
    Answer. The Army made the difficult choice to fund modernization 
efforts required to face near peer threats on the multi-domain 
battlefield. The base budget request maintains the production line and 
funds facility improvements at the Lima Tank Plant. The request 
included $800.3M for 34 tanks (a battalion set) and $105.8M for 
industrial base updates to facilitate production for a total of $906.1M 
in procurement and an additional $96.2M in Research Development Test & 
Evaluation (RDT&E) in FY 2024. The Abrams tanks we currently have in 
our formations (M1A1 SA, M1A2 SEPv2 and M1A2 SEPv3) remain the best in 
the world. The Unfunded Priorities List provides an option for the 
government to take advantage of the best available price point on 
Abrams if funding becomes available.
    Question. We understand from the Department that the initial 
estimates for delivery of M1A2 Abrams tanks to Ukraine were about 1 
year, but that will be sooner now that they have decided to ship M1A1 
Abrams tanks instead.
    Can you confirm whether the specific Abrams tanks have been 
identified?
    Answer. Yes, the specific Abrams tanks that will eventually be 
provided to Ukraine have been identified. Additional details can be 
provided in a classified briefing.
    Question. Please provide an update on the overall timeline for 
transfer, including where those tanks are and how the movement to 
Ukraine aligns with the training of Ukrainian troops.
    Answer. The Department will begin delivery of the 31 tanks to 
Ukraine this fall, and earlier if possible. The tanks are now in the 
maintenance and conversion process to the proper combat configuration. 
The tanks are on schedule and their delivery is being synchronized to 
align with the training of Ukrainian forces.
                                 ______
                                 
               Question Submitted by Senator John Hoeven
    Question. We want the best individuals to serve in the military 
and, as you know, educational benefits are one of the most effective 
ways to attract, retain, and develop outstanding Soldiers. Amongst many 
competing priorities, I applaud the Army for making tuition assistance 
a priority, including for those serving in the Army National Guard and 
Reserves.
    How important is the Tuition Assistance Program to meeting the 
Army's recruiting and retention goals?
    Answer. For many years, the Tuition Assistance (TA) program has 
consistently played a major role in supporting Army's recruiting and 
retention missions. In repeated surveys of new recruits, a majority 
report that education benefits, including Tuition Assistance (TA), are 
``very'' to ``extremely'' influential on their enlistment decision. The 
Army knows from additional surveys and internal analyses that education 
benefits are repeatedly cited as a top reason for Soldier reenlistment. 
A 2021 study conducted by the Army's Office of Economic and Manpower 
Analysis (OEMA) found that TA usage is associated with a 9.5% increase 
in reenlistment among first term Soldiers.

                          SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

    Senator Tester. This Defense Subcommittee will reconvene 
next Thursday, a week from this Thursday, on May 11, at 11 a.m. 
for a hearing with the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff. That will be an interesting hearing.
    Until then, we stand in recess.
    [Whereupon, at 11:27 a.m., Tuesday, May 2, the subcommittee 
was recessed, to reconvene at 11 a.m., Thursday, May 11.]